Missed approach point on a Localizer

crisscross321

crisscross321

New Member
Hi all, I'm a student working towards my Instrument rating and I had a question about the missed approach point for a Localizer approach, specifically this one:

http://www.globalair.com/dtpp/globalair_06656ild5.pdf

I understand that for the ILS, you'd start your missed approach point at 1732 feet. But if you're doing the Localizer approach, when do you go missed? 7.5 DME (if so, why?) Is there some special notation I'm missing?

Thank you.
 
Ah, I'm a bit of an elitist when it comes to charts, as I find NOS occasionally befuddling. Let me fish out my Jepps...

The missed approach point for the nonprecision variant of this approach is 7.6 DME from the Stanfield VOR, according to my Jeppesen chart. It's marked in the Jepp profile view with an 'M', a clear and unambiguous "THIS IS IT, MISS THE APPROACH HERE" indicator. (The reason for the difference of .1 DME in the Government and Jeppesen depictions of the procedure is unclear to me.)

According to the FAA's legend page here - http://aeronav.faa.gov//d-tpp/1407/frntmatter.pdf - see page 12 of 19 - the point at which the dashed arrow starts is the missed approach point. The official chart (http://aeronav.faa.gov//d-tpp/1407/06656ILD5.PDF) doesn't have the start of the missed precisely overlaying 7.5 DME TFD in the profile view, but that's where you should be missing it. (Looking at a bunch of ILS (GS out) procedures, this seems to be pretty common on government charts - the localizer-only MAP for, say, LAX 25L is 2 DME ILAX, which doesn't precisely overlay the precision missed approach point in the profile view - see here: http://aeronav.faa.gov//d-tpp/1407/00237IL25L.PDF )
 
You would go missed at 7.5 dme. The title of the approach says ILS or LOC/DME, so dme is not required for the ILS since you would go missed at DA. LOC/DME means that DME is required for the approach. If you were using an IFR certified GPS you can use that in lieu of DME
 
I think the real question here is "Why does the depicted missed approach segment start before 7.5 DME, and how do I know where that point is?"

The befuddling answer is "The plate sucks. 7.5 DME is the best you can do."
 
I would venture to say that the depicted missed approach being before 7.5 DME would be due to the ILS part of the approach being at DA. I would be curious to see what a LOC/DME only approach plate looks like.
 
Jamesah2008 said:
I would venture to say that the depicted missed approach being before 7.5 DME would be due to the ILS part of the approach being at DA. I would be curious to see what a LOC/DME only approach plate looks like.
Click to expand...

Looks like this:

http://155.178.201.160/d-tpp/1407/00430LDBC29R.PDF

Autothrust Blue said:
Ah, I'm a bit of an elitist when it comes to charts, as I find NOS occasionally befuddling. Let me fish out my Jepps...
Click to expand...

Elite = Jepps?

Oh pulllleeze......

:)
 
Autothrust Blue said:
And

Maybe so. I've been reading Jeppesen charts since I was about five, standing on the center seat of our first TwinBo, so I have a bit of a bias...
Click to expand...
Just kidding around. Many, including me, had a Jepp bias for a while. Two things changed that. The briefing strip was one since it made briefing the approach simpler for both sets. The more significant one, though, is the iPad since, except for the Jepp app, they use FAA charts. So lots of folks who liked Jepp suddenly "discovered" they liked FAA just as much.
 
MidlifeFlyer said:
Just kidding around. Many, including me, had a Jepp bias for a while. Two things changed that. The briefing strip was one since it made briefing the approach simpler for both sets. The more significant one, though, is the iPad since, except for the Jepp app, they use FAA charts. So lots of folks who liked Jepp suddenly "discovered" they liked FAA just as much.
Click to expand...
In a word, "phooey."

I think Jeppesen charges a ridiculous amount of money for their product, but having read the agony that Elrey Jeppesen went through in order to design a chart that wouldn't kill anyone (vs. the FAA/NOS, who just sort of throw them together, in my view)...I'll keep paying for the personal subscription. :)
 
Autothrust Blue said:
In a word, "phooey."

I think Jeppesen charges a ridiculous amount of money for their product, but having read the agony that Elrey Jeppesen went through in order to design a chart that wouldn't kill anyone (vs. the FAA/NOS, who just sort of throw them together, in my view)...I'll keep paying for the personal subscription. :)
Click to expand...
I don't think Boeing is using Elray's notes anymore. :D

aug_i_history2.jpg


I'm sure a number of others would continue paying also,maybe even a lot. That is, if the charts were available for the apps they were using.
 
Autothrust Blue said:
In a word, "phooey."

I think Jeppesen charges a ridiculous amount of money for their product, but having read the agony that Elrey Jeppesen went through in order to design a chart that wouldn't kill anyone (vs. the FAA/NOS, who just sort of throw them together, in my view)...I'll keep paying for the personal subscription. :)
Click to expand...

I read both of them just fine, but Jepps always seem too cluttered to me. Nothing that's wrong with them necessarily, but the NOS are just easier to read it seems. If Jepps are all that's available or what's required, I'll happily use them. If given a choice of use, I lean towards the NOS charts.
 
MikeD said:
I read both of them just fine, but Jepps always seem too cluttered to me. Nothing that's wrong with them necessarily, but the NOS are just easier to read it seems. If Jepps are all that's available or what's required, I'll happily use them. If given a choice of use, I lean towards the NOS charts.
Click to expand...
Everywhere I work and have worked is Jepp.

In Computer Science we call this a "religious issue."
 
Autothrust Blue said:
Everywhere I work and have worked is Jepp.

In Computer Science we call this a "religious issue."
Click to expand...

It's like working at Delta and wearing a hat: if the operation I'm in requires them, then I use them. No issue with that. They're just not personal preference......are they still printed on that rice paper consistency stuff?
 
MikeD said:
It's like working at Delta and wearing a hat: if the operation I'm in requires them, then I use them. No issue with that. They're just not personal preference......are they still printed on that rice paper consistency stuff?
Click to expand...
They're pretty thin sheets of paper, yes. Some of them are that way.
 
MikeD said:
It's like working at Delta and wearing a hat: if the operation I'm in requires them, then I use them. No issue with that. They're just not personal preference......are they still printed on that rice paper consistency stuff?
Click to expand...
Without the hat, you have a funny looking suit...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top