Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Lost Comm's Question.  
User currently offlineAAH732UAL From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (6 years 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 2149 times:

Okay I have a question about Lost Comm's at SEA. I am going to use NACO charts, as I was told my company Jepps cannot be posted in plain view on the internet. Sorry to those that may have a problem reading them.

Ok..... the Lost Comm(LC) procedure off any of the STARs into KSEA is...... after the final fix DCT SEA VOR.

Now after that you need to go at the last assigned, MEA, etc etc to any IAF and hold till ETA on flight plan or EFC..... standard holding pattern etc etc.

But I noticed that ILS34C has a note over the IAF saying, "Procedure NA for arrivals via the V495 southbound." The V495 is SEA then CIDUG. But on ILS34R, that note is absent.

My take on this is that even though you can shoot ANY published IAP during LC, they would prefer you to hold for ILS34R instead of ILS34C. But the thing is...... the IAF is the same for both approaches(CIDUG).

Now my questions are.....
1) Is my take wrong and that note only means ONLY if I filed V495 even though the LC procedure has me follow the V495 southbound?

2)What is the difference holding at CIDUG for ILS34R compared to ILS34C?

3)Say I held over CIDUG for ILS34C...... would I be able to justify it since I was following standard and published LC procedures and I did not have V495 officially filed in my FP?

I just don't understand if I could hold over CIDUG for ILS34C or if that note is preventing me even though STD LC procedures say ANY approach.

Thanks!

http://airnav.com/airport/KSEA
-any STAR
-ILS34C and ILS34R

7 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineMeister808 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 973 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (6 years 2 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 2123 times:

Good one...

Quoting AAH732UAL (Thread starter):
1) Is my take wrong and that note only means ONLY if I filed V495 even though the LC procedure has me follow the V495 southbound?

You could probably argue that one, since technically SEA CIDUG is not automatically joining the V495. I think you are probably correct though in saying that the way the procedure is written would tend to prevent you from taking the ILS 34C. You'd probably have to delve deep into TERPS to see what the exact design specs are.

Quoting AAH732UAL (Thread starter):
2)What is the difference holding at CIDUG for ILS34R compared to ILS34C?

I don't think this comes down to the holding pattern for lost comms, this restriction comes from the sharp angle being made by an aircraft flying a 187 heading (SEA 168 radial) turning left to a heading of 026 to join the ILS 34C to intercept the localizer 4nm away at DIYVE. Aircraft joining the ILS 34R fly the same 026 heading, but have an additional 0.2NM until Localizer intercept.

I'm thinking the problem here deals with being able to lead the turn so that the aircraft will roll out on the next course. I would imagine that something geometrically doesn't work out past a certain speed (under 250 KIAS) to enable an aircraft to lead the turn from V495 southbound, then be able to lead the turn from 026 to the localizer. The problem could also deal with the aircraft exiting protected airspace while making one or both of these turns. I'm thinking that, whatever the problem is, the extra 0.2NM between CIDUG and localizer intercept on the 34R approach allows the boxes established in TERPS to be checked, thus it is allowed.

Quoting AAH732UAL (Thread starter):
3)Say I held over CIDUG for ILS34C...... would I be able to justify it since I was following standard and published LC procedures and I did not have V495 officially filed in my FP?

As far as I am concerned (I believe legal precedent backs me up), lost comms is an emergency procedure, so as long as you have a decent reason to shoot the 34C approach over the 34R (perhaps you recieved ATIS prior to the LC situation stating 34R was closed, etc...), you can deviate from the procedure as neccessary, using emergency authority. It might bite you in the ass though, because the restriction is likely there because the turn to final for 34C is a hard one to make.

http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Gu...2a600622680/$FILE/8260.3BCHG19.pdf

There's a direct link to TERPS if you want to really get into it, I'm sure what you're looking for is somewhere in the 300-odd pages. Happy Reading.

Meister

[Edited 2008-08-15 00:22:17]


Twin Cessna 812 Victor, Minneapolis Center, we observe your operation in the immediate vicinity of extreme precipitation
User currently offlineCosmicCruiser From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 2255 posts, RR: 15
Reply 2, posted (6 years 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 2089 times:



Quoting AAH732UAL (Thread starter):
I noticed that ILS34C has a note over the IAF saying, "Procedure NA for arrivals via the V495 southbound." The V495 is SEA then CIDUG. But on ILS34R, that note is absent.

Searching my LIDO charts it appears that this note is not part of the lost comm proced but a N/A proced for the app itself. It's not mentioned in the lost comm proced notes and only shows up on the app. plate alone. Checking a little further you will see that on the ILS 16L and the RNAV 16L there too is a note "proc NA for arr at PAE via V23 northbound" but isn't on the ILS 16C nor the RNAV 16C. Can't say why. That is interesting considering the use the same IAF.
If I really wanted to know I would call someone at SEA ATC.


User currently offlineAAH732UAL From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (6 years 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 2078 times:



Quoting Meister808 (Reply 1):
Aircraft joining the ILS 34R fly the same 026 heading, but have an additional 0.2NM until Localizer intercept.

That is probably right..... it would almost have to be a constant greater then STD rate of turn from CIDUG to the CNF then the LOC...... Good call! But the only thing is..... if I Hold over CIDUG..... its 026 inbound, r/ts, and 1 min legs. So really when I do shoot the actual approach, its a straight shot to the CNF/LOC INTC! Its just...... they both have the same primary protected area, since its the same IAF for both approaches so that is what is throwing me. But I see what you mean IF we fly slow and there is no need to hold!

Quoting Meister808 (Reply 1):
TERPS to be checked, thus it is allowed.

Meh..... I know a ton of TEPRS/ICAO pan ops already...... not going to get me anyway in the cockpit though  Wink

I will say.... the ROC/OCS & MSA/MEA/MOCA obstacle clearance and the primary/secondary protected areas and some of the info about offset approaches are very good to have in the memory bank! But the one about..... RNAV(GPS) approaches with only MDA minimums/no APV(app. w/ vertical guidance) cannot be offset from runway heading by more then 15 degrees, is a bit more then I need to be concerned with when shooting it  Smile

Quoting Meister808 (Reply 1):
Happy Reading.

I would get to page 299 and they would add more to it...... lol!

Quoting CosmicCruiser (Reply 2):
If I really wanted to know I would call someone at SEA ATC.

Very true.... or the FAA legal department to see if I have a justifiable case  Wink

I guess.... just get it down safe and let the FAA say you broke a rule. Plus this could fall into one of their many gray areas!

He is my new take.....
DCT SEA DCT CIDUG..... either approach since I am officially NOT going SEA V495 CIDUG and its NOT listed in my FP. Plus they prefer me to use ILS34R and I will unless NOTAM/ATIS say different!

Thanks guys!


User currently offlineAAH732UAL From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (6 years 1 week 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 2044 times:



Quoting Meister808 (Reply 1):
TERPS to be checked, thus it is allowed.

My bad..... I quoted the wrong thing or read that wrong....... brain Fart  Smile


User currently offlineMeister808 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 973 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (6 years 1 week 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 2018 times:



Quoting AAH732UAL (Reply 3):
But the only thing is..... if I Hold over CIDUG..... its 026 inbound, r/ts, and 1 min legs.

I think... and I don't have a FAR/AIM sitting beside me to verify this... but aren't you supposed to hold on the course you arrived on? Therefore it would be 168 inbound, right turns, 1 minutes.

Or maybe I haven't taught instrument stuff for a little while and I'm wrong on that.

Quoting AAH732UAL (Reply 3):
I know a ton of TEPRS/ICAO pan ops already...... not going to get me anyway in the cockpit though

Amen to that... TERPS is/can be interesting reading, but there is no way any of it should be applicable in the cockpit as long as the guy who writes and the guy who signs off on the procedures have done their jobs.

-Meister



Twin Cessna 812 Victor, Minneapolis Center, we observe your operation in the immediate vicinity of extreme precipitation
User currently offlineAAH732UAL From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (6 years 1 week 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 1963 times:



Quoting Meister808 (Reply 5):
I think... and I don't have a FAR/AIM sitting beside me to verify this... but aren't you supposed to hold on the course you arrived on? Therefore it would be 168 inbound, right turns, 1 minutes.

Or maybe I haven't taught instrument stuff for a little while and I'm wrong on that.

Naw..... Its hold on the inbound course for the approach. I am almost positive! On that same note..... you are almost allowed to call the recommended holding entries a PT if you reach at your EFC/ETA at the IAF and no hold is needed. Yeah it's hold on the inbound course that will allow for a straight-in approach!

Quoting Meister808 (Reply 5):
Amen to that... TERPS is/can be interesting reading, but there is no way any of it should be applicable in the cockpit as long as the guy who writes and the guy who signs off on the procedures have done their jobs.

BTW I have been doing some thinking about the protected areas with my TERPS knowledge today and have sorta come up with this conclusion that may or may not be correct as to why the FAA set this up! I think it all depends on the FDA(Fix Displacement Area) and the protected area off the airway. Like the 4NM on either side does not overlap into the protected area from CIDUG. And a greater then standard turn is required to stay within it.

But I do apply some basic TERPS into my approach briefings though. Like the MEA/MOCA rules, MSA obstacle clearance(1000 below the published), and the 200feet per NM or 40:1 slope for the MAP etc etc, but yeah I know what you mean. The biggest thing that should be noted is...... if you fly the things as published, you will have obstacle clearance and thats always nice  Smile

This has been fun getting really tech!

Thanks!


User currently offlineAAH732UAL From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (6 years 1 week 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 1940 times:



Quoting AAH732UAL (Reply 6):
Quoting Meister808 (Reply 5):
I think... and I don't have a FAR/AIM sitting beside me to verify this... but aren't you supposed to hold on the course you arrived on? Therefore it would be 168 inbound, right turns, 1 minutes.

Or maybe I haven't taught instrument stuff for a little while and I'm wrong on that.

Naw..... Its hold on the inbound course for the approach. I am almost positive! On that same note..... you are almost allowed to call the recommended holding entries a PT if you reach at your EFC/ETA at the IAF and no hold is needed. Yeah it's hold on the inbound course that will allow for a straight-in approach!

Also...... officially your DEA DCT CIDUG not SEA V495 CIDUG. DCT to any IAF unless otherwise published and hold inbound allowing for a straight in approach.

I just did a Lost/Comm's study up and remeber reading it in the AIM. But I am not going to be the know-it-all and say the actual reg/page lol


Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Lost Comm's Question.
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
A340 Cargo Weight And Fuel Consumption Question posted Thu Jul 31 2008 15:12:29 by TheMirror
A319 Vs A320 Fuel Question posted Sat Jul 26 2008 06:19:20 by Panais
Question About The 737-100 Design posted Sat Jul 26 2008 03:11:07 by Columba
New "Enchanced" Airbus Interior Question posted Wed Jul 23 2008 10:59:43 by SXDFC
Question About Winglets posted Mon Jul 21 2008 15:47:30 by AT777
Graflite Question posted Mon Jul 14 2008 02:00:04 by Longitude
Cockpit Outline Question posted Tue Jul 8 2008 11:09:45 by SXDFC
MD-80/JT8D Question posted Fri Jul 4 2008 19:07:53 by Boeing767mech
US Airways East And West Pilot Question posted Fri Jul 4 2008 18:42:56 by SXDFC
Time Zones Question posted Fri Jul 4 2008 10:55:58 by AlexEU

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format