LZ Landing Theory
Walter,
You place a great value on STANs information and still persist with the LZ approach theory, when the entered Waypoints strongly suggests you are wrong.
Wpt D. N5732.42 W00402.92
Very precise, entered to two decimal places. I don,t know if it is the current recognised LZ at Inverness but it certainly looks a suitable place to land a Helo. Both on Goole Earth and Ordnance Survey.
Wpt C. N5735.02 W00402. 92
Again very precise. Just off the coast from Fort George. A feature which is big, unique and with verical extent. It is the perfect Initial Point /TAP. (They would probably have liked to use the corner of Fort George itself, but it is a bit too vertical.)
They have just defined a perfect TAP to LZ run. (IP to Tgt) for you FJ guys.
In marginal conditions you approach the TAP over the Moray Firth.
If you then set up Along / Across Track on the TANS, in effect it will offer you information as good as any SRA. ( I am pretty sure it was not authorised for instrument approaches, so you would still require VFR minimums.)
A very thorough bit of planning.
Wpt A. N5518.50 W00548.00.
A pile of rocks on a slope.
There is a marked LZ close by at N5518.39 W00548.05 and there may be others. It is very close to the entered position, but if they had gone to so much trouble at Inverness why not here?
Also, after studying the LZ, (photos and / or OSM), why not choose a run in track, use the Bearing and Distance facility on Tans to set in a TAP. This would have given them slow down points and best possible angle of approach.
Being thorough at one LZ and gash at another, makes no sense.
Waypoint A is what it seems. It is a turning point taken from a half mil LFC, and plotted within acceptable limits. They had probably never intended overflight.
I do hope that this entry does not compound my ignorance?
Last edited by dalek; 17th Jun 2009 at 14:30.