Well, hoping not to get dragged into yet another session of slanging, here!
Why on earth was the procedure not constructed on a 'front course' of 120? The g/a then back-tracks this localiser a 'course' set of 120, as in many other procedures. I am assuming, of course, that there is no requirement for a 'front course' of 300 in any procedures there, in which case I think this has all been made with unnecessarily complicated?
Apart from keeping everything 'standard', there is a distinct advantage in this solution, namely the course needs only to be twiddled from 148 to 120 for the g/a, instead of all the way round to 300. One less thing to do when surrounded by cumulo-granitus.
Originally Posted by aterp
so there was no other way to get the course guidance needed to avoid the higher terrain to the southwest of the airport.
- have I not just done exactly that? I am unconvinced that just because it 'fits' with some notion of naming in TERPS that it is correct!