CWS approaches
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CWS approaches
G'day guys, saw this NOTAM a couple of days ago, just wondering why is the procedure removed and is there a new procedure for it?
PHILLIP ISLAND (YPID)
C1/09
REMOVE AD CHART AND NDB-A OR VOR-A PROC FROM DAP. PROC WITHDRAWN AMD AIP DAP EAST
FROM 07 280620 TO PERM
Thanks.
PHILLIP ISLAND (YPID)
C1/09
REMOVE AD CHART AND NDB-A OR VOR-A PROC FROM DAP. PROC WITHDRAWN AMD AIP DAP EAST
FROM 07 280620 TO PERM
Thanks.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: On the equator
Posts: 1,291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I quite like doing this approach as it's one of the few approaches in Victoria where you're tracking outbound from the aid to the missed approach point, and the few approaches where the missed approach point is a distance/time from the aid rather than 'station passage'. And I think it's a common one for people doing their IR initial or renewal test because of that.
If this approach is officially removed from the DAPs, then what's stopping people from doing practice NDB/VOR approaches here in VMC?
I see the Airservices website still has this approach published in the August 09 issue.
If this approach is officially removed from the DAPs, then what's stopping people from doing practice NDB/VOR approaches here in VMC?
I see the Airservices website still has this approach published in the August 09 issue.
When you live....
I'd guess that there is nothing to stop you from doing the approach in VMC - after all you are simply airworking between 2200 and the ground.
Whether or not your could log it for currency is a different question.
Bit of a bugger for those who call Tyabb home - was our method of getting in- use the MSA, then the holding alt then break out outbound or inbound and then straight up the channel for a downwind join for 17.
UTR
Whether or not your could log it for currency is a different question.
Bit of a bugger for those who call Tyabb home - was our method of getting in- use the MSA, then the holding alt then break out outbound or inbound and then straight up the channel for a downwind join for 17.
UTR
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I flew it the other day guys, well sorta.
Just revise the MDA to 2100, the actual MSA for the old procedure. Work backwards and you can attain the not below heights. There is nothing illegal about it, as you are simply airworking above the lower safe. Beats flying out to Yarrowee to do a VOR. Slightly dodgy I understand but nothing against the law.
Just revise the MDA to 2100, the actual MSA for the old procedure. Work backwards and you can attain the not below heights. There is nothing illegal about it, as you are simply airworking above the lower safe. Beats flying out to Yarrowee to do a VOR. Slightly dodgy I understand but nothing against the law.
Please tell me you are doing this in VMC...
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Capricorn
Age: 57
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"I see the Airservices website still has this approach published in the August 09 issue."
I guess that a new NOTAM will come out at the appropriate time prior to 9AUG09.
Maybe you need some more training, Wheels.
"Flew there the other day, and heard on the rumour mill that Air Services were puting the cost of re-surveying the approaches onto the operator, who was not prepared to pay the cost."
Sounds about right ANRO, No Pay = Air No Services
"Just revise the MDA to 2100, the actual MSA for the old procedure. Work backwards and you can attain the not below heights. There is nothing illegal about it, as you are simply airworking above the lower safe."
Pilots reworking procedure altitudes backwards to work out "not below heights" allows undertakers to live in large houses James. Not to mention how excited the Safety Gods get when they find another candidate to watch.
And I think the right word is LOWEST SAFE.
You are better off being LOWER and staying on the ground to be safe mate....your wife and kids need you.
I guess that a new NOTAM will come out at the appropriate time prior to 9AUG09.
Maybe you need some more training, Wheels.
"Flew there the other day, and heard on the rumour mill that Air Services were puting the cost of re-surveying the approaches onto the operator, who was not prepared to pay the cost."
Sounds about right ANRO, No Pay = Air No Services
"Just revise the MDA to 2100, the actual MSA for the old procedure. Work backwards and you can attain the not below heights. There is nothing illegal about it, as you are simply airworking above the lower safe."
Pilots reworking procedure altitudes backwards to work out "not below heights" allows undertakers to live in large houses James. Not to mention how excited the Safety Gods get when they find another candidate to watch.
And I think the right word is LOWEST SAFE.
You are better off being LOWER and staying on the ground to be safe mate....your wife and kids need you.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Apologies for the incorrect terminology, I will never forgive myself. LOWEST SAFE 
I never said I flew the procedure in IMC, it was strictly VMC with another pilot as a watch pilot for another eye on traffic, considering there are often numerous helicopters transitting coastal down to Phillip Island without broadcasting, I was at no point below 2100ft. Which is well clear of the CAR 174 requirement to be not below 500ft AGL of non-populated areas. It certainly was not for currency UTR, just for something different. Hope this eliminates any confusion that I may have caused
happy flying! 
I never said I flew the procedure in IMC, it was strictly VMC with another pilot as a watch pilot for another eye on traffic, considering there are often numerous helicopters transitting coastal down to Phillip Island without broadcasting, I was at no point below 2100ft. Which is well clear of the CAR 174 requirement to be not below 500ft AGL of non-populated areas. It certainly was not for currency UTR, just for something different. Hope this eliminates any confusion that I may have caused
happy flying! Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: On the equator
Posts: 1,291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This procedure was withdrawn due to YPID being an ALA. CASA regulations prevent an instrument procedure to a non registered/certified field. I believe the owner was given 12 months to upgrade the aerodrome, but declined.
