Missed approach tracking (Cairns ILS)
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
rehashing that debate i saw a while back..and am still slightly confused about
just a quick question regarding in the missed approach ..
So the cairns VOR-A chart for example gives you a specific radial from the vor/bearing to intercept in the missed approach.. others such as Avalon, Mudgee etc etc do not- and just say Track 300 climb to 4000.
Would these charts which just say track 300 climb to 4000 mean just turn to 300 and adjust for wind , or would it mean a positive intercept of the 300* bearing from the VOR in the missed approach- assuming the fact that the missed approach wasnt due to the VOR reciever failing!
just a quick question regarding in the missed approach ..So the cairns VOR-A chart for example gives you a specific radial from the vor/bearing to intercept in the missed approach.. others such as Avalon, Mudgee etc etc do not- and just say Track 300 climb to 4000.
Would these charts which just say track 300 climb to 4000 mean just turn to 300 and adjust for wind , or would it mean a positive intercept of the 300* bearing from the VOR in the missed approach- assuming the fact that the missed approach wasnt due to the VOR reciever failing!
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
T D Bear,
thanks mate..
but what would you do then in terms of primary tracking in the MAPT- obviously if you just track 300- your cdi still set to the vor station will indicate full scale deflection usually unless you positively reintercept that?
is the go- just to leave it how it is and then set a radial to intercept/gps bearing and intercept the next leg on fpt once you reach your MSA ....
thanks mate..
but what would you do then in terms of primary tracking in the MAPT- obviously if you just track 300- your cdi still set to the vor station will indicate full scale deflection usually unless you positively reintercept that?
is the go- just to leave it how it is and then set a radial to intercept/gps bearing and intercept the next leg on fpt once you reach your MSA ....
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't really understand your comments about gps bearings and fpt legs. I guess if you wanted another crack at the approach, I would make a left turn and re-intercept the outbound radial of the approach for a direct entry.
travelator,
The MM is shown at 0.5nm from the runway. 320ft is around 1nm from the runway.
No it doesn't. The AIP chart clearly shows that the MM is the MAPt for the LLZ approach, not the ILS. The Jepp chart even has the last dive-and-drive segment for the LLZ approach terminating at the MM.
Mig3,
I agree. 
As I have already pointed out the missed approach point on an ILS is where the applicable DA intersects with the glide path. The applicalble DA in Cairns is 320 feet and that is basically the middle marker.
The chart actually specifies the MAP is MM!
Mig3,
TL 01 ILS states to commence the turn as soon as practical, but not before the MM (or words to that effect) perhaps if that is the intention of the CS ILS MAP the text needs to be reworded?
Bloggs
I said "basically" the middle marker, whats 0.5 miles between friends. It comes back to my point that the MAP is where the glide slope intersects the DA, as per AIP, which is around the middle marker. The point is you are REQUIRED to continue tracking to this point before turning.
I know that the MM is the MAP for the LLZ. It just further illustrates my point that if you are tracking via the ILS ans the GS fails or you are conducting a LLZ that you are directed to continue tracking to the MAP if a missed approach is conducted. Why would they require us to fly to that point on a LLZ but not an ILS?
Where do you think the missed approach should be commenced Bloggs? If you think 1nm mile from the runway (320 feet on glide slope) then we are in agreement.
It comes back to airmanship and common sense. If you can fly a heading reasonably well and are climbing, terrain will not be an issue. We know where it is and it doesn't move. Traffic on the other side of us is a different issue, not to mention the violation of your airways clearance! Remember that "Cleared ILS approach" clears us to track for final to the runway then the missed approach if required.
I said "basically" the middle marker, whats 0.5 miles between friends. It comes back to my point that the MAP is where the glide slope intersects the DA, as per AIP, which is around the middle marker. The point is you are REQUIRED to continue tracking to this point before turning.
I know that the MM is the MAP for the LLZ. It just further illustrates my point that if you are tracking via the ILS ans the GS fails or you are conducting a LLZ that you are directed to continue tracking to the MAP if a missed approach is conducted. Why would they require us to fly to that point on a LLZ but not an ILS?
Where do you think the missed approach should be commenced Bloggs? If you think 1nm mile from the runway (320 feet on glide slope) then we are in agreement.
It comes back to airmanship and common sense. If you can fly a heading reasonably well and are climbing, terrain will not be an issue. We know where it is and it doesn't move. Traffic on the other side of us is a different issue, not to mention the violation of your airways clearance! Remember that "Cleared ILS approach" clears us to track for final to the runway then the missed approach if required.
sorry guys, am with travelator on this one. "turn without delay" is simply a reminder that there is terrain in close proximity to the aerodrome, not an invitation to deviate from the rules. 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some corporate history may be of interest. The "without delay" advice in the IAL was based upon ATC experience with a USAF C130 Hercules several years ago who made a missed approach in IMC on the ILS and continued straight ahead before making a gentle left turn out to sea. The aircraft came dangerously close to the hills.
ATC then changed the wording to "without delay" and this was worded so that the missed approach would not be construed as an immediate turn since that could imply a sense of urgency that could cause unnecessary work load on the pilot since the turn left towards 015 was quite a long way and configuration changes would normally up the ante as well.
"Without delay" means don't spend an inordinate amount of time climbing straight ahead cleaning up before commencing the turn left. In other words, there is no blinding urgency to turn left because the rising terrain that will concern you is yet some distance away. But don't deliberately continue to fly ahead because the longer you do, the closer you will get to eventually infringing rising terrain.
This explanation for the choice of "without delay" in the IAL came from the horses mouth aka the CASA chart designer at the time.
ATC then changed the wording to "without delay" and this was worded so that the missed approach would not be construed as an immediate turn since that could imply a sense of urgency that could cause unnecessary work load on the pilot since the turn left towards 015 was quite a long way and configuration changes would normally up the ante as well.
"Without delay" means don't spend an inordinate amount of time climbing straight ahead cleaning up before commencing the turn left. In other words, there is no blinding urgency to turn left because the rising terrain that will concern you is yet some distance away. But don't deliberately continue to fly ahead because the longer you do, the closer you will get to eventually infringing rising terrain.
This explanation for the choice of "without delay" in the IAL came from the horses mouth aka the CASA chart designer at the time.
