Approach Charts
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chichester, UK
Posts: 1,650
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Approach Charts
Are all UK airfield instrument approach charts available online? The AIP en-route/aerodromes-specific bit contains quite a few, but I cannot find Goodwood (although the Navaids bit of the AIP lists GWC as being an approach aid). Aerad contains it, and Thom book 5 reproduces the 32 VOR letdown (page 382 of my copy). But can i download it from anywhere?
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Hants
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Evo
I'm probably showing my ignorance here.... The AIS website lists Goddwood as Chichester/Goodwood, EGHR. Link to it's PDF:
http://www.ais.org.uk/aes/pubs/aip/pdf/ad/302HR01.PDF
I'm probably showing my ignorance here.... The AIS website lists Goddwood as Chichester/Goodwood, EGHR. Link to it's PDF:
http://www.ais.org.uk/aes/pubs/aip/pdf/ad/302HR01.PDF
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Surrey, UK.
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Evo, can't remember when, but Goodwood ceased to have IAPs some time ago - hence no IAP plates on the AIS website.
May be because they don't have tower/approach?? Someone will know why they lost it...
May be because they don't have tower/approach?? Someone will know why they lost it...
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chichester, UK
Posts: 1,650
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
(@RichyRich) Yeah, I can find that - but Goodwood only gets the general aerodrome chart that you posted a link to. If you go to the list of aerodromes and click on Shoreham (say) it gives you a choice between a similar aerodrome chart and three instrument approach charts (NDB/DME RWY 03, VDF RWY 03 and NDB/DME RWY 21). I know Goodwood has a published VOR/DME RWY 32 approach - and possibly others - and that's what I'm looking for.
edit: Rustle. Has it vanished from the latest Aerad/Jeppesen books then? It is in the Aerad that we have at my club, but that may be out of date. The letdown is still used (although it may be unofficial and/or training only) and GWC is still listed as an approach aid for EGHR in the AIP.
edit 2 - just noticed that the chart in Thom is dated 1991
Hope our Aerad isn't that old, but we've probably (hopefully!) kept the plate as it's used for training...
edit: Rustle. Has it vanished from the latest Aerad/Jeppesen books then? It is in the Aerad that we have at my club, but that may be out of date. The letdown is still used (although it may be unofficial and/or training only) and GWC is still listed as an approach aid for EGHR in the AIP.
edit 2 - just noticed that the chart in Thom is dated 1991
Hope our Aerad isn't that old, but we've probably (hopefully!) kept the plate as it's used for training...
Last edited by Evo; 23rd Apr 2003 at 19:55.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 233
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AIP only lists licensed aerodromes.
For others, you might strike lucky and find the local club has the required information on a webpage (for example http://cfc.deltabbs.org/page3.html or http://www.enstonemicrolights.co.uk/airfield%20map.htm); try the directory at http://www.pilotfriend.com/links/fly...clubs/126.htm, otherwise you'll just have to spend £20 on a copy of Pooleys like the rest of us.
P
For others, you might strike lucky and find the local club has the required information on a webpage (for example http://cfc.deltabbs.org/page3.html or http://www.enstonemicrolights.co.uk/airfield%20map.htm); try the directory at http://www.pilotfriend.com/links/fly...clubs/126.htm, otherwise you'll just have to spend £20 on a copy of Pooleys like the rest of us.
P
PPruNaholic!
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Buckinghamshire
Age: 61
Posts: 1,615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Try calling the flying club there - they might be able to fax instrument approach inform to you, or at least confirm whether or not a published procedure still exists?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chichester, UK
Posts: 1,650
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Andy - I fly from Goodwood and I know the approach unofficially exists because I've flown it during IMC training. I was trying to get my own copies of the procedure, but I didn't realize that it doesn't officially exist any more (and probably hasn't for a while). Rustle has taught me a bit about checking how up to date my information is 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: London, England
Posts: 191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does the same apply to Blackbushe - I seem to remember seeing an old NDB letdown plate, but there is certainly no IAP listed anywhere now.
BTW - if anyone has the old plate I'd appreciate a copy!
BTW - if anyone has the old plate I'd appreciate a copy!
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Surrey, UK.
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Phil, I wasn't aware of any official IAP for Blackbushe.
There was a "back of fag packet" let-down/cloud-break design from one of the EF guys...
Far safer to use Farnborough ILS and either become VMC below or land at Farnborough (FOC for weather diverts
)
There was a "back of fag packet" let-down/cloud-break design from one of the EF guys...
Far safer to use Farnborough ILS and either become VMC below or land at Farnborough (FOC for weather diverts
)
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Anywhere
Posts: 2,212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Evo - as others have hinted but I will re-iterate:
There are no official IAP's for Goodwood.
There used to be, when it was full ATC. It ceased to be that at the beginning of 1996 and when the ATC went so did the approval to do Instrument Approaches. Same thing happened to Sheffield last year.
So - that's why you can't find them. They don't officially / legally exist anymore.
There are no official IAP's for Goodwood.
There used to be, when it was full ATC. It ceased to be that at the beginning of 1996 and when the ATC went so did the approval to do Instrument Approaches. Same thing happened to Sheffield last year.
So - that's why you can't find them. They don't officially / legally exist anymore.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 233
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ah, but you didn't use the magic word "instrument" before approach did you.
If you don't want to spend money on Aerad (which is horrible anyway, go with Jeppesens), you can buy the RAF's plates much cheaper from http://www.aidu.co.uk/ Very user friendly and the South of England book is £11.60 one-off, £1 for a single plate or £46pa for a subscription, but they don't list Goodwood either.
Maybe you should just phone them and ask.
P
If you don't want to spend money on Aerad (which is horrible anyway, go with Jeppesens), you can buy the RAF's plates much cheaper from http://www.aidu.co.uk/ Very user friendly and the South of England book is £11.60 one-off, £1 for a single plate or £46pa for a subscription, but they don't list Goodwood either.
Maybe you should just phone them and ask.
P
Last edited by Pilotage; 23rd Apr 2003 at 22:18.
Why do it if it's not fun?
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Bournemouth
Posts: 4,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok, so here's a question:
A pilot with a valid and current IMC rating or IR has in front of him a plate for an unofficial instrument approach procedure. Maybe it's an old procedure which has been discontinued, maybe it's a procedure which has been devised by local pilots over several years but has never been official. Is he allowed to fly the procedure?
Under IFR, you need to be 1000' above the nearest obstacle blah blah blah, except for approach and departure. I can't find anything which says that the approach has to be an "official" approach or any similar words. As far as I can tell, it's legal. But I'd be interested to hear what others think.
As for it being safe, well, that's not possible to say without giving details of a specific case - so let's assume that our pilot isn't going to do anything unsafe at all, the only question is the legality.
FFF
----------
A pilot with a valid and current IMC rating or IR has in front of him a plate for an unofficial instrument approach procedure. Maybe it's an old procedure which has been discontinued, maybe it's a procedure which has been devised by local pilots over several years but has never been official. Is he allowed to fly the procedure?
Under IFR, you need to be 1000' above the nearest obstacle blah blah blah, except for approach and departure. I can't find anything which says that the approach has to be an "official" approach or any similar words. As far as I can tell, it's legal. But I'd be interested to hear what others think.
As for it being safe, well, that's not possible to say without giving details of a specific case - so let's assume that our pilot isn't going to do anything unsafe at all, the only question is the legality.
FFF
----------
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Surrey, UK.
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There isn't a procedure to follow. Period. So this "procedure" is nothing more than a scrap of paper with writing on it 
If, by following the track and height profiles on this "scrap of paper", no other IF rules are broken (including quadrantal) then I can't see why you couldn't fly it down to MSA (an IF rule) or VMC if that came first...
Here's another question for you!
You're over the sea (no land for 5 miles each direction) and above o/c cloud at 2400'
You "know" the ceiling is at 800' AMSL
Can you descend through the 8/8 to VMC below? (Forget ratings, assume current IR)
Does it make any difference if you are under a RAS/RIS/FIS?
If, by following the track and height profiles on this "scrap of paper", no other IF rules are broken (including quadrantal) then I can't see why you couldn't fly it down to MSA (an IF rule) or VMC if that came first...
Here's another question for you!
You're over the sea (no land for 5 miles each direction) and above o/c cloud at 2400'
You "know" the ceiling is at 800' AMSL
Can you descend through the 8/8 to VMC below? (Forget ratings, assume current IR)
Does it make any difference if you are under a RAS/RIS/FIS?
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Anywhere
Posts: 2,212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For a facility to be used as an approach aid the aerodrome license holder has to provide an ATC Approach Control Service (ANO - Article 90).
No APP service - facility cannot be used an approach aid. FFF's assumption that it would be legal therefore is dubious. Of course if you were to stop the approach at 1000ft then different matter - but then you're just obeying the 1000ft rule. Any lower than that though and you're asking for trouble legally.
No APP service - facility cannot be used an approach aid. FFF's assumption that it would be legal therefore is dubious. Of course if you were to stop the approach at 1000ft then different matter - but then you're just obeying the 1000ft rule. Any lower than that though and you're asking for trouble legally.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chichester, UK
Posts: 1,650
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seems like it should be fine.
Think about what would happen if there was no approach and you were flying from White Waltham to Goodwood with your new IMC rating. It's CAVOK north of Guildford, but (for strange Met reasons that only Irv can explain) to the south there is overcast at 1000 feet, tops at 2000. You approach from the north, overfly GWC at 2400 and track out on the 160 radial and start to descend. At 6DME and 1500 feet you level out, do a rate-1 turn to 325 degrees and then start to descend again. At 1000 feet you come out of cloud, see runway 32 about 3 miles ahead and land.
It's a sensible thing to do. All the high ground is to the north of the aerodrome, so descending to the south is fine and by 6 DME you're almost over the sea. It seems to me to be a perfectly sensible letdown - it just happens to be the old VOR approach to runway 32.
(rustle kind of got there first )
Think about what would happen if there was no approach and you were flying from White Waltham to Goodwood with your new IMC rating. It's CAVOK north of Guildford, but (for strange Met reasons that only Irv can explain) to the south there is overcast at 1000 feet, tops at 2000. You approach from the north, overfly GWC at 2400 and track out on the 160 radial and start to descend. At 6DME and 1500 feet you level out, do a rate-1 turn to 325 degrees and then start to descend again. At 1000 feet you come out of cloud, see runway 32 about 3 miles ahead and land.
It's a sensible thing to do. All the high ground is to the north of the aerodrome, so descending to the south is fine and by 6 DME you're almost over the sea. It seems to me to be a perfectly sensible letdown - it just happens to be the old VOR approach to runway 32.
(rustle kind of got there first
)
Why do it if it's not fun?
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Bournemouth
Posts: 4,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ah, but Rustle (and Evo),
What about the 1000' rule? That's where I'm not sure. Because the rule doesn't count if you're making an approach. Do the "track and height profiles on this scrap of paper" count as an approach?
To answer your question about descending through the cloud over the sea, no I don't believe that's legal. Again, it's the 1000' rule that's going to catch you - there is no way you could reasonable describe what you are proposing as an approach, so you are illegal under IFR, and you can't be VFR if you're in cloud. Doesn't make any different if you're receiving any radar or non-radar service from anyone. At least that's my interpretation.
(Looking for the exact text of the low-flying rules right now to paste in here...)
FFF
--------------
Edit: the text of the rule can be found here, on page 249 of the document, under rule 29:
Therefore, I would argue that in my scenario, (a) comes into account, because it is necessary to fly below 1000' in order to land.
If... no other IF rules are broken (including quadrantal) then I can't see why you couldn't fly it down to MSA
To answer your question about descending through the cloud over the sea, no I don't believe that's legal. Again, it's the 1000' rule that's going to catch you - there is no way you could reasonable describe what you are proposing as an approach, so you are illegal under IFR, and you can't be VFR if you're in cloud. Doesn't make any different if you're receiving any radar or non-radar service from anyone. At least that's my interpretation.
(Looking for the exact text of the low-flying rules right now to paste in here...)
FFF
--------------
Edit: the text of the rule can be found here, on page 249 of the document, under rule 29:
Without prejudice to the provisions of rule 5,in order to comply with the Instrument Flight Rules an aircraft shall not fly at a height of less than 1000 feet above the highest obstacle within a distance of 5 nautical miles of the aircraft unless:
(a) it is necessary for the aircraft to do so in order to take off or land;
(b) the aircraft is flying on a route notified for the purposes of this rule;
(c) the aircraft has been otherwise authorised by the competent authority;or
(d) the aircraft is flying at an altitude not exceeding 3000 feet above mean sea level and remains clear of cloud and in sight of the surface.
(a) it is necessary for the aircraft to do so in order to take off or land;
(b) the aircraft is flying on a route notified for the purposes of this rule;
(c) the aircraft has been otherwise authorised by the competent authority;or
(d) the aircraft is flying at an altitude not exceeding 3000 feet above mean sea level and remains clear of cloud and in sight of the surface.
Last edited by FlyingForFun; 23rd Apr 2003 at 23:24.