Heli NDB/DME aproach RWY 27 Gloucestershire 'Aerad plate'
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Heli NDB/DME aproach RWY 27 Gloucestershire 'Aerad plate'
Hi all,
If it's not too much trouble and you got this plate, can you talk me through it?
I seem to get stuck
on NDB approaches!!
If it's not too much trouble and you got this plate, can you talk me through it?
I seem to get stuck
on NDB approaches!!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Do you not have an Instrument Instructor?
This is how I see it working (bear in mind my IR was a few years ago):
Fly to the NDB at 2800' and (if required) enter the hold as depicted, then proceed outbound on 095 degrees to DME 8, at 2300', then turn inbound on 264 and start descending to 2000', to reach DME 5.0 at 2000'. At DME start descending . Missed aproach point is when you reach DME 1.0.
If you arrive from the East, you just join the approach at the IAF at DME 10.0 at 2400'.
This is how I see it working (bear in mind my IR was a few years ago):
Fly to the NDB at 2800' and (if required) enter the hold as depicted, then proceed outbound on 095 degrees to DME 8, at 2300', then turn inbound on 264 and start descending to 2000', to reach DME 5.0 at 2000'. At DME start descending . Missed aproach point is when you reach DME 1.0.
If you arrive from the East, you just join the approach at the IAF at DME 10.0 at 2400'.
Last edited by manfromuncle; 25th Apr 2008 at 11:50.
(Refering to plate P2M, 07 Jul 05).
Leave the hold not below 2800ft QNH and fly outbound from the beacon (GST) on a track of 095 (note 3.) By 8d, decend to not below 2300ft. At 8d, start a left turn to intercept the inbound track of 264. (NB This is not necessarily a rate 1 turn and it should never take you further out than 10d.)
Between 8d and 5d (the FAF), decend to not below 2000ft. At 5d, not below 2000ft; 4d, target alt is 1630ft; 3d, target alt is 1250ft; 2d, target alt is 880ft (and must not be below 800ft).
MDA is 600ft (MDH 520ft.) The MAPT is at 1d. The go-around is as published.
I've never flown the procedure but that's how I read the plate.
Has this been of any help?
Leave the hold not below 2800ft QNH and fly outbound from the beacon (GST) on a track of 095 (note 3.) By 8d, decend to not below 2300ft. At 8d, start a left turn to intercept the inbound track of 264. (NB This is not necessarily a rate 1 turn and it should never take you further out than 10d.)
Between 8d and 5d (the FAF), decend to not below 2000ft. At 5d, not below 2000ft; 4d, target alt is 1630ft; 3d, target alt is 1250ft; 2d, target alt is 880ft (and must not be below 800ft).
MDA is 600ft (MDH 520ft.) The MAPT is at 1d. The go-around is as published.
I've never flown the procedure but that's how I read the plate.
Has this been of any help?
Exactly as B73 describes. Some additional info - you can join straight in or from the DME arc. there is guidance on rate of descent to achieve the fnal approach profile, and don't forget the basics on how to correct track errors. I was always taught 'pull the tail and push the head' but that may not mean much!
I'm sure your IRI would be happy to explain more - it's strange that you have to resort to pprune for answers whilst doing (I assume with BAS or PAS) an initial IR course
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Aberdeenshire
Posts: 217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh and do make sure that you turn left at the end of the outbound not right as I did in the sim a few weeks back, I thought I was at Southend. Which was politely pointed out to me at the end of the session, not! Somehow managed to regain the inbound track though.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Wales
Age: 38
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh and do make sure that you turn left at the end of the outbound not right as I did in the sim a few weeks back, I thought I was at Southend. Which was politely pointed out to me at the end of the session, not! Somehow managed to regain the inbound track though.
Now if you just had a GPS approach overlaid on the existing NDB approach (or in lieu of....) life would be much easier.
Oh sorry....forgot those don't exist in the UK?
(Or do the US Military have such things for their bases?)
Oh sorry....forgot those don't exist in the UK?
(Or do the US Military have such things for their bases?)
Now if you just had a GPS approach overlaid on the existing NDB approach (or in lieu of....) life would be much easier.
Oh sorry....forgot those don't exist in the UK?
Oh sorry....forgot those don't exist in the UK?
Next thing you know there will cans of Budwieser behind the bar and Marlboro's at the ciggy counter.
212man, without splitting too many hairs over this, what the UK calls a GPS Approach (RNAV or RNP .3), doesn't quite qualify with standards in the rest of the world.
The UK GPS approaches do not provide guidance for the missed approach segment. It is either climb straight ahead and ask center for help (Gatwick, Heathrow, etc), or "LCTR required for missed approach" (Gloucester, etc). A good FMS system should be able to provide constant overlay information, but compared to what's going on this side of the Atlantic it looks bush league and half-hearted. If it is any consolation to UK pride, the Norweigans have a similar restriction on their LPV (localizer precision with vertical guidance) precision GPS approaches, and also require conventional navaids for the missed approach segment.
Must be something regulatory over there, and maybe somebody has some explanation. We're busy decommissioning NDB's, Marker Beacons, LCTR's, VOR, Radar etc. here, so designing a new procedure requiring existing ground based navaids seems pointless to us.
The UK GPS approaches do not provide guidance for the missed approach segment. It is either climb straight ahead and ask center for help (Gatwick, Heathrow, etc), or "LCTR required for missed approach" (Gloucester, etc). A good FMS system should be able to provide constant overlay information, but compared to what's going on this side of the Atlantic it looks bush league and half-hearted. If it is any consolation to UK pride, the Norweigans have a similar restriction on their LPV (localizer precision with vertical guidance) precision GPS approaches, and also require conventional navaids for the missed approach segment.
Must be something regulatory over there, and maybe somebody has some explanation. We're busy decommissioning NDB's, Marker Beacons, LCTR's, VOR, Radar etc. here, so designing a new procedure requiring existing ground based navaids seems pointless to us.
