Minimum Safe Altitude
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: India
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Minimum Safe Altitude
i have this nagging question about MSA. Consider that the MSA for a particular approach is around a VOR are the sectors bearing to the station or radials? The reason I ask this is because I was looking at a number of Approach Plates(Jeppesen) and the sectors if the MSA was referenced with a VOR indicated the bearing. In this chart would the MSA between bearing 180 and 270 be 15000?
Also if that's the case isn't it easier to describe then as R360 and R090 because Radials will be more precise than headings.
Also if that's the case isn't it easier to describe then as R360 and R090 because Radials will be more precise than headings.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Germany
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You are right the MSA is 15,000 ft in the sector mentioned.
Regarding use of bearings or radials please keep in mind that a MSA circle can be based also on NDB or a waypoint, e.g. the ARP is often used with RNAV approaches. So using bearings will always work.
Regarding use of bearings or radials please keep in mind that a MSA circle can be based also on NDB or a waypoint, e.g. the ARP is often used with RNAV approaches. So using bearings will always work.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Seattle
Posts: 3,196
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Also, look at it from a realistic point of view...
In the SE clockwise through NW sector, there is virtually nothing but ocean, and a bit of the city of Key West. The 1500' MSA makes perfect sense.
OTOH, in the NE sector, there is little but a few other keys and a bridge/causeway, EXCEPT a tethered balloon on Cudjoe Key that goes up to 14,000' or so. Therefore, the 15,000' MSA.
Also, the magnetic bearing from a VOR would overlie the radial, so there is no practical difference.
I would prefer that the MSA depiction show the outbound radial instead of an inbound bearing. However, since the depiction is on an approach chart, many people may tend to mentally place themselves with regard to inbound course/bearings. Hence (I assume) the use of the inbound bearing.
In the SE clockwise through NW sector, there is virtually nothing but ocean, and a bit of the city of Key West. The 1500' MSA makes perfect sense.
OTOH, in the NE sector, there is little but a few other keys and a bridge/causeway, EXCEPT a tethered balloon on Cudjoe Key that goes up to 14,000' or so. Therefore, the 15,000' MSA.
Also, the magnetic bearing from a VOR would overlie the radial, so there is no practical difference.
I would prefer that the MSA depiction show the outbound radial instead of an inbound bearing. However, since the depiction is on an approach chart, many people may tend to mentally place themselves with regard to inbound course/bearings. Hence (I assume) the use of the inbound bearing.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: India
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i understand if the reference is the ARP or even the NDB. however in this example the chart specifically mentions a VOR.
hence jst wondering why not specify radials to demarcate the sectors . tht way there is no ambiguity.
I would prefer that the MSA depiction show the outbound radial instead of an inbound bearing
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: India
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Headings would be of no value to you ar all! As depicted on the chart shown, the sector identified with an MSA of 15,000 ft lies between QDM's of 180 and 270 degrees. (QDM being the magnetic bearing to the station, or fix being used as a reference point)
Intruder guess that's what you were trying to tell me...jst took a lil time to sink in. thanks
