LTAI Missed approach procedure

[Denti]

I would do exactly what is said on the plate of course, climbing to 2700 and turn at either 5D or 1250 whichever is later.

[tommoutrie]

Well I don't agree that's what the plate says but I don't think it matters that much either. The plate says climb to 1250 feet on the radial. It's in the immediate actions box. If it was continuous to 2700 it would say it there. The reason for the cap at 1250 is conflicting traffic as I've pointed out - you have the potential for reciprocal traffic with no meaningful separation. So what I would do is request the further climb and the net result would be the same. The plate is written to give a known profile and I don't agree that the climb is continuous unless you achieve 1250 feet at or after the 5D. I do agree that it's sensible to want to be higher at that point but you should obtain a clearance.

What would you do on plate 11-7? The missed approach is initially 2000 feet then a climbing left turn to 3000? Would you climb straight to 3000?

The plate is clear. This is not a continuous climb to 2700, and 11-7 is not continuous to 3000. If you want that you need to get a clearance to do it. If there is a feeling that the wording is ambiguous (and I don't think it is) then It needs reporting. But I don't understand why you think it's continuous when the immediate actions give you the initial platform. The onward climbing turn is clearly conditional on the 5D. Wouldn't you simply ask for the climb?

[tommoutrie]

Incidentally. Lets assume the single failure is a stuck mike in the control tower blocking out the tower frequency. And you're the number 2 traffic who is also going around because you don't have a clearance to land and there's a bloke on the runway. How would you fly the missed approach now? You know there's an aircraft who was in front of you by 6 miles, he has probably gone around, by the time you are establishing on the 330 radial climbing 2700 he's inbound the beacon at 2700, you can't chat about it because the megawatt transmitter has blocked the channel. That's a simple stuck mike, broken switch, duff transmitter, whatever, but certainly not a complex failure. What's the plan?

[Zeffy]

What would you do on plate 11-7? The missed approach is initially 2000 feet then a climbing left turn to 3000? Would you climb straight to 3000?

Did you intend to refer to plate 11-8?

[The Range]

If so many people here can't agree on this there must be something wrong with the wording.

[BOAC]

It certainly seems there is sufficient confusion here, and it is the wording that causes it. Is the intention to prevent anyone turning left until above 1250', and if so, why? There are no terrain reasons - OR is it as tom says, to provide separation? There should be no confusion. To all those who, like me have an idea of what is 'sensible', it is what is required by the chart constructors that matters, not personal 'interpretation'.

[tommoutrie]

ILS 36C is 11-7 on the current jepps I think. It bases a very similar go around on the YT 330 radial. I just wondered if the other chaps read that as a continuous climb too.

Interesting discussion chaps, very rare for prune..

[Zeffy]

Text from Missed Approach for the ILS 36C from your linked file:

MISSED APCH: Climb on 330-deg from NDB to 2000', then climbing LEFT turn to 3000' to NDB and hold.

tommoutrie:

What would you do on plate 11-7? The missed approach is initially 2000 feet then a climbing left turn to 3000? Would you climb straight to 3000

Yes, absolutely -- the climb is continuous. The left turn back to the NDB commences leaving 2000'.

tommoutrie:

The plate is clear. This is not a continuous climb to 2700, and 11-7 is not continuous to 3000

[FullWings]

Tom, I think you might be misinterpreting the design ethos of approach plates. The *primary* role of these procedures is not traffic separation but approach alignment and terrain clearance. Traffic separation is the job of ATC and the pilots, pilots only if ATC is unable to help. Yes, keeping inbounds and missed approaches away from each other is good but not at the expense of everything else.

For example, there are many airfields from which the departure says climb on a heading/track to XXXX then turn and climb to ZZZZ. This is simply because if you turned en-route before reaching XXXXft, you'd hit something! The climb is continuous but the turn cannot be made until the restriction is made.

You can invent scenarios all day but nothing kills you more quickly than unexpected or unavoidable ground. If you were aware of conflicting traffic before the radio went kaput, you might modify your actions in the light of it but not by exposing yourself to CFIT risks. Most pilots would switch to the previous frequency and/or 121.5 and try and coordinate from there. TCAS is a backup to this.

[FlightPathOBN]

Because I love you guys...original source document...

[tommoutrie]

I'm not! I completely agree that 11-7 is continuous. But the 5D condition means that 11-5 is not. The condition is intended to keep the outbound and inbound radials separated. Of course you can get clearance to climb continuously but that's not what the plate says. The difference between the two plates, the 5D condition, makes that clear. Ignore it if you want but don't misread the plate and believe that it's a continuous climb. Get clearance to do it, or bust it if you want, but that's not what the plate says. Feedback to jeppesen is the important thing. They can negotiate with the national authorities to change these things but I'm not a fan of mis reading what it says.

What's to disagree with? The difference in the plates is clear, you can call atc for clearance to get the continuous climb, and I totally agree that being close to the ground is uncomfortable. As I have made clear, I would get clearance to climb. I also think the plate design is a bit bizarre and it's unnecessary for an aircraft to be held at that height over rising terrain but I reiterate, daft or not, that is clearly what the plate says.

[FlightPathOBN]

The *primary* role of these procedures is not traffic separation but approach alignment and terrain clearance. Traffic separation is the job of ATC and the pilots, pilots only if ATC is unable to help. Yes, keeping inbounds and missed approaches away from each other is good but not at the expense of everything else.

Any procedure has to take into account all of the clearances to the airspace and the other procedures, and must maintain min sep within the boundary of the procedure.

[Zeffy]

tommoutrie
I completely agree that 11-7 is continuous.

Respectfully sir -- that is not what you said in post #62

tommoutrie
What would you do on plate 11-7? The missed approach is initially 2000 feet then a climbing left turn to 3000? Would you climb straight to 3000?

The plate is clear. This is not a continuous climb to 2700, and 11-7 is not continuous to 3000.

[Denti]

The 5D condition in its own doesn't make it a discontinued climb, it is only a restriction where to start the turn, and not so rare in itself as well. It is pretty common to have missed approaches where one has to reach both a distance and an intermediate altitude during a continous climb. Like for example the missed approaches in EDDK.

[BOAC]

OBN - if you REALLY love us, could you look at post #28 and comment on the g/a track on the AIP chart - as I posted?

While you are feeling 'love', what is YOUR take on the ILS2 g/a altitudes?

[tommoutrie]

Sorry zeffy, in typing on a tiny windows mobile phone on a gprs signal in Kazakhstan. I cant see the whole sentence in one go when i type. I wanted to point out the difference in the plates and the 5D condition. I was hoping someone would point out the immediate action strip says 2000 on plate 11-7. The reason it is continuous is that the climb to 2000 feet is followed by the onward climbing turn. 2000 feet is the condition for the turn. On 11-5 the initial action is climb 1250. The condition comes next and its the 5D. So you must remain at 1250 until the condition is met. Then you execute the climbing turn. I have made it clear that i would also climb, however, but i would obtain a clearance to do so.

cant see what in typing at all now as its behind the really handy pop up soft keyboard...

[Zeffy]

Thanks for the clarification, Tom.

However, as Denti and others have pointed out, the 5D condition does not of itself stop the climb.

It is regrettable that confusion exists on a fundamental IFR instruction.

[tommoutrie]

You know what? I've read it again. Much more carefully this time. I agree, 1250 is not a condition, it is badly worded, i agree its a continuous climb. I have seen an in and out vertical separation being the important bit but i don't think that's what's going on here. I realise that its simply keeping you above 1250 for the turn. The wording is not great and i apologise for getting it wrong. Still, interesting chat eh..

[tommoutrie]

Its because both conditions need to be satisfied. I don't think the wording is fantastic but id have had a better look if i was going there. I shall post my licence back to the authorities immediately.

[733driver]

Indeed, terribly worded missed approach. I tend to agree the intention is for it to be a continous climb but it doesn't really say that. All missed approach instructions should say something like: climb to 2700', then follow the details (turm when passing 1250ft or DME 5 whatever is later etc.). Or at least say: Cross DME 5 at 1250' or above. This could be so easy.

It's also interestimg how the initial missed approach instructions in the bottom right corner (above the circling minima) says 1250' so that adds to the confusion. I would expect to see the first stop altitute there.

How is the missed approach coded in the FMS? DME 5 at 1250' or at or above?