Approaches into KABQ with Outdated XPlane GPS data

RyanK
Posts: 148
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2014 11:00 am
Location: Stevens Point, WI

Re: Approaches into KABQ with Outdated XPlane GPS data

Post by RyanK »

Talan2000 wrote:Ryan,
I'm not a CFII, so I will defer to your feedback that there is no ambiguity in how approach plates are labeled wrt equipment requirements...but as a run of the mill instrument rated pilot I'd say we're almost, but not quite splitting hairs here.

One wonders how one might identify that VDP on the Final Approach segment without DME? I'm guessing you would teach your students to do the math, perform the calculation, and use a timer while shooting the LOC approach in their Cherokee 180 with 1 VOR and an ADF.
You asked about naming and labeling conventions for required equipment, and I think they're good questions. You're not required to be able to identify the VDP.
Talan2000
Posts: 207
Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2014 8:59 pm
Location: McKinney, Texas, USA, Earth

Re: Approaches into KABQ with Outdated XPlane GPS data

Post by Talan2000 »

Ryan,

Thanks again. I appreciate your clarification about the distinction between enroute transition segments and Final Approach Segments wrt chart labels. Mostly when briefing approaches, I've thought, ok, "what's the big picture, what's required for the approach as a whole" (and in capital letters) and what do I have onboard to help me execute it. And this had led me to gloss over some of the nuance of why we get notes like DME required but not LOC/DME in the title. I have a better understanding now.

And full disclosure, when I first saw this one online, I really squinted my eyes and wanted ABQ to be an IAF and kept squinting to see a procedure turn barb, but to no avail :) Maybe it was once there before a later revision added those GPS waypoints...who knows...

Despite some others objections, I really do enjoy and appreciate deep diving on approaches like this on PE. Our local approaches are a lot more straightforward, and doing even so much as a procedure turn seems rare with vectors being the norm...That said,I have in past been told not to overthink things. Mea culpa.

Still, deep diving on this approach sure has helped clear up the fine print of why some equipment requirements are relegated to the notes (DME), some to the title, and some to the plan view (GPS or RADAR). Thanks again.

T
Keith Smith
Posts: 9939
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2010 8:38 pm
Location: Pompton Plains, NJ
Contact:

Re: Approaches into KABQ with Outdated XPlane GPS data

Post by Keith Smith »

My objection was not related to the depth of information being covered. I think there were some great posts that will be informative for a lot of people.
Post Reply