Odd missed approach instructions in KSAN RNAV RWY 27

[NM Doug]

I flew the KSAN RNAV RWY 27 approach in PE last night, and I was a little confused by the missed approach instructions: climbing left turn to 2500 direct SARGS and hold. The odd thing is, SARGS is pretty much in a direct line with the final approach course. Adding to the mystery: the hold at SARGS is lined up with the final approach course of 272 degrees, too, and the missed approach instructions for the LOC RWY 27 approach begin with "climb to 2500 on heading 275."

Just curious!

- Doug

[Ryan B]

Looking at the plate I agree. The plan view shows the missed approach straight out, yet the profile view shows you making a climbing left turn.

What I'd do is upon missed approach climb to 2500 direct SARGS, and I'd hold parallel (teardrop is fine I think). Is this what you did?

Regarding the missed for the LOC Ry 27... The heading 275 might be to get someone pointed at the MZB255 radial, join that radial to SARGS (per missed approach instructions). If one didn't have GPS/FMS/INS etc they probably couldn't get to SARGS direct (hence why the approach is only a localizer approach). I did a quick check on Skyvector and from KSAN to SARGS is a 272 heading (no wind etc).

[NM Doug]

I landed and didn't fly the missed approach, but I was planning what you suggested if I needed to go missed. I had considered asking the approach controller about it before starting the approach, but I decided to post my question on the forum instead. (If I were planning the approach RW, I think I would have tried to call approach or the tower ahead of time to ask). I agree, I think the specific heading on the LOC approach is there for non-/G aircraft so they can navigate via radials.

- Doug

[Mark Hargrove]

The MAP on the RNAV 27 plate has got to be erroneous. The LOC 27, which is effectively the exact same approach shows the missed approach procedure straight-ahead climb to 2500, intercepting the MZB R-255, then tracking outbound to SARGS. I guess you could go direct SARGS with RNAV, but I sure don't understand the left turn indication either.

Also, I personally would not be crazy about holding 7 miles offshore at 2500 feet in a single-engine airplane, even in good weather.

-M.

[Alex Stjepanovic]

IIRC, RNAV came to SAN bigtime in 2008, including the arrivals(LYNDI specifically). The way I see it, here's what could have happened.

If you look at the runway courses on the AD chart, you'll see that they are 093.7/273.7. If you look at the final approach courses for L27, I9 and R27, you'll see that they are 092/272. It's close enough, taking into account the fact that the AD charts update more often, that an instrument approach gets you into a position to carry out a visual portion on final, etc etc and one more etc.

If you then look at the missed approach procedure for L27, you'll see that a heading of 275 is initially assigned, followed by the intercept of MZB255R. Compared to the runway/approach courses, this has the effect of turning you ever so slightly to the right, then left.

If you now look at this, without really taking into account the position of SARGS, it's easy to enter the mind of a hypothetical procedures engineer at the FAA: "Right, the approaches are identical and I haven't been given any other notes from the FAA on whether there are obstacles, traffic flows or anything else that'd require a different procedure. L27 doesn't require any changes either. So, on L27 this goes right then left...........f&&k it, for RNAV27 I'll copy everything over, but instead add a gentle left turn, and save the pilots the trouble of going through the manual to figure out how to put a radial into their FMCs. The big airline types will keep bitching about doing work, the regional types will bitch about never being taught this, and the privates about their GPS' being too inadequate to fly such a complex, procedure without pilot input. The hell with them all, I need a coffee - HEY LOREEN?".


*Fast forward to this thread*

[Mark Hargrove]

Ah, now this explanation finally makes sense.