It is not uncommon for air traffic control to pose this question to pilots on IFR flight plans approaching certain airports when the weather is VFR. In daylight, when the visibility is good, the winds calm, and the pilot familiar with the airport—and the approach is a straight in—the visual is no big deal.

But throw in weather, fatigue, low light, pilot unfamiliarity, and a circle to land, and it’s a different event.

Honeywell Aerospace is trying to mitigate these risks, expanding its navigation database to offer flight management system (FMS) guided visual procedures as a stand-alone option.

According to Jim Johnson, senior manager of flight technical services at Honeywell, the visual approaches are created in collaboration with Jeppesen. The instructions for the guided visuals look like Jeppesen approach plates but carry the caveat “advisory guidance only” and “visual approach only.” In addition, the symbology on the approaches differs in a handful of ways.

“The FMS-guided visual provides a lateral and vertical path from a fix fairly close to the airport all the way down to the runway,” says Johnson. “You can hand fly them or couple them to the autopilot.”

Visual into KTEB

One of the first guided visual approaches was created for the descent to Runway 1 at Teterboro Airport (KTEB) in New Jersey.

The airport sits in a very industrialized area with the runway blending into warehouses and business parks. Honeywell provides a video of the visual approach on its website that illustrates the value of having that helping hand. Having the extra vertical and lateral guidance from a mathematically created visual procedure allows pilots to better manage their approach, configuring the aircraft in an expedient manner to avoid “coming in high and hot” in an improperly configured aircraft.

• READ MORE: Going with Glass: The Mother of All Panel Upgrades

This is quite helpful when the aircraft needs to circle to land, says Carey Miller, pilot and senior manager of technical sales at Honeywell.

“Going into Runway 1 at Teterboro on the visual, you are not aligned with the VASI,” Miller says. “There is no vertical guidance, which can lead to a dive to the runway. Add a moonless night or gusty winds, and it can be quite challenging. Not being able to see the airport is a detriment to your energy management. The visual approaches, when coupled to the autopilot, eliminate the guesswork and the overbanking tendency that can lead to stalls.”

Adds Johnson: “The aircraft will fly constant radius turns, [and] you will be on the same ground track every time because the computer knows how to manage the vertical and lateral path. It gets rid of the pilot drifting down or turning early because of the winds.”

Airspace Guidance

The guided visual procedures created thus far have come from suggestions from Honeywell customers, including a visual approach to Chicago Executive/Prospect Heights Airport in Wheeling, Illinois (KPWK). KPWK is in Class D airspace, 8 nm from Chicago O’Hare International Airport (KORD). The Class B airspace for KORD sits above KPWK. There is a V-shaped cutout with various altitudes over KPWK.

The guided visual can help the pilot avoid clipping the Class B airspace during the circle to land—and the dreaded phone call with ATC that results.

The Creative Process

Each approach is created using software tools that take into account the airspace and terrain at the airport, then test flown in simulators to check for flyability.

According to Johnson, the suggestions for where to offer the guided visual approaches come from their customers.

“There are a lot of secondary and regional airports in the U.S. that have both terrain and airspace considerations that make visual approaches very challenging,” says Johnson. “For example, Van Nuys, California [KVNY], has both airspace challenges and a ridge nearby.”

• READ MORE: All Flight Jackets Tell a Story

In some cases, the team may opt to create a visual approach as an overlay to improve safety at airports where closely spaced simultaneous approaches are in use. As this issue was going to press, Honeywell was working on an approach to Runway 28R/L at San Francisco International Airport (KSFO). The visual approach has a briefing sheet with textual guidance, and Honeywell has literally drawn a picture of it.

During development each procedure is flown in a simulator, using a specific briefing sheet that is checked and double-checked for accuracy and usability. Each approach has the ability to be coupled with the autopilot.

Miller cautions it is important to recognize that the visual procedures are not considered instrument approaches in the traditional sense.

“Do not request it as an approach, because ATC will not be aware of it,” Miller says. This information is emphasized on the procedure briefing sheet that accompanies each guided visual approach.

The guided visual approach is loaded in the FMS just like an instrument approach. The pilots can access them with a few pushes of a button, just as they do Jeppesen approaches.

“To use the visual approaches, the customer needs to have a Honeywell-equipped aircraft, and in addition to the FMS database, for an additional $2,000 per year they receive the visual approaches,” says Miller.

To request an approach, contact Honeywell at FTS@honeywell.com. It takes approximately four weeks to put one together.

Coming Full Circle

In many ways, the visual approach procedures represent a modern treatment to the first approaches created by Elrey Jeppesen—yes, that Jeppesen—who became a pilot in 1925 at the age of 18. At the time, there was no such thing as maps purpose-built for aviation. Pilots relied on road maps—which often weren’t terribly accurate, following railroad tracks from town to town or by pilotage and dead reckoning.

In 1925, Jeppesen went to work as a survey pilot and by 1930 was working for Boeing Air Transport, the precursor to United Airlines. This was decades before air traffic control and electronic navigation systems were created. Jeppesen bought a small notebook and filled it with information about the routes he flew. In it there were drawings of runways and airports and information that pilots needed to know, like the elevation of water towers, telephone numbers of farmers who would provide weather reports, and dimensions of the runway and its distance from the nearest city.

In 1934, this evolved into the Jeppesen Company and the notebook into the en route charts and terminal area procedures we know today. Much of Jeppesen’s flying was done in the Pacific Northwest. The Museum of Flight in Seattle is the keeper of the Elrey B. Jeppesen Collection, and for many years there was a replica of his first notebook on display in the Red Barn.

We think Captain Jepp would appreciate how far the approaches he inspired have come.

This column first appeared in the January-February 2024/Issue 945 of FLYING’s print edition.

The post Honeywell Crafts Safer Approaches Through Technology appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Navigraph has been the flight simulation community’s trusted charts and navigation data provider for more than two decades. With a user base surpassing 1 million, Navigraph is highly regarded for its all-in-one subscription offering, providing a comprehensive suite of charts, navigation data, and flight planning utilities. In the user-friendly Charts app, subscribers can access worldwide IFR charts and VFR maps sourced from Jeppesen. 

In this article, we’ll embark on a flight from Los Angeles International Airport (KLAX) to Harry Reid International Airport (KLAS) in Las Vegas, utilizing Navigraph’s simulation apps for flight planning, charts, and navigation data, observing how they seamlessly integrate to enhance the simulation experience.

Navigating the Struggle: Flight Planning

Virtual pilots, like their real-world counterparts, must meticulously plan flights, understand fuel consumption, monitor real-world weather injected into the simulator, and if flying a commercial airliner, take on roles such as dispatcher, baggage handler, operations agent, and sometimes even cabin crew duties, among others.For our KLAX-KLAS flight, we’ll utilize SimBrief, a free flight planning application by Navigraph. SimBrief will generate a real-world-based dispatch release, or operational flight plan (OFP), which can be up to 40 pages long. These OFPs can be input directly into the flight management computer (FMC) of many popular simulator aircraft for enhanced convenience.

Staying Current: Jeppesen Data

Navigraph ensures that subscribers have access to the latest Jeppesen data across all their services. They also offer navigation data update apps for popular simulators, as well as add-on aircraft and tools. Every 28 days, Navigraph updates the Jeppesen data, including waypoints, VORs, NDBs, intersections, and airports, aligning with the real AIRAC cycle. We use the Navigraph Hub desktop app to install current Jeppesen data into our Microsoft Flight Simulator. The navigation data installation is done with the click of a button.

With the current AIRAC cycle installed, we can enter the simulator. This flight is conducted in Microsoft Flight Simulator (MSFS) on a PC, however, integrated features are available for several MSFS aircraft on Xbox. Navigraph offers extended integrations, such as charts with moving maps, navigation data, and flight plan import capabilities for MSFS, X-Plane, and many add-on aircraft for Prepar3D and Microsoft Flight Simulator X.

Seamless Integration: Navigraph Charts App

Utilizing the SimBrief import feature, we load our flight plan into Navigraph Charts. We’ll now be provided with a visual representation of our route. The charts include high and low IFR en route symbology familiar to Jeppesen users. Navigraph’s global charting capability allows access to airport charts, SIDs, STARs, and approaches in Jeppesen format without regional limitations.

Upon reaching the gate at LAX, we activate Navigraph’s weather overlays to assess current and upcoming weather conditions. Forecasts on turbulence help anticipate our experience at cruising altitude, essential for ensuring passenger comfort. A handy feature in Navigraph Charts for increased situational awareness is the overlay feature, allowing us to superimpose our SID out of LAX.

Navigraph provides several methods for pilots to incorporate their technology into simulation.

First, there’s the mobile app, accessible via the Apple Store or Google Play, effectively transforming your tablet or smartphone into an Electronic Flight Bag (EFB). Second, they offer their desktop application, Navigraph Charts, ensuring full functionality across various platforms.

Navigraph also offers a web-based cloud interface and its Charts In-Game Panel for MSFS that seamlessly integrates into the simulator as a compact window. In addition to the native apps, Charts can be displayed inside the virtual cockpit environment of many aircraft, enhancing the overall immersion and facilitating a better virtual-reality experience.

Flight Essentials: Key Features in Charts

The Navigraph Charts app boasts an array of valuable features essential for every flight. These include real-world ATIS for designated airports, METARs, NOTAMs, moving maps (ideal for real-time position tracking), and telemetry monitoring, providing crucial flight data.

We utilized Navigraph’s VFR charts during our flight, seamlessly incorporating FAA sectionals directly into the app. For example, when we wanted to pinpoint Soda Lake for our virtual passengers, it was conveniently located on the VFR sectional chart, just northeast of the Hector (HEC) VOR—really good for those PAs.

KLAS is a busy airport. We use Navigraph’s annotation feature to draw our taxi route to the gate. For increased resolution as we approach it, we use the map view and zoom-in to access the detailed airport diagrams in Charts powered by Jeppesen’s Airport Mapping Database (AMDB).

Navigraph: Your Key to Elevated Flight Simulation

Navigraph’s comprehensive suite of features revolutionizes the flight simulation experience. With comprehensive flight planning, worldwide Jeppesen charts, and matching data, Navigraph covers the needs of any IFR flight simulation adventures.

The integration of worldwide VFR maps and U.S. sectionals adds another layer of detail, allowing flight simmers to navigate with precision and share geographical landmarks effortlessly.

Whether accessed through the mobile app, desktop application, web interface, or in-game panel, Navigraph’s versatility and functionality make it an indispensable tool for enhancing the realism and accuracy of flight simulations. It’s a must-have if you want to take flight simulation to the next level.

The post Next-Level Flight Simulation with Navigraph appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

According to the company, an estimated 90 percent of the aircraft in service at this time rely on JeppNavData from the Digital Aviation Solutions group of Boeing Global Services to get them where they need to be.

“Jeppesen NavData has been at the heart of aviation navigation for decades, evolving not just in step with the industry but often ahead of it,” said Brad Surak, the company’s vice president of digital aviation solutions. “It is our proud legacy to have contributed to the digital transformation of flight navigation. This anniversary is a testament to the pioneering spirit that continues to guide our path forward.”

The History

The company began in the 1930s when Captain Elrey Jeppesen, an airline pilot, jotted down notes and drew diagrams in a small black notebook. These notes contained information about the airports he visited and highlighted, among other things, the location of prominent landmarks, like railroad tracks and the height of water towers and their location in reference to the airport.

United Airlines, the employer ofJeppesen, was the first to use Jeppesen charts, or “Jepps” as pilots call them.

In 1947 Jeppesen and the Civil Aeronautics Administration (the precursor to the FAA) collaborated to create standard instrument approach procedures and the National Flight Data Center.

The company continued to grow and evolve, serving nations outside the U.S., and in 1973 Jeppesen NavData was used commercially in flight management computer guidance systems.

Jim Terpstra, a pioneer of Jeppesen data services, tells the story.

“The NavData department began with two guys in 1973,” Terpstra said. “Once every 28 days, the computer department created a magnetic tape with the latest information, and I would pack it in a box and we would deliver it to customers.”

According to Terpstra, the first commercial flight using the Jeppesen NavData digital navigation system was a National Airlines DC-10 in 1973.

The 28-day cycle of digital information is still utilized today. According to Jeppesen, the data powering Jeppesen Data Solutions is created and refined from raw source information from more than 246 global providers in 195 countries as well as information from regulatory agencies.

More than 1,000 experts are tasked with transforming the raw data into a consistent format that pilots can use. The company noted that “each cycle, the team turns raw data into refined, consistent flight information by analyzing and verifying more than 47,000 pieces of data.”

• READ MORE: Two Kinds of Instrument Approach Charts

Delivery Method Has Changed

Over the decades as digital media has evolved, so has the data delivery method. Magnetic tape gave way to floppy disks, and now pilots receive real-time updates via wireless transmissions that can be easily integrated with advanced flight management systems in a variety of aircraft.

Although ostensibly developed for airlines, Jeppesen NavData is also used by the military and flight schools around the world.

“Every update of NavData reflects our relentless pursuit of excellence in aviation,” said Brett Burgess, the company’s digital aviation solutions leader. “We’re shaping not just routes in the sky but the future of global air travel.”

The post Jeppesen NavData Turns 50 appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

A. Transitions From En Route To Approach

HINZY, MAJUR, MELON, and KURAY are all waypoints from which this approach might be started, which then transitions into the MUNIE waypoint. All of these waypoints are also found on low-altitude en route charts and are on victor airways that might be used to transition en route to the ILS Runway14 approach into Nassau. A pilot planning ahead might choose their en route path to transition to one of these points. One of the most commonly used is the MAJUR intersection, which falls on BR22V-54V-57V, a victor airway that transitions off from the Palm Beach (PBI) VOR, taking the pilot from the East Coast of the U.S. into the Bahamas with the help of Miami Approach.

B. DME Arc

A pilot choosing to transition onto this approach from either the HINZY or KURAY intersection might find themselves assigned a DME arc. While not as common in many locations as in the past, an arc such as this can be used by ATC to sequence traffic from multiple points onto a final approach path, as in this ILS Runway 14. Remember to use the turn-10, twist-10 (degrees) process to feed onto the approach while flying the 14 DME arc from the ZQA VOR until intercepting the final approach path of 143 degrees inbound on the ILS. For many pilots, an IFR-capable GPS can select the initial fix and help feed the aircraft around the DME arc. Don’t forget to make the ILS frequency active and switch to VLOC when flying this approach, though, if you are using the GPS to feed your aircraft from the initial fixes onto the final approach path.

C. Mixing With Big Aircraft

With many different aircraft of various sizes and speeds using this approach, be ready to mix it up in the airspace. With that said, you may be asked to maintain your aircraft’s best forward speed; to be vectored around a little bit if there are bigger aircraft needing to land; or to get out of the way quickly when landing. With an airport with runways of over 8,000 and 10,000 feet of landing distance, Nassau brings in big aircraft to use the facilities. You might be flying your GA aircraft on the approach between a Gulfstream ahead of you and a Boeing 787 behind you. Be honest if you can’t maintain something assigned to you. It’s certainly better than getting run over by a faster aircraft.

D. DME From the ILS

While a pilot using a traditional DME source will be using the ZQAVOR (112.7) for DME fixes, if using an intersection or the DME arc to feed onto this approach, they will need to transition to using the DME on the ILS frequency (110.1) once they pass the IZQA waypoint (the final approach fix). This can be confusing because prior to this, the pilot would be using the VOR. They need to swap the frequency for the DME source to the ILS (as denoted by the D6.9 IZQA notation at the final approach fix) for the last part of the approach.

E. Correct GPS Database?

GPS systems in aircraft have databases that include approach procedures for selected areas. Make sure if you are going here and planning on using approaches at all—anything beyond basic VFR—that your database subscription is not only current but includes the places you want to go. A subscription for a database that includes “United States” might include Puerto Rico, but not the Bahamas. A subscription for “North America” might be needed to get the right data. Verify this well ahead of your trip or plan on being a VFR-only operator for your time in the Bahamas.

This column was originally published in the December 2022/January 2023 Issue 933 of FLYING.

The post Nassau, Bahamas ILS 14 (MYNN) appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

On November 2, Jeppesen, a Boeing (NYSE: BA) subsidiary, reported on its website that there had been a “cyber incident” that affected some Jeppesen products and services. For pilots, that translated to issues potentially affecting navigation charts and information that most pilots draw from ForeFlight on their electronic flight bags (EFBs). In short, the information became suspect, as pilots were notified it could be out of date.

“It’s always good to have options,” noted Jason Blair, designated pilot examiner and FLYING Magazine contributor who pens Chart Wise, a study of instrument approaches and procedures. 

“We have become too dependent on our EFBs. It’s a great check ride scenario—what would you do if you suspected your EFB was compromised and you needed to get weather? How about making a call to Flight Service? Or when it comes to approaches, have another app loaded on your phone or tablet as backup,” he said.

• READ MORE: Classic Aftermath: More than He Could Handle

In the days that followed the cyber incident, it was determined that Jeppesen was not the target of the attack, but rather the delivery method that is used to share informational Jeppesen products with customers was briefly affected; it has since been restored.

In a nutshell, this means that en route navigation and terminal approaches available from ForeFlight are back, which is a relief to pilots utilizing instrument flight plans. According to FAA Advisory Circular 90-100A, pilots need to have the most up- to- date information for these operations.

“Pilots should always have a backup,” Blair said. “I have iflightPlanner on my phone and tablet and there are other pilots who use Garmin products.”

In the meantime, Boeing and Jeppesen are still trying to determine the scope of the cyberattack. On November 2, Jeppesen posted information atop its website with a red banner indicating that the cyber incident had affected certain products and services.

“We immediately initiated an incident response process and are working to reactivate individual products to our hosted production environment,” the statement read, adding “The most recent Jeppesen chart downloads available in Jeppesen Mobile FliteDeck and ForeFlight Mobile are currently effective and in compliance with applicable regulatory requirements. Any ‘Expired’” messages shown for Jeppesen terminal charts prior to December 1st do not indicate that the charts are expired from a regulatory perspective.”

This situation is evolving and FLYING will continue to provide updates as they are made available.

The post Cyber Incident Affects Electronic Flight Bag Users appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

The Kings established a successful business delivering ground training to prospective pilots as well as serving their ongoing training needs. They just released their first book, part entrepreneurship manual and part autobiography, Lift: How to Start, Run, and Grow Your Own Successful Business.

Though I’ve renewed my flight instructor certificate several times using their course, they have also been mentors, colleagues, friends—and competitors—to me and the companies I’ve worked with over the years. Most recently, they’ve contributed the column “Sky Kings” to FLYING.

But they started off as a piece of paper tacked to a column near my cube at Jeppesen in 1997, when I joined Aviation Courseware as a technical writer. Our team was in the midst of finishing the first installment of the Guided Flight Discovery program, for private pilots. Their smiling faces and thumbs-up demeanor served as a cruel reminder that Jepp had lost the contract to develop training materials for Cessna Pilot Centers to the Kings—and we were determined to best them in the marketplace with GFD.

At the time, I wouldn’t touch a King Schools video with a 10-foot pole.

Times Change

Fast forward through my “career path with many waypoints,” and in 2008 I took on the role of Cessna Pilot Center manager for Cessna. All of a sudden, as the training focal on the Skycatcher light sport aircraft program and head of CPC, I reached out to the Kings to launch our development of the new courseware that would accompany the 162’s debut with flight schools. 

As we built our working relationship, I had a first-hand view of not only their business but also the ethical way they moved through the world—and aimed to treat their employees with respect. 

We’ve been through our fair share of spirited debates, and have not always agreed on the best approach to specific elements of training. 

One example: John was not an early proponent of scenario-based training as outlined with the FAA/Industry Training Standards (FITS), while to me its advantages were clear. It turned out that the answer for us both was in its proper execution—natural for some instructors to deliver, but considered a complete waste of time by others. We found a resolution for the Cessna Sport/Private Pilot Training Program.

So, What About the Book?

I mention all this because I sat down to read “Lift” curious to see what I would learn. Would this be a review of the hundreds of stories they’ve shared over the years, both with me directly and to various audiences? Sure, it turns out a lot of those anecdotes reside in its pages—but you’d expect that they’d share some of their most important lessons again.

The Kings are clearly on a mission to promote entrepreneurism, and the benefits of healthy business development. However, after opening chapters compelling the reader to form a solid business plan based on a passion—and their personal “Scrabble tiles”—John and Martha quickly get into the specific reasons why they feel their business has succeeded, as well as outlining areas where they have failed. 

They provide actionable tools to use to help you organize your own business. While these might seem basic to those with a strong business background, there are also good reminders within about the elements that have worked.

Because of their own position in the industry, the Kings have met a ton of interesting people along the way. They include additional stories that introduce you to some of these folks—a veritable who’s who of aviation legends. And they give credit where it is due to the team members who have propelled them forward.

Overall, it’s a fast-moving read, with nuggets enough to keep even those of us who have had the pleasure to work with John and Martha entertained—and still learning from them.

At NBAA 2022

The Kings will host a book signing at the Coffee Social at the National Business Aviation Association’s Business Aviation Convention and Exhibition (NBAA-BACE) in Orlando at the Orange County Convention Center on Tuesday, October 18, at 2 p.m. The first 100 attendees will receive a complimentary copy.

The post Good <i>FLYING</i> Reads: John and Martha King’s ‘Lift’ appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

The new database will feature unimproved airstrips on both private property and public lands. 

“Adding more of those type of airstrips to the Jeppesen Nav databases of aviation GPS units makes it much easier for a larger number of private pilots across the country to gain access and enjoy the benefits and freedom of flying that we all cherish,” said Avidyne President and CEO Dan Schwinn in a statement.

Often the only way to find these out-of-the-way, unimproved landing areas is to have a more experienced pilot show you where they are. Avidyne and Jeppesen are drawing on the expertise of the all-volunteer Recreational Aviation Foundation (RAF) to verify the location and characteristics of these backcountry strips. 

The RAF strives to promote recreational aviation by helping fund the establishment of new airstrips on public land, developing educational materials, and encouraging  national recognition of backcountry flying. 

“Our goal is to promote backcountry flying and to encourage more pilots to join us in the adventure of flight, and the aviation community is fortunate to have a friend like Avidyne who recognizes the value of these off-the-beaten-path aviation destinations,” said RAF Chairman John McKenna in a statement. “Avidyne actively supports the RAF and we really appreciate their efforts working with Jeppesen to enhance the Nav databases so these not-so-mainstream kinds of places can find their way onto the screens of modern avionics.”

The post Avidyne Expands Database to Include Backcountry Airstrips appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Instrument approach charts, be they Jeppesen or FAA terminal procedures publications (TPPs), contain notes that tell the pilot what to do—such as missed approach instructions—and what not to do, such as “circle to land at night not authorized” by using the designation NA.

The information on both forms of approach charts starts at the top with the name of the approach and the airport it services, then radio frequencies, missed approach instructions, and special notes about this approach.

The so-called fine print, often called out using an asterisk, tells the pilot to adjust their procedures given certain circumstances, such as a piece of ground-based navigational equipment out of service, or when a piece of information, such as the altimeter setting, is unavailable.

When a “T” in a black triangle appears in the notes section of the instrument approach chart, it signifies the airport has IFR takeoff minimums and/or departure procedures.

When a triangle containing an “A” appears in the notes section, it signifies the airport has non-standard IFR alternate minimums. 

Think of those letters as the “Trouble T” and “Non-standard A.” 

When using Jeppesen TPPs, you find the takeoff and alternate information on page 10-9. Page 10-9 also shows heading, communications, airport plan view, and additional runway information.

When using the FAA TPPs, the information on non-standard takeoff and departure minimums and non-standard IFR alternate minimums is in the front of the approach binder in section L.

On FAA approach plates, the information about runway distances, and airport lighting is at the bottom of the approach plate and is shown with sort of a pictogram, like IKEA furniture instructions.

The plan view of the approach plates has a bird’s-eye-view of the approach and gives details, such as the height of obstacles near the approach. 

The profile section notes contain information about altitudes and glide-slope intercepts. 

Is helpful to use an acronym to make sure you have all the pertinent information from an approach plate before you use it. Many pilots use MARRTHA:

• Missed approach—memorize first two steps
• Approach type and weather needed for landing
• Radio frequencies necessary—ATIS, approach, tower or unicom
• Radials off a VOR that may identify fixes on the approach
• Time if it is a timed approach, utilizing the aircraft’s projected ground speed
• Heading—when on final approach
• Altitude—how low can the aircraft legally and safely be—check that profile view

Do you have a question about aviation that’s been bugging you? Ask us anything you’ve ever wanted to know about aviation. Our experts in general aviation, training, aircraft, avionics, and more may attempt to answer your question in a future article.

The post We Go Through the Notes on Terminal Procedures Publications appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

A. Ground-Based ATC Communications

Though the airport is nontowered, the chart lists 133.825 as the frequency for “Great Lakes Approach,” a convenience that could be overlooked. Great Lakes can communicate with pilots on the ground, offering the opportunity to open or close IFR flight plans without using the phone. For clearances, take a look at the airport chart to view the clearance delivery frequency of 123.95.

B. Two DMEs Listed at the Intermediate Fix JAVPO

The ILS Runway 26 approach is commonly joined via the feeder route to JAVPO from the Pullman VOR (PMM) or via radar vectors from Great Lakes Approach. Pilots should, however, pay close attention to what navigational aid they’re using to identify the intermediate fix because it’s defined as both 13.2 nm along the IBIV localizer or 22.4 nm from PMM. Each uses a different frequency.

C. The Hold at JAVPO

The holding pattern depicted at the JAVPO intersection includes notes requiring a minimum holding altitude of 2,700 feet and a maximum holding altitude of 5,100 feet. These kinds of restrictions are most commonly used when there is potential overflight traffic that could conflict with aircraft at other altitudes. Grand Rapids Michigan Airport (KGRR), 27 miles northeast of JAVPO, is a busy commercial facility, for instance.

Check out more charts: Chart Wise

D. Missed Is Anything but Direct

The missed approach procedure to the ZEELE intersection can be a little confusing because the VOR that partially creates the intersection is not used in any other way until the missed approach. That can make the Victory VOR (VIO) frequency easy to miss until the pilot begins that initial climb straight ahead to 1,500 feet before making a right turn to a heading of 020 and climbing to 2,600 feet to intercept the VIO 285 radial, which begins off the chart. If you’re questioned about the hold entry after crossing the 185 radial of Muskegon VOR (MKG) and you chose course reversal back to ZEELE, you’d be correct. A GPS or DME could also be used to identify ZEELE.

E. Checking Notams Is Important

Awareness of current ground-equipment outages is always important, but for this approach, they can often be critical. Pilots who regularly fly to KBIV say the MKG and PMM VORs used to identify cross radials and the approach’s feeder route are often out of service, which means if your aircraft is not GPS-equipped, shooting this approach might at times be impossible.

F. Time Block, but No Time Listed

While a descent-rate box still exists below the approach’s profile view, confirming the need for a 3-degree glideslope, notice there are no times mentioned at the listed groundspeeds. This is because of the requirement to identify the missed approach point using DME—in this case, 1.2 DME from the localizer—or the decision height when flying this approach as an ILS. Hence, timing does not apply, even if the approach is flown as localizer-only.

This story appeared in the September 2021 issue of Flying Magazine

The post Holland, Michigan, ILS or LOC Runway 26 appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Despite a falloff in world air traffic since early 2020, Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport (PANC) in Alaska still represents a stopover point for thousands of airline and business-aviation flights between North America and Asia, as well as thousands of local general aviation and military airplanes. Visitors will notice that many of those local GA aircraft are mounted on floats, so they can freely move between PANC and the nearby Lake Hood Seaplane Base. About the terrain transient pilots can expect, city-data.com says: “The Chugach Mountains to the east have a general elevation of 4,000 to 5,000 feet, with peaks from 8,000 to 10,000 feet. These mountains block warm air from the Gulf of Mexico, keeping precipitation relatively low.”

A. Required Equipment

On this month’s chart, the ILS Runway 15 into PANC, pilots will learn that while many precision procedures allow a pilot to identify a final approach fix with a crossing radial, an outer marker or something similar, this procedure does not. That’s why the first note reminds pilots that DME is required. Even if an aircraft is vectored to the approach with ATC calling out the CARDD intersection, aircraft are still required to carry DME or a suitable substitute such as GPS to fly this approach.

B. DME ARC

DME arc approaches still exist, and this procedure employs two—one from each side of the final approach course. There are, however, no procedure turns. The DME arc is based on the Anchorage VOR (TED), making the arc a desirable method of establishing an aircraft on the approach. A pilot could fly directly to the TED VOR and then follow either the 288 radial to the IVANN IAF or the 012 radial to the PEPVE intersection, then via the 22-mile DME arc to intercept the IBSC localizer inbound. Pay careful attention to the requirement at some point to switch from the TED VOR to the ILS localizer that delivers DME data. It must be an easy switch to miss because Note 3 calls it out to the pilot reviewing this chart.

C. VOR to Navigate to CARDD IF

A feeder route for this approach is designated by the heavy arrow line coming from the Big Lake VOR (BGQ) to the CARDD intersection and represents a common path to join the approach from the en route environment, but there are a number of limitations. This route is not allowed “for arrivals at the BGQ VOR on V438-456 northbound and T227 northeast-bound” because it would require too steep of a turn to intercept the course back inbound.

Check out more charts: Chart Wise

D. Missed Approach or the Alternate?

Some approach plates, such as this one, publish a missed approach and an alternate missed approach procedure. Typically, these are provided when one fix may be unreliable at times—such as if a VOR is out of service—and are often located in completely different places. In this case, however, it might be easy for any pilot to be confused about why there are two, when both place the aircraft in holding at the JUKEP intersection. The primary missed approach is based around the 15-mile DME on the 210 radial from the TED VOR. The same intersection can be identified as the 34.2 DME on the 028-degree radial from the Kenai VOR (ENA). The difference here is not where an aircraft will hold but which VOR and DME source the pilot will be relying upon to establish themselves in the hold from the missed approach point.

E. No Localizer or Circling Minimums

Many ILS approaches can be flown as precision or nonprecision approaches, but this approach publishes only ILS minimums, meaning a pilot would not be able to use this approach to circle to land on another runway or if the glideslope were inoperative. It also means there is no approach timing available from the final approach fix from KANSY at the 6.2 DME point on the localizer, from the IBSC ILS transmitter.

This story appeared in the August 2021 issue of Flying Magazine

The post Anchorage ILS Runway 15 appeared first on FLYING Magazine.