2 IFR Refresher Ques.

[your_dreamguy]

1) When you're proceding along an airway towards an intersection with an MCA, you're supposed to be at that MCA height before reaching the intersection (let's assume that you're lower than the MCA). If you're not, you're supposed to enter a standard holding pattern until you reach the MCA height. What about if you're proceeding toward an intersection with an MEA increase. Do the same rules apply? I would imagine they would. In other words, you would want to be at the new MEA height (if higher) prior to reaching the intersection where an MEA increase take place...right?

2) Radar vector with GPS equip. The other day, I was given a turn to a radar vector heading of 130. However, there was a 10 degree crosswind component from the right. After a few minutes, ATC came back and told me to maintain 140 as a heading. Could I have just turned such that my GPS ground track read 130, the first time? In other words, if you're given a vector heading and you have GPS, can you just maintain a GPS heading that matches the radar vector heading as opposed to maintaining a DG heading that matches the vector heading? I think pilots of EFIS equipped planes do this because they have a separate ground track heading bug.

Look forward to your help.

 

[mattpilot]

I'm not sure on the first one, but i can answer the second one.


Answer is No, you fly the magnetic heading assigned. Reason for this is the controller may have already added wind correction. Also, what if other aircraft are in the area? If you add your own correction, you might hit another plane. Say your following another aircraft and both are assigned 130, but you decide to fly 140. You will end up with a different ground track than the aircraft your following. This screws up everything for the controller. R/V are ALWAYS magnetic HEADINGS, not courses!!

 

[atrdriver]

1) When you're proceding along an airway towards an intersection with an MCA, you're supposed to be at that MCA height before reaching the intersection (let's assume that you're lower than the MCA). If you're not, you're supposed to enter a standard holding pattern until you reach the MCA height. What about if you're proceeding toward an intersection with an MEA increase. Do the same rules apply? I would imagine they would. In other words, you would want to be at the new MEA height (if higher) prior to reaching the intersection where an MEA increase take place...right?

2) Radar vector with GPS equip. The other day, I was given a turn to a radar vector heading of 130. However, there was a 10 degree crosswind component from the right. After a few minutes, ATC came back and told me to maintain 140 as a heading. Could I have just turned such that my GPS ground track read 130, the first time? In other words, if you're given a vector heading and you have GPS, can you just maintain a GPS heading that matches the radar vector heading as opposed to maintaining a DG heading that matches the vector heading? I think pilots of EFIS equipped planes do this because they have a separate ground track heading bug.

Look forward to your help.

I believe that with am MEA you can start climbing once on that segment of the route, where with a MCA you must be at the higher altitude before baing on that segment.

As far as the heading, fly what ATC gives you. They issue headings based on known weather conditions, and they are already anticipating the winds when they issue you a heading. They may over or underestimate and need to correct, but winds are part of their thought process when issuing a heading.

 

[A Squared]

I believe that with am MEA you can start climbing once on that segment of the route, where with a MCA you must be at the higher altitude before baing on that segment.

Yes, this is correct, ref 91.177(b) CAUTION this is the correct answer for the UNITED States, it is incorrect in many other countries, including Canada, Australia and the UK. In these places, and others, you cross the fix *AT* the new MEA, doing it the US way in Canada may kill you.

 

[sqwkvfr]

One more quick one for you guys:

The Bendix King KLN 94 almost always shows "APPR ACTV" after passing 2NM to go to the FAF on a GPS approach.

What is the exact procedure IF you don't get that indication?

 

[A Squared]

One more quick one for you guys:

The Bendix King KLN 94 almost always shows "APPR ACTV" after passing 2NM to go to the FAF on a GPS approach.

What is the exact procedure IF you don't get that indication?

Maintain FAF altitude or greater, fly the published missed approach (or other missed approach assigned by ATC)

 

[sqwkvfr]

Maintain FAF altitude or greater, fly the published missed approach (or other missed approach arrigned by ATC)

So would you report going missed at the final approach fix, or is there some other terminology?

 

[GravityHater]

Isn't this really a question that applies in a lost comm situation? I would hope an altitude change would always be coordinated with atc first.

Wasn't mentioned so I want to be clear.

Proceeding towards the hills at an assigned altitude, are you going to initiate a climb to meet the mca before clarifying the plan with atc?
Thanks.

 

[A Squared]

So would you report going missed at the final approach fix, or is there some other terminology?

yeah, you're performing a missed approach aren't you? It's really not any different that a missed approach for other reasons.

 

[sqwkvfr]

yeah, you're performing a missed approach aren't you? It's really not any different that a missed approach for other reasons.

Sweet. Thank you.

 

[minitour]

...which brings to mind...

At what point is too early to go missed?

Like say you're 10 from the FAF and you get turned, told to intercept and cleared for the approach...you intercept and descend (if applicable) to your minimum altitude for that segment but you discover full scale deflection...is this a "missed approach" or "vectors to re-intercept" ??

My butt tells me "missed" and request "vectors to re-intercept" but I've been wrong before

-mini

 

[atrdriver]

What is the exact procedure IF you don't get that indication?

Kick the panel and cuss at it?? Do I win??

 

[avbug]

If you're on an approach and full scale, it's not the time to attempt to salvage the approach. Especially if your CDI is your only instrumentation on the approach. There are approaches around that will put you into a mountain if you go full scale. If you're off to the right, get turning left and for me, climb. Execute the missed. Remember that you still need to proceed to the MAP in order to execute a missed; you can't simply continue off course and expect terrain and obstacle protection.

Make your turn back for the course you just lost while you get some altitude. Talk to ATC. If you've got an RMI that's in use for the course, that's going to give you some good, meaningful information, as will most any GPS unit. Use whatever you have, but if you're off on an approach to that degree, dont' try to salvage it. Go missed and try it again.

If you're approaching an intersection with a minimum crossing altitude and haven't been cleared higher, then query ATC. Don't initiate the climb without ATC's authorization; hold it you must, unless you're in a lost communications situation.

 

[Vik]

1) When I got my IFR ticket I was taught and I remember reading that if there is a MEA increase after the intersection, you can start climbing at the intersection and there is a certian climb gradient required to get to the MEA. If your aircraft cannot maintain that, the obstacle clearance the MEA affords you will be lost and you could crash. Something to lookup somewhere .. possibly the FAA Instrument Flying Handbook?

2) My gut tell me you fly the DG and let ATC sort it out. For all you know, the controller knows the winds and is compensating already based on other aircraft. I don't know about more technologically advanced aircraft but I can't imagine it being different. The controller gives you headings, not ground tracks, and if something went wrong, the FAA would ask you .. "did you turn to a heading of 130?" .. "No Sir, I turned to 140 because that would give me a ground track of 130 according to my GPS" .. I can't imagine it being different with cockpits with GPS and EFIS but who knows?

1) When you're proceding along an airway towards an intersection with an MCA, you're supposed to be at that MCA height before reaching the intersection (let's assume that you're lower than the MCA). If you're not, you're supposed to enter a standard holding pattern until you reach the MCA height. What about if you're proceeding toward an intersection with an MEA increase. Do the same rules apply? I would imagine they would. In other words, you would want to be at the new MEA height (if higher) prior to reaching the intersection where an MEA increase take place...right?

2) Radar vector with GPS equip. The other day, I was given a turn to a radar vector heading of 130. However, there was a 10 degree crosswind component from the right. After a few minutes, ATC came back and told me to maintain 140 as a heading. Could I have just turned such that my GPS ground track read 130, the first time? In other words, if you're given a vector heading and you have GPS, can you just maintain a GPS heading that matches the radar vector heading as opposed to maintaining a DG heading that matches the vector heading? I think pilots of EFIS equipped planes do this because they have a separate ground track heading bug.

Look forward to your help.

 

[Stepclimb]

Maybe someone has TERPS handy, but I believe for MEA changes, start the climb at the fix and the min gradient is the standard 200ft/nm. I also believe this gives you the standard 152 ft/nm clearance with the 48 ft/nm buffer in addition to the 1000 ft of airway obstacle clearance. (assuming non-mountainous terrain).

-Stepclimb

 

[A Squared]

Maybe someone has TERPS handy, but I believe for MEA changes, start the climb at the fix and the min gradient is the standard 200ft/nm. I also believe this gives you the standard 152 ft/nm clearance with the 48 ft/nm buffer in addition to the 1000 ft of airway obstacle clearance. (assuming non-mountainous terrain).

THe obstacle clearence for the airway is based on 150 ft/nm below 5000', 120 ft/NM 5k thru 10k, and 100ft/nm above 10K

 

[avbug]

It's important to understand that obstacle clearance isn't 200'/nm (etc), but that this represents the mimumum climb gradient to ensure standard enroute obstacle clearance 1000'/2000') at MEA, and is the purpose for establishing the and subsequent MEA in the first place. MCA is established for the purpose of meeting the minimum climb gradient subsequent to the crossing point, for the new MEA on the other side.

Normally, a climb to a higher altitude is begun at the fix from which the higher altitude applies. This climb is predicated on the ability to climb at the rate of 150'/nm between sea level and 5,000 MSL; 120'/nm between 5,000 MSL and 10,000 MSL, and 100'/nm above 10,000' MSL.

When the standard climb gradient criteria won't permit necessary obstacle clearance protection per the above minimum climb gradients, a MCA is established to ensure that the aircraft is high enough prior to transitioning to the new enroute segment to climb to the new MEA using the minimum standard climb gradient.

To determine the obstacle clearance areas, TERPS Volume 1, Chapter 17, Section 1 utilizes formulas and templates. This section divides the obstacle clearance into primary and secondary areas, with separate criteria for each.

For your purposes, all you need to know is that you need to meet MCA restrictions when transitioning from one route segment to another, and that in absence of a MCA, the minimum climb gradients listed above apply immediately after the fix where the higher altitude applies. Meet those minimum gradients, and you are good to go.

Where a MCA is provided, you are still required to meet the applicable minimum climb gradient for your altitude, after making the crossing restriction as you climb to the new MEA. For example, if transitioning from a MEA of 5,000 to a MEA of 8,000, with a MCA of 6,000, you need to start your climb prior to the MCA fix. You need to arrive at the fix at 6,000, and thereafter, you need to maintain a climb gradient of 120'/nm to 8,000 (or higher, as assigned by ATC).

I think it's especially critical to take note of the cautions provided by A Squared regarding MCA and MEA in other countries. What one is accustomed to doing in the United States can kill you elsewhere. The proceedures under discussion here apply in US airspace covered by TERPS crieria, and no other.

 

[cale42]

I'd like to expand a little on the question regarding GPS approaches and the KLN94, I instruct with this unit a lot and have had the occasion to not get APCH ACTV 2 miles out before due to lost RAIM.

Proper procedure is to maintain the charted altitude for outside the final approach fix as mentioned, but you need to proceed to the MAP before executing your missed approach. Because you have presumably filed /G (you better have if your doing GPS approaches) you need to immediately report to ATC that you have lost a piece of navigation equipment, that is a required report as your airplane is no longer /G until RAIM comes back. You can then proceed to the MAP fix and execute the published missed approach and report the missed approach to tower at the time, or usually once you have reported the equipment failure they will vector you for a different approach.

cale

 

[A Squared]

Proper procedure is to maintain the charted altitude for outside the final approach fix as mentioned, but you need to proceed to the MAP before executing your missed approach.

I assumed that we all know that you don't make any turns until after passing the missed approach point, but perhaps it does bear repeating.

Because you have presumably filed /G (you better have if your doing GPS approaches) you need to immediately report to ATC that you have lost a piece of navigation equipment, that is a required report as your airplane is no longer /G until RAIM comes back. You can then proceed to the MAP fix and execute the published missed approach and report the missed approach to tower at the time, or usually once you have reported the equipment failure they will vector you for a different approach.

well, actually, you have to make the report "as soon as practical" (direct quote from 91.187) not "immediately". Remember the order of priorities? Aviate, Navigate, Communicate? Personally, letting ATC know the exact details of why I'm executing the missed approach would be fairly low on my list of priorities, probably somewhere after making sure I'm climbing away from terrain and that i'm correctly established on the missed approach procedure. Once that was all squared away, and I had a litttle freetime, I'd give some thought to discussing the exact nature of the problem with ATC and coming up with a new plan.

 

[cale42]

A Squared.. no disrespect meant...

given that it was an instrument student asking the question I just wanted to clarify that you should proceed to the MAP, I feel many students overlook that. sqwkvfr initially responded to your post saying "
So would you report going missed at the final approach fix, or is there some other terminology?11-16-2004 03:47
and I wanted to clarify it was MAP not FAF


And you are absolutely right, I should amend my "immediately notify ATC" to contact ATC as soon as practicable, once you are stabilized on course and know you are safe, you should let them know and they will vector you or assign the charted missed approach as appropriate.

cale

 

[HMR]

One more quick one for you guys:

The Bendix King KLN 94 almost always shows "APPR ACTV" after passing 2NM to go to the FAF on a GPS approach.

What is the exact procedure IF you don't get that indication?

sqwkvfr,
Great question. Good answers. On a related note: I used to teach classes and give flight instruction for all of the KLN's and the Garmin 400/500 series GPS's. The fact that you're even checking the "APPR ACTV" annunciator shows you're ahead of the curve. I'm amazed at the number of GA pilots flying around with these boxes installed who never crack open the GPS section of the AIM, let alone the owner's manual. It gives me shivers to think how many people are out there shooting GPS approaches that they've loaded fix by fix from the approach plate. I saw it ALL the time during BFR's and IPC's. Most commonly this would occur because their database wasn't current and the GPS wouldn't accept the approach. This is assuming they knew how to load an approach, which was rare. I can still see the look on their faces when I explained the CDI sensitivity differences between ENROUTE (5mi), TERMINAL or APPR ARM (1mi), and APPR ACTV (0.3mi) modes.

"Profesionals" also screw this up. When I flew King Air's Pt.135, the company's "Chief Instructor" taught us how to get around the fact that our KLN's wouldn't accept approaches (because they weren't approach certified) by loading them fix by fix, not to mention GPS approaches weren't approved in our OpSpecs anyway. It carries over to the FMS's when these guys fly jets. Check out some RNAV DP's (KLAS, for example). I've watched guys load these in fix by fix and totally disregard the note on CDI sensitivity (huh?). Last week, I met an Astra captain who does it that way. He said he "doesn't trust the box". That's code for: "I have no idea what that thing does and I'm too embarrassed to ask".