Bad Vectors on a Checkride.

[minitour]

Right! Mee Too! Vector headings up to the point of the final heading to intercept the final are mandatory to keep seperation, however, once you are "cleared for approach", I take it to mean we can adjust the heading. I don't mean a whole procedure turn or nuthin', but a 10-20 degree adjustment for a 'bad vector". That's why we teach using the other navaids you have to see if the vector heading is going to intercept outside the FAF or not.

I'm gonna agree.

"Fly heading 030 maintain 3,000 until established on the LOC cleared ILS 35 approach" If I'm going through the LOC right then, I'm going to continue the turn to get established.

Most times, however, I've been given the "if that wasn't enough, you can continue to XXX heading to intercept cleared for ___".

If I got the LOC above the GS, I'd probably proceed w/ LOC procedures (mins) and if I get the GS inside that, I would imagine I'd ride that on down...unless I have some sort of GS flag or something.

-mini

 

[A Squared]

Well, I have to say that I haven't heard that you can make up your own vectors after being cleared for the approach. Anyone got a reference for this? I'd be interested to see something official.

Sure, I can see shaving 5-10 degrees to make it come together a little better, who's going to know anyway? But substantially different? 30 degrees? Anyway, back to the example at hand, when you're being vectored for the 19R at Fairbanks, frequently you can tell long, long before your approach clearence that you're going to intercept inside FOX. I've seen it when you're headed 90 degrees to the localizer on "base" and if you just maintain that heading you'd cross the localizer inside FOX. If you adjusted your vector to incercept outside FOX you'd be flying away from the airport.

 

[nosehair]

If you adjusted your vector to incercept outside FOX you'd be flying away from the airport.

Yeah, I'm talking 'shaving', not turning so as to fly away from the airport - that's wrong. I wouldn't do it. I would definitely have a talk with approach control. I'm not a controller, but I understand they have to vector you to the approach gate which is at least a mile outside the FAF.

Of course, you are in Alaska, right?...and you know that is not really a part of the United States...well, at least not part of the rules we 'lower 48' have to comply with, so you probably have a lot of 'localisims' going on there, and having served time in Alaska, I would not try to tell a native Alaskan how to operate.

 

[A Squared]

I'm not a controller, but I understand they have to vector you to the approach gate which is at least a mile outside the FAF.

Yeah, they do, but just to clarify FOX is not the LOM, it's actually a ways out on the LOC, WEARR is the LOM. So they are vectoring you to intercept outside the approach gate, but they are doing it at an altitude that puts you well above the GS. You can get down to the GS before the LOM, but it isn't smooth, or terribly stable, and you are supposed to be on your best behavior on a checkride.

Anyway, I have an e-mail into the ATC manager at the facility, it will be interesting to see what he has to say.

You never mentioned having been Alaska before, when were you here?

 

[nosehair]

You never mentioned having been Alaska before, when were you here?

1981-84, 3 winters in a row. Talkeetna, Anchorage, Sheep Mountain, Gulkana, Valdez, and some other places with no names.

Loved it, but after a while I missed the color.

 

[AerroMatt]

FWIW, I get a similar situation when being vectored for the ILS to SNS (Salinas CA). NorCal approach has explained to me that due to the proximity of higher terrain near the localizer they are not allowed to vector me at an altitude below GS intercept. Since 90% of the time in this situation I am dealing with coastal stratus and I have visual on the higher terrain, I will ask for a lower altitude on the vector and advise NorCal that I can maintain terrain separation until established. This way I intercept localizer below GS and am legal.

Granted, I am part 91 and don't have to worry about all the Part 135 and ops specs like you do, but it may help.