Possible Violations @ CVG

[JECKEL]

Arriving crews into CVG now run the risk of being violated after they have been cleared for the ILS approach for runway 18C. (not the visual)

Local ATC has threatened future violation action for pilots due to vertical separation after being cleared for the ILS to 18C.

Crews are being told to maintain 7000 until LAMAH (20 DME off the ISIC) and then cleared for the ILS 18C. Crews who interecept and follow the glideslope just after LAMAH are finding themselves, according to local ATC, 200 to 300 below the ANTRI stepdown fix (6000) at the 17.2 DME. This is causes vertical seperation problems for approaches on the other two runways even in VMC conditions. (Especially in VMC conditions is what approach is complaining about)

So here is my question ... at what distance can you safely/legally intercept and follow the glideslope and not impede on any stepdown fixes? When MUST you stepdown and stepdown, etc before you can intercept the glideslope?

In my research I found some generic information that says LOCs are USUALLY only reliable to 18 NM and GLIDESLOPEs are USUALLY only reliable to 10 NM. Does this have any relevance?

In addition, a representative of the local ATC stated that DELTA pilots almost always cross LAMAH at 7000, stepdown to 6000 to cross ANTRI, stepdown to 5000 to cross DULEY and intercept the GS at the point preventing any vertical separation errors, while almost all COMAIR pilots just intercept the GS at LAMAH/7000 follow it down and are 200-300 feet low at ANTRI causing TERP related vertical speration problems. Go Figure.

 

[ultrarunner]

So here is my question ... at what distance can you safely/legally intercept and follow the glideslope and not impede on any stepdown fixes? When MUST you stepdown and stepdown, etc before you can intercept the glideslope?

You're cleared to fly the published appr. Fly the step-downs and intercept the GS at the FAF. Simple as that.

That you can "receive" the GS signal 20 miles out is meaningless. Fly the charted procedure and folks will stop bitching, you won't get violated and you'll live longer!

 

[greygoose]

You just answered your own question if you reread what you wrote.
If you are on a glideslope and are going to be going below a step down you cant stay on the glideslope. The only place you can be sure to be save to be following the glideslope down is crossing the FAF.
Its kind of like the incident of a crew following the Vasi/papi in mountainous terrain. Something like they followed the lights down aways away from the airport, and got too close to the terrain. The lights are only useable between 4-5 miles.

 

[gear goes down]

But the FAF is the intercept of the GS on a ILS.

 

[Showtime]

Look for the featherd barb on the profile view. That shows G/S intercept

Be "past" the end of the feather before you track the slope (or go below a step down).

LAX has the same "problem" and the same result (violations)

-Showtime

 

[The_Russian]

You're cleared to fly the published appr. Fly the step-downs and intercept the GS at the FAF. Simple as that.

What if the GS intercept at the FAF is below the final step down minimum requiring you to fly the GS down to that point?

So the original question stands:

So here is my question ... at what distance can you safely/legally intercept and follow the glideslope and not impede on any stepdown fixes? When MUST you stepdown and stepdown, etc before you can intercept the glideslope?

Answer:

It depends on the NAVAID itself.

AIM 1-1-9 d.

3. The glide path projection angle is normally adjusted to 3 degrees above horizontal so that it intersects the MM at about 200 feet and the OM at about 1,400 feet above the runway elevation. The glide slope is normally usable to the distance of 10 NM. However, at some locations, the glide slope has been certified for an extended service volume which exceeds 10 NM.

 

[JECKEL]

All good posts and I totatally agree.

I believe it comes down to the lazy/sloppy pilot syndrome.

 

[The_Russian]

Look for the featherd barb on the profile view. That shows G/S intercept

Be "past" the end of the feather before you track the slope (or go below a step down).

LAX has the same "problem" and the same result (violations)

-Showtime

Not that I doubt you, but could you provide a reference for that?

 

[SkiFishFly]

Look for the featherd barb on the profile view. That shows G/S intercept

Be "past" the end of the feather before you track the slope (or go below a step down).

LAX has the same "problem" and the same result (violations)

-Showtime

The "problem" at LAX is that if you intercept and fly the GS too early, you will bust altitude restrictions on the arrival. Pay attention and don't arm approach early.

 

[The_Russian]

But the FAF is the intercept of the GS on a ILS.

Only with reference to specific procedures and profile flying. The FAF on the ILS is depicted by the maltese cross on the approach. It can be defined only by a second navaid or DME.

 

[LarryinTN]

The maltese cross is the FAF fix for the LOC approach which uses the same plate, not the ILS. FAF for the ILS is glide slope intercept at, or below, the published G/S intercept altitude.

 

[vtwo]

After looking at the plate the faf is 2400' that is where you may continue down the glide slope,
before that you have step down fixes. if you intercept the gs out past the iaf then it may bring you below the step downs. There is also 2 separate notes that state "2500 when auth by atc, and 2400' when auth by atc. if you are told Maintain 7000' cleared for the ils 18c then I would be aware of the step downs. If you are at 7000' or higher and are told maintain 2400 cleared for the ils then you may proceed to follow the gs from the iaf in bound.

I hope I didn't confuse you too much.

 

[viper548]

Only with reference to specific procedures and profile flying. The FAF on the ILS is depicted by the maltese cross on the approach. It can be defined only by a second navaid or DME.

The FAF on an ILS is Glideslope intercept, not the maltese cross. The cross is the FAF if you were to fly localizer only

 

[UAL'01]

Showtime is correct.....Where the feathered barb ends, is where you can safely follow the glideslope inbound. Before that comply with stepdown fixes and altitudes.

 

[The_Russian]

The maltese cross is the FAF fix for the LOC approach which uses the same plate, not the ILS. FAF for the ILS is glide slope intercept at, or below, the published G/S intercept altitude.

The maltese cross serves as the final approach fix for both approaches or one depending on its depicted position and use.

The FAF on an ILS is Glideslope intercept, not the maltese cross. The cross is the FAF if you were to fly localizer only

Not for determining segments of the ILS or position reporting requirements. The actual FAF can be positioned lower than the GS intercept.

Say GS intercept can be achieved as published at 5000' msl with a field elevation of zero and the FAF is published at 2000' msl. Would you put the gear down, call for landing/final checks and report FAF inbound at GS intercept while still at 5000'?

 

[The_Russian]

Showtime is correct.....Where the feathered barb ends, is where you can safely follow the glideslope inbound. Before that comply with stepdown fixes and altitudes.

I feel he is correct also. Do you have any reference for this?

 

[greygoose]

The maltese cross serves as the final approach fix for both approaches or one depending on its depicted position and use.

Not for determining segments of the ILS or position reporting requirements. The actual FAF can be positioned lower than the GS intercept.

Say GS intercept can be achieved as published at 5000' msl with a field elevation of zero and the FAF is published at 2000' msl. Would you put the gear down, call for landing/final checks and report FAF inbound at GS intercept while still at 5000'?

What the hell are you talking about

 

[The_Russian]

What the hell are you talking about

How did I know that was coming?

 

[The_Russian]

For clarification of my point, I should include that the FAF on the ILS is only the same as GS intercept when at the minimum altitude authorized for the approach.

 

[greygoose]

For clarification of my point, I should include that the FAF on the ILS is only the same as GS intercept when at the minimum altitude authorized for the approach.

Okay I agree with that

 

[Amish RakeFight]

For the CVG ILS 18C adhere to the minimum altitudes on the step-downs. No question about it. Theoretically (regulatory), you shouldn't be intercepting the GS that far out.

Once beyond DULEY, you may descend down to 2400' and when the GS needle centers you're at the FAF. This will not necessarily take place at LOGOZ.

Like someone said, I thinks it's lazy pilot syndrome in the end.

 

[CA1900]

For clarification of my point, I should include that the FAF on the ILS is only the same as GS intercept when at the minimum altitude authorized for the approach.

That doesn't have any relevance to the Maltese cross on the approach plate. The cross is the non-precision final approach fix, and its only purpose on a precision approach is an altitude cross-check on your way down the glideslope. It's uncommon for the cross to be at the same point in space as the published GSIA.

The final approach segment on a precision approach begins at the interception of the glideslope at the published glideslope intercept altitude. If you need a reference, look at the FAA Instrument Flying Handbook:

Final approach fix (FAF): The fix from which the IFR final approach to an airport is executed, and which identifies the beginning of the fi nal approach segment. An FAF is designated on government charts by a Maltese cross symbol for nonprecision approaches, and a lightning bolt symbol for precision approaches.

 

[ultrarunner]

Originally Posted by ultrarunner
You're cleared to fly the published appr. Fly the step-downs and intercept the GS at the FAF. Simple as that.

What if the GS intercept at the FAF is below the final step down minimum requiring you to fly the GS down to that point?

Then ATC would have cleared you to that lower altitude, thus allowing you to intercept the GS.

 

[redrok]

LAX has the same "problem" and the same result (violations)

On the LAX ILS25L, guys were flyin the slope beyond the published intercept alt. and busting the HUNDA stepdown fix by 100'. Not much, however enough to have to make a call to SOCAL TRACON.

 

[The_Russian]

That doesn't have any relevance to the Maltese cross on the approach plate. The cross is the non-precision final approach fix, and its only purpose on a precision approach is an altitude cross-check on your way down the glideslope. It's uncommon for the cross to be at the same point in space as the published GSIA.

The final approach segment on a precision approach begins at the interception of the glideslope at the published glideslope intercept altitude. If you need a reference, look at the FAA Instrument Flying Handbook:

I agree. Maybe I wasn't as clear as I thought I was on my point. Sorry for that. My original response as to someone who said glideslope intercept is the FAF, which is not completely true.

From my experience, it is more common for the maltese cross to be in the same place as the GS intercept at the lowest authorized altitude. Like I said, it depends on the approach. Either way, if you intercept at a higher altitude than the minimum, that point (the minimum altitude pictured for the lowest GSI) will become the FAF whether or not the maltese cross is there.

 

[The_Russian]

Then ATC would have cleared you to that lower altitude, thus allowing you to intercept the GS.

Not always.

 

[Amish RakeFight]

Russian, admit it, you're back peddling over here. It seems you thought that the precision and non-precision FAF were at the same geographical location.

 

[The_Russian]

Russian, admit it, you're back peddling over here. It seems you thought that the precision and non-precision FAF were at the same geographical location.

Yeah, that was my bad.

My point still stands. GS intercept is not always the FAF on a precision approach.

 

[obadie]

Yeah, that was my bad.

My point still stands. GS intercept is not always the FAF on a precision approach.

FAF is the lowest published ALT that intercepts the GS. Unless ATC gives you a lower ALT to intercept that then turns into FAF. On an ILS.

 

[The_Russian]

FAF is the lowest published ALT that intercepts the GS. Unless ATC gives you a lower ALT to intercept that then turns into FAF. On an ILS.

Thats what I said. Except that ATC cannot assign you an altitude lower than authorized for the IAP.

Am I not a good poster or something? It seems no one reads nor understands what I am saying in any thread, ever.