Just to be sure. You are holding over RES VOR at 5000ft and ATC clears you for the approach or you are joining the racetrack via a direct entry. Can I descend to 2600’ from the moment I start the turn to outbound heading 068 degrees or do I have to wait until abeam or on the outbound heading to start descending, as is the case when performing a parallel entry in a racetrack?
Thanks
Gr
Hi !
According to ICAO doc 8168, it seems that you can start you descend outbound as soon as you cross the VOR.
However, when turning inbound for final approach, you can’t descend before you are established inbound.
TDJ737 wrote:
Can I descend to 2600’ from the moment I start the turn to outbound heading 068 degrees or do I have to wait until abeam or on the outbound heading to start descending,
The design rule is that the position where you start a descent needs to be identifiable by the Navaids required for the approach. Passing the Fix is identifiable by the Navaid. “Abeam” is not.
One other question on this interesting approach: Can anyone explain why the localizer approach starts slightly earlier than the ILS and descents at a higher angle (so is always below the ILS with increasing lateral distance)?
Malibuflyer wrote:
Passing the Fix is identifiable by the Navaid. “Abeam” is not.
I agree that you can start the descent when passing the navaid, but “abeam” is certainly identifiable. It is when you cross RES radial 158.
Malibuflyer wrote:
Can anyone explain why the localizer approach starts slightly earlier than the ILS and descents at a higher angle (so is always below the ILS with increasing lateral distance)?
The charting is strange. The FAF is earlier than the FAP and the charted descent angle for the LLZ approach is steeper than for the ILS. So, as you say, on a CDFA LLZ approach you should always be below the ILS GP. Yet the chart shows a stepdown altitude for the LLZ approach at D5.5 IRS which is higher than the GP altitude!
Another weird thing: The missed approach says “turn LEFT to RES VOR and hold,” (from the south) but there is also a note “Entry into racetrack pattern is restricted to approach track.”
Also, MHA is at 5000 but the missed approach wants you to hold at 4000, not given by ATC as noted in (1).
Dimme wrote:
Also, MHA is at 5000 but the missed approach wants you to hold at 4000, not given by ATC as noted in (1).
That is not really strange, looks like 4,000ft is reserved for the missed approach, which means that ATC can have an aircraft arrive at 5,000 ft when another one is on the approach and might go missed. If there isn’t one on approach, they can clear you down to 4,000ft in the hold.
Is it a design objective to make European approach procedures unnecessarily complex?
Once “cleared for the approach” why can’t you simply descend in the hold to 2600ft?
Dimme wrote:
The missed approach says “turn LEFT to RES VOR and hold,” (from the south) but there is also a note “Entry into racetrack pattern is restricted to approach track.”
The racetrack and the hold are not the same thing, so I don’t see any conflict. The entry area for a racetrack is larger than the entry area for a hold which is probably the reason for the difference.
Great! Thanks for the reply!
