holding on the LOM at McMinnville. OR

I'm trying to remember how to hold over a LOM.

Refresh my memory, how do I identify a LOM if I don't have GPS or ADF?

ie McMinnville,Ore.? missed approach procedure? what am I missing?

thanks

Mark,

It's not that hard. I assume you're talking about ILS 22 MMV. If you have a marker beacon, use that. If you don't, use the cut off of UBG, which is the 178 radial. It would be easier if you had two nav radios when doing this. So, just fly the localizer inbound and centered, and when you get to MINNE, turn outbound and time for one minute. You need to ID this for more than just holding, you need to start timing while inbound incase you lose your glideslope and have to turn it into a LOC only approach.

Anyone else out there, correct me if I'm wrong, please.

Here's the approach for the curious: http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0506/05626I22.PDF

Tobin

thanks tobin, it's clearer now. it does say /int and the arrow is slightly darker and has mileage. IAF. to minne.

I have an old NOS book with the older depiction and the arrow off UBG 178' looked so small and distant; I didn't get the intersection connection.

good point about the glideslope dying and needing to i.d. it.

thanks for the link to the new depiction.

mark

extended line??

I remember learning something somewhere about if the line doesn't extend past the course, then you can't use it "legally" for ID'ing that point? (Like the R-004 does at the OM on this approach: http://avn.faa.gov/d-tpp/0506/00233I22R.PDF.) Does that sound familar? I might be thinking of something else. Thanks for setting me straight.

Blue skies,

(6.8)

mark manda said:

thanks tobin, it's clearer now. it does say /int and the arrow is slightly darker and has mileage. IAF. to minne.

Click to expand...

I'm sure you already know, but keep in mind, that (6.8) is of little navigational value to you without GPS (or with for that matter). It's not a DME distance. You will probably not be at 6.8 when you get to MINNE.

Blue skies,

Off the top of my head, (and I could certainly be wrong), since the approach doesn't say ADF or GPS or DME Reqired and it's an ILS without DME, then I think it is perfectly legal to use the 178 radial off of UBG to ID MINNE. Otherwise, I don't see why else they'd put it there. This is also why I said it would be easier to do this with two nav radios, one tuned to the localizer and one tuned to UBG, then the 6.8DME off of UBG doesn't matter. Again, I could be totally wrong here, but it sounds good. Here's an example where you need radar to ID the FAF or at least GPS.
http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0506/00267IL32.PDF
Look at Dagey int where it says RADAR. I'm assuming however that this applies to single nav receiver aircraft, otherwise, you could use the 267 radial off of BFM, I would think. Then again, if you have GPS, just ID it that way.

Hopefully I didn't cause more confusion.

Tobin

tobinbasford said:

Off the top of my head, (and I could certainly be wrong), since the approach doesn't say ADF or GPS or DME Reqired and it's an ILS without DME, then I think it is perfectly legal to use the 178 radial off of UBG to ID MINNE. Otherwise, I don't see why else they'd put it there. This is also why I said it would be easier to do this with two nav radios, one tuned to the localizer and one tuned to UBG, then the 6.8DME off of UBG doesn't matter. Again, I could be totally wrong here, but it sounds good. Here's an example where you need radar to ID the FAF or at least GPS.
http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0506/00267IL32.PDF
Look at Dagey int where it says RADAR. I'm assuming however that this applies to single nav receiver aircraft, otherwise, you could use the 267 radial off of BFM, I would think. Then again, if you have GPS, just ID it that way.

Click to expand...

So it doesn't mean anything that some lines go through the course (like R-121 and R-267 on your example) and some don't?? Also, the title of the approach ONLY tells you what's required to fly the final approach segment. It does not speak to what is required to get established on final.

brian,

Not sure but what is for sure is-- the route line must meet (I hate using the word must) three criteria for it to be flyable. altitude, distance and heading. Your two routes meet that criteria.

So, R-121 and R- 267 meet all three and hence the larger arrowhead and bold line. and I'll say that maybe the reason they extend thru the final approach is like all the rest of the small thin routes-- used for a nav fix off a navaid. For your position.

http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0506/00267IL32.PDF

So, R-201 isn't flyable, doesn't meet the three requires and isn't bold and can just be used for a fix.

You could be vectored to fly R -121 and 267 NOT R-201. And fly to IAF's. I don't see all three for R-201. And the lines going thru final approach seem to be just for ease of identification.

Back to MMv ILS. The 178 rad. meets the requirements for a flyable route in addition to being a fix off a navaid. Feeds you right to Final and a IAP, initial approach fix. Right, distances aren't DME-- no D in front of the number.

http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0506/05626I22.PDF

R-111 off UBG and R-117 isn't flyable just navaid.

how'd I do so far?

thanks for input.

edit-- and I can't find a Bold line with big arrowhead that DOESN'T go to a IAF.