Lanseria ILS ?

RNAV, GNSS, GPSS. Your place to discuss all aspects pertaining to Instrument Flying.

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
BallsOfFire
1k poster
1k poster
Posts: 1598
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 8:04 am
Location: Lanseria
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 1 time

Re: Lanseria ILS ?

Unread post by BallsOfFire » Mon Jul 03, 2017 5:50 pm

Well done Mike...
"Learning to fly is easy.....it's learning when not to fly that's the hard part"
User avatar
Hop Harrigan
1k poster
1k poster
Posts: 1012
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2010 7:55 pm
Has liked: 3 times
Been liked: 19 times

Re: Lanseria ILS ?

Unread post by Hop Harrigan » Fri Aug 11, 2017 1:01 pm

10 days and counting :-) !
Hop
There is no gravity...the Earth sucks
User avatar
BallsOfFire
1k poster
1k poster
Posts: 1598
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 8:04 am
Location: Lanseria
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 1 time

Re: Lanseria ILS ?

Unread post by BallsOfFire » Fri Aug 11, 2017 7:55 pm

I really hope it is on time....
"Learning to fly is easy.....it's learning when not to fly that's the hard part"
Ari-wan
Flight Planning
Posts: 6
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 4:24 pm
Closest Airfield: FALA
Location: Johannesburg
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

Re: Lanseria ILS ?

Unread post by Ari-wan » Wed Aug 16, 2017 6:26 pm

Looking at the CAA website the chart is finally there! Valid 14 September ...

http://www.caa.co.za/AIP%20Charts/Attac ... 202017.pdf

Some interesting characteristics:
- no markers
- a separate DME for LAI
- nice DA!

Looking forward to it ... :D
User avatar
tansg
Reaching altitude
Posts: 239
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 8:29 pm
Closest Airfield: OMAA
Has liked: 28 times
Been liked: 33 times

Re: Lanseria ILS ?

Unread post by tansg » Thu Aug 17, 2017 7:17 am

Ari-wan wrote:Looking at the CAA website the chart is finally there! Valid 14 September ...

http://www.caa.co.za/AIP%20Charts/Attac ... 202017.pdf

Some interesting characteristics:
- no markers
- a separate DME for LAI
- nice DA!

Looking forward to it ... :D
Markers are not used in any new installation ILS's anywhere in the world any more. To expensive with additional maintenance and security costs.
DME co-located with the ILS GP is the normal modern installtion.
Yes nice DA if you can comply with the 4.2% Missed App Climb Gradient not so good if you can only do a 2.5% Missed Approach Climb Gradient all thanks to Ebury Airfield.
highline
Straight and Level
Posts: 243
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2005 8:16 am
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 1 time

Re: Lanseria ILS ?

Unread post by highline » Wed Sep 06, 2017 8:10 am

Interesting that they have used the GNSS points on this approach. I see LA1F1 is 6,9 DME LAI on this chart and 6.7 nm on the GNSS approach. This obviously means the LAI DME is 0.2 nm from the threshold of 07.
Also interested that this chart side view shows a continuous descent from LA1N2 through LA1T1 to LA1F1. By my calculations to capture the GS at LA1N2 you should be at +-10400 ft or have i gotten it totally wrong. Surely they should rather show stepdown
high fly
User avatar
Hop Harrigan
1k poster
1k poster
Posts: 1012
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2010 7:55 pm
Has liked: 3 times
Been liked: 19 times

Re: Lanseria ILS ?

Unread post by Hop Harrigan » Thu Sep 07, 2017 3:35 pm

Hi,
This seems a bit odd to me...is it usual to annotate RNAV positions on an ILS Approach chart? The chart calls for "DME and Radar Required" but doesn't mention GPS is required (to locate the RNAV positions). So does this maybe mean you can substitute a GPS range for the "DME required"?
If not, why not...the GPS range should be as accurate if not better than the DME? I understand that using GPS range instead of DME is quite acceptable in the USA. Hence the omission of DME's from most new US imported a/c.
Hop
There is no gravity...the Earth sucks
User avatar
tansg
Reaching altitude
Posts: 239
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 8:29 pm
Closest Airfield: OMAA
Has liked: 28 times
Been liked: 33 times

Re: Lanseria ILS ?

Unread post by tansg » Fri Sep 08, 2017 4:30 am

Hop Harrigan wrote:Hi,
This seems a bit odd to me...is it usual to annotate RNAV positions on an ILS Approach chart? The chart calls for "DME and Radar Required" but doesn't mention GPS is required (to locate the RNAV positions). So does this maybe mean you can substitute a GPS range for the "DME required"?
If not, why not...the GPS range should be as accurate if not better than the DME? I understand that using GPS range instead of DME is quite acceptable in the USA. Hence the omission of DME's from most new US imported a/c.
Hop
Go and read AIC 25.4 dated 08/08/2006 particularly Para 6 f. and g.
User avatar
tansg
Reaching altitude
Posts: 239
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 8:29 pm
Closest Airfield: OMAA
Has liked: 28 times
Been liked: 33 times

Re: Lanseria ILS ?

Unread post by tansg » Fri Sep 08, 2017 4:34 am

highline wrote:Interesting that they have used the GNSS points on this approach. I see LA1F1 is 6,9 DME LAI on this chart and 6.7 nm on the GNSS approach. This obviously means the LAI DME is 0.2 nm from the threshold of 07.
Also interested that this chart side view shows a continuous descent from LA1N2 through LA1T1 to LA1F1. By my calculations to capture the GS at LA1N2 you should be at +-10400 ft or have i gotten it totally wrong. Surely they should rather show stepdown
Can I ask why you think this? I am trying to understand your logic so I can give you a relevant answer.
highline
Straight and Level
Posts: 243
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2005 8:16 am
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 1 time

Re: Lanseria ILS ?

Unread post by highline » Fri Sep 08, 2017 8:02 am

tangs i guess i am asking this because if you have a look at the side view of the plate it would indicate that you would intercept the GS at LA1N2 at 8000 feet for a continuous descend on the glide slope throught the FAF. For me as a cross referance to check the GS in the A/C is correct i would expect to be on the GS at LA1N2 which is not the case. i would have to do a mental calculation to work out that at 18.6 nm i will be well below the GS at 8000 ft for that distance. Hope this makes sense.
i see our CAA GNSS approach onto 07 also shows the same continuous descend whereas the Jepp chart show a step down side view. will be interesting to see what the Jepp chart looks like.
high fly
User avatar
BallsOfFire
1k poster
1k poster
Posts: 1598
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 8:04 am
Location: Lanseria
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 1 time

Re: Lanseria ILS ?

Unread post by BallsOfFire » Wed Sep 13, 2017 8:21 pm

I see Jeppesen published the ILS 07 today effective tomorrow 14/09 :)

Very very good news.....
"Learning to fly is easy.....it's learning when not to fly that's the hard part"
User avatar
Hop Harrigan
1k poster
1k poster
Posts: 1012
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2010 7:55 pm
Has liked: 3 times
Been liked: 19 times

Re: Lanseria ILS ?

Unread post by Hop Harrigan » Thu Sep 14, 2017 8:20 am

Not on the CAA website...
Hop
There is no gravity...the Earth sucks
highline
Straight and Level
Posts: 243
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2005 8:16 am
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 1 time

Re: Lanseria ILS ?

Unread post by highline » Thu Sep 14, 2017 8:55 am

This is great and see Jepp show it as step down which is much better.
Know of someone that flew it recently inbound from CT side and they received Localizer and GS at around 85nm and at 27000 ft.Believe they flew the GS from there to short finals. Must have been awesome.
high fly
User avatar
Hop Harrigan
1k poster
1k poster
Posts: 1012
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2010 7:55 pm
Has liked: 3 times
Been liked: 19 times

Re: Lanseria ILS ?

Unread post by Hop Harrigan » Thu Sep 14, 2017 12:19 pm

Just gone up on the CAA website
WELL DONE OPSMIKE!!
Hop
FullSizeRender.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
There is no gravity...the Earth sucks
User avatar
Hop Harrigan
1k poster
1k poster
Posts: 1012
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2010 7:55 pm
Has liked: 3 times
Been liked: 19 times

Re: Lanseria ILS ?

Unread post by Hop Harrigan » Thu Sep 14, 2017 9:13 pm

IMG_0416.PNG
Ok, so here are a few things I don't understand about the FALA approaches...
1) Using the VOR Z approach one is vectored by ATC onto R245 at 8000' around 15nm LIV in order to start the descent at 12.1D LIV.
Now the new ILS calls for the a/c to be at 8000' at 18.6D LAI. The ILS is annotated to be a 3deg gs. That would imply that the VOR Z approach slope is greater than 3deg.
Q: Why is the VOR Z slope greater than a 'standard' 3 deg slope? Is this due to its being a non-precision approach?
Q: 18.6 nm from LAI seems an inordinately long detour to start ones approach?
2) Why are the RNAV points annotated on the ILS chart? What interest can they be to an a/c on the gs? Does this imply that a gps is required, in addition to 'vectors and DME' ?
Hope someone can enlighten me.
Hop
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
There is no gravity...the Earth sucks

Return to “Instrument Flying”