...
首页> 外文期刊>IFR >READING THE FINE PRINT
【24h】

READING THE FINE PRINT

机译:阅读精美打印

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Recently, we heard from a reader with a question about an approach into Carlisle, Pennsylvania (N94). The RNAV (GPS)-A approach has a final approach course that's offset from the runway by around 12 degrees and a standard three-degree descent angle. Approaches are usually published with only circling minimums when the final approach course alignment relative to the runway exceeds 30 degrees (for most procedure types) or the descent angle is greater than 3.77 degrees (for Category C and below). Since neither of these reasons apply to this approach, why doesn't it have straight-in minimums? It turns out that the reason this procedure has only circling minimums has to do with the runway markings, of all things. The runway at Carlisle has basic, visual, runway markings; airport design standards call for at least non-precision instrument markings in order to publish straight-in minimums. This little detail isn't found on the chart, the Airport/ Facility Directory, or most EFBs, but can be found in online sources, such as Airnav.com, which include FAA airport survey data. If not for the visual runway markings, lower minimums might be possible since LP, LNAV/VNAV or LPV lines of minimums could be considered.
机译:最近,我们收到一位读者的疑问,询问有关进入宾夕法尼亚州卡莱尔(N94)的方法。 RNAV(GPS)-A进场的最终进场路线偏离跑道约12度,并具有标准的3度下降角。当相对于跑道的最终进近航向路线对准超过30度(对于大多数程序类型)或下降角大于3.77度(对于C类及以下类别)时,通常仅以最小的圆周发布进近。由于这两个原因均不适用于此方法,因此为什么没有直接的最小值?事实证明,该程序仅具有最小圆周的原因与所有地方的跑道标记有关。卡莱尔(Carlisle)的跑道具有基本的,视觉的,跑道标记;机场设计标准至少要求使用非精密仪器标记,以发布最低要求。在图表,机场/设施目录或大多数EFB上都找不到这个小细节,但是可以在在线资源中找到,例如Airnav.com,其中包括FAA机场调查数据。如果没有用于跑道的视觉标记,则可能会降低最小值,因为可以考虑使用LP,LNAV / VNAV或LPV最小值线。

著录项

  • 来源
    《IFR》 |2019年第8期|6-8|共3页
  • 作者

    IFR STAFF;

  • 作者单位
  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号