曝光台 注意防骗
网曝天猫店富美金盛家居专营店坑蒙拐骗欺诈消费者
includes the gradual phase out of NDB facilities, and
eventually, the NDB approach will become nonexistent.
Until that time, the NDB provides additional availability
for instrument pilots into many smaller, remotely located
airports.
The NDB Runway 9 approach at Charleston Executive
Airport, is an example of an NDB approach established
5-60
Figure 5-50. Alexandria International, Alexandria, Louisiana (KAEX), VOR/DME RWY 32.
5-61
with an on-airport NDB that does not incorporate a
FAF. [Figure 5-51] In this case, a procedure turn or
penetration turn is required to be a part of the approach
design. For the NDB to be considered an on-airport
facility, the facility must be located within one mile of
any portion of the landing runway for straight-in
approaches and within one mile of any portion of
usable landing surface for circling approaches. The
final approach segment of the approach is designed
with a final approach area that is 2.5 NM wide at the
facility, and increases to 8 NM wide at 10 NM from the
facility. Additionally, the final approach course and the
extended runway centerline angle of convergence cannot exceed 30 degrees for straight-in approaches. This
type of NDB approach is afforded a minimum of 350
feet obstacle clearance.
When a FAF is established for an NDB approach, the
approach design criteria changes. It also takes into
account whether or not the NDB is located on or off the
airport. Additionally, this type of approach can be made
both moving toward or away from the NDB facility.
The St. Mary’s, Alaska, NDB DME RWY 16 [Figure
5-52 on page 5-62] is an approach with a FAF using an
on-airport NDB facility that also incorporates the use
of DME. In this case, the NDB has DME capabilities
from the LOC approach system installed on the airport.
While the alignment criteria and obstacle clearance
remain the same as an NDB approach without a FAF,
the final approach segment area criteria changes to an
area that is 2.5 NM wide at the facility and increases to
5 NM wide, 15 NM from the NDB.
RADAR APPROACHES
The two types of radar approaches available to pilots
when operating in the NAS are PAR and ASR. Radar
approaches may be given to any aircraft at the pilot’s
request. ATC may also offer radar approach options to
aircraft in distress regardless of the weather conditions,
or as necessary to expedite traffic. Despite the control
exercised by ATC in a radar approach environment, it
remains the pilot’s responsibility to ensure the
approach and landing minimums listed for the
approach are appropriate for the existing weather
conditions considering personal approach criteria
certification and company OpsSpecs.
Perhaps the greatest benefit of either type of radar
approach is the ability to use radar to execute a “nogyro” approach. Assuming standard rate turns, an air
traffic controller can indicate when to begin and end
turns. If available, pilots should make use of this
approach when the heading indicator has failed and
partial panel instrument flying is required.
Information about radar approaches is published in tabular form in the front of the TPP booklet. PAR, ASR,
and circling approach information including runway,
DA, DH, or MDA, height above airport (HAA), HAT,
ceiling, and visibility criteria are outlined and listed by
specific airport.
Regardless of the type of radar approach in use, ATC
monitors aircraft position and issues specific heading
and altitude information throughout the entire
Figure 5-51. Charleston Executive (KJZI), Charleston, South Carolina, NDB RWY 9.
5-62
approach. Particularly, lost communications procedures should be briefed prior to execution to ensure
pilots have a comprehensive understanding of ATC
expectations if radio communication were lost. ATC
also provides additional information concerning
weather and missed approach instructions when
beginning a radar approach. [Figure 5-53]
PRECISION APPROACH RADAR
PAR provides both vertical and lateral guidance, as
well as range, much like an ILS, making it the most
precise radar approach available. The radar approach,
however, is not able to provide visual approach indications in the cockpit. This requires the flight crew to listen
and comply with controller instructions. PAR
approaches are rare, with most of the approaches used in
a military setting; any opportunity to practice this type of
approach is beneficial to any flight crew.
The final approach course of a PAR approach is always
directly aligned with the runway centerline, and the
中国航空网 www.aero.cn
航空翻译 www.aviation.cn
本文链接地址：
Instrument Procedures Handbook (IPH)仪表程序手册下(136)
