Timeline for How close is an obstruction allowed to be in an instrument approach?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
19 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 1, 2018 at 17:17 | comment | added | Vikki | Of note is that that building was built there specifically to make it impossible to extend the runway (I don't see how that would prevent them from extending the other end of the runway, though). | |
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:59 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://aviation.stackexchange.com/ with https://aviation.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Sep 9, 2016 at 15:42 | vote | accept | CommunityBot | moved from User.Id=14897 by developer User.Id=59471 | |
| Jul 8, 2016 at 20:01 | history | edited | FreeMan | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
grammar police
|
| Jul 8, 2016 at 16:32 | answer | added | fooot | timeline score: 7 | |
| Jul 1, 2016 at 13:09 | comment | added | Pondlife | The short answer is to look in the TERPS, but it's very technical and standards are different for different approach types. | |
| Jun 29, 2016 at 20:18 | history | edited | user14897 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 39 characters in body; edited title
|
| Jun 29, 2016 at 13:08 | comment | added | Pondlife | I'm a bit confused about what you're asking here. Your question title asks if 14 can be used legally for landings, but your own answer is about instrument approaches at other airports. Are you asking how close an obstruction is allowed to be to an approach path? And I don't immediately see what the city vs. airport issue has to do with this, apart from being interesting background. | |
| Jun 29, 2016 at 2:20 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackAviation/status/747977898015989760 | ||
| Jun 29, 2016 at 0:58 | comment | added | TomMcW | I think Lindbergh Field (KSAN) in San Diego has a similar problem with a building that aircraft only clear by a couple of feet when landing on rwy 27. | |
| Jun 29, 2016 at 0:32 | comment | added | Pondlife | The Chart Supplement says that no landings are allowed on 14 so I don't see how you could land there legally, at least without declaring an emergency. Or are you thinking about some more general regulation that applies everywhere? | |
| Jun 29, 2016 at 0:03 | history | edited | user14897 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 129 characters in body
|
| Jun 28, 2016 at 23:54 | history | edited | user14897 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
edited body
|
| Jun 28, 2016 at 23:35 | history | edited | user14897 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 80 characters in body
|
| Jun 28, 2016 at 23:24 | history | edited | user14897 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 17 characters in body
|
| Jun 28, 2016 at 23:17 | history | edited | user14897 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 393 characters in body
|
| Jun 28, 2016 at 23:03 | comment | added | DeltaLima♦ | Nice follow up! It can't be used for instrument approaches because it doesn't meet the required obstacle clearance. | |
| Jun 28, 2016 at 22:51 | history | edited | user14897 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 1 character in body
|
| Jun 28, 2016 at 22:46 | history | asked | user14897 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |