Prescott ILS 21 L IAP does not note DME required, although it clearly says "Use I-PRC DME on localizer course". If you do not have DME, can you do this approach? or if your aircraft is not equipped with DME, how can you identify VDP?
2 Answers
Note the bottom right says (emphasis mine)
ILS or LOC/DME
Which means that to use the localiser approach a DME must be required, otherwise it would specify LOC
only.
So if you have no DME, you can use this approach for ILS, but if not equipped, and you want to do a Localiser approach you need a DME.
I would add to the other answer that there is no VDP for an ILS (or other approaches with vertical guidance) as these approaches take you all the way down to the DA from which you either complete the landing or go missed from there. VDP only makes sense in a non-precision approach (like the LOC/DME in this case) where you will be close to MDA until presumably the missed approach point (which would be too late to make a normal landing...thus the VDP being necessary). So the graphical depiction of the VDP on the chart is only for the LOC/DME. The ILS doesn't have one. This is also demonstrated by the fact that the 2.6 mile DME point that marks the VDP shows an asterisk which denotes it's for the LOC only. That point is meaningless for the ILS. Hope this helps add color to the other correct answer.
-
$\begingroup$ I hadn't even picked up on that, so thanks for pointing it out. A great additional bit of info - I'm still not entirely used to US-style/Jepp charts so I'm also learning how to interpret them. $\endgroup$– Jamiec ♦Commented Jul 3 at 7:40
-
$\begingroup$ I’d like to add that both the procedure title and the LOC only note are because this chart is old. If this was a current chart, the title would be ILS or LOC RWY 21L, there would be a DME required note in the pilot briefing bar, and there would not be a LOC only note in the profile. $\endgroup$– TimboCommented Jul 3 at 10:03
-
$\begingroup$ @timbo, Since this is the most current chart as of this post, I’m guessing you mean that the next time the TERPS folks at the FAA update this procedure they will change the name based on new standards. Is that what you mean? Thanks. $\endgroup$ Commented Jul 4 at 15:39
-
$\begingroup$ @BillWilliams yes, that is what I mean. The currently published chart does not align with the currently published FAAO 8260.19 or IAC 4 specification. $\endgroup$– TimboCommented Jul 7 at 17:55