13
$\begingroup$

The ILS / LOC approach at KCXY states radar is required. I understand I can't fly the approach if not in radar contact. However, if flying the LOC approach I think I can identify both final and HORVI (for lower minimums) using HAR VOR. There's no reason I'd need the controller to call out a fix. If that is true, why is radar required? I think it would be more of a safety concern because of terrain and an adjacent airport (HAR Int)?

enter image description here

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ An observation. There is a RADAR note under TIVNE. This clues the pilot into the fact ATC has that waypoint on their screen. If you ask them to tell you when you pass it, they are required to. $\endgroup$
    – wbeard52
    Commented Apr 21, 2022 at 12:50

4 Answers 4

11
$\begingroup$

Radar is most likely required in this case because there is no defined Initial Approach Fix (IAF). This means that ATC needs to give vectors to final or otherwise provide a specific clearance to establish an IFR aircraft on the approach.

There may be other considerations, but that is the main one that I see here.

$\endgroup$
3
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Good call. Totally missed no IAF on approach plate. $\endgroup$
    – Clarke76
    Commented Dec 23, 2015 at 17:11
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Well, the question would then become: Why is there no IAF? $\endgroup$
    – Lnafziger
    Commented Jan 12, 2016 at 19:20
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @Lnafziger - my assumption would be because they want to know and have contact with all aircraft in that area. This could be because of the terrain to the SE of runway or the airport that is 3NM to the E (marked on plate as Harrisburg International) that has an ILS over CXY. $\endgroup$
    – Clarke76
    Commented Jan 15, 2016 at 14:08
10
$\begingroup$

As mentioned above, this approach has no IAF.

That's because the the VOR is at 1,301 MSL (note the height of the obstacle next to the VOR is 1,410), and the segment from TIVNE to HORVI descends from 2,800 to 1,340 MSL, and will dip below the usable volume of a Low Altitude VOR. According to AIM 1-1-8, a low altitude VOR with a standard service volume cannot be received inside 10 miles and below 1,000 feet above the NAVAID.

enter image description here

$\endgroup$
5
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Excellent detective work, I think that this best answers the reason of why. $\endgroup$
    – Lnafziger
    Commented Jan 13, 2016 at 4:42
  • $\begingroup$ As I was trying to figure out why the VOR was unusable in the segment previously described, I realized that my entire answer was wrong, and fixed it. $\endgroup$
    – rbp
    Commented Jan 13, 2016 at 14:40
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I'm not sure that is correct rbp. Via your link section c "Standard Service Volume limitations do not apply to published IFR routes or procedures." $\endgroup$
    – Clarke76
    Commented Jan 14, 2016 at 0:48
  • $\begingroup$ @Clarke76 even the FAA can't reverse the physical limitations of transmitting below the VORs line of sight. $\endgroup$
    – rbp
    Commented Jan 14, 2016 at 12:37
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @rbp Glad we are having this discussion. Could even be it's own question on here. That being said the FAA wouldn't have a rule overriding SSV if it wasn't used. They also wouldn't clearly mark HORVI with HAR 142 radial. It wouldn't be on the plate if you couldn't. They must have determined there was adequate signal, 39ft above VOR, to id fix. I'd go so far as to say there are many approaches that use VOR to id fix that are not within SSV numbers. (ILS or VOR RWY 8 @ KLNS for example). $\endgroup$
    – Clarke76
    Commented Jan 15, 2016 at 14:03
3
$\begingroup$

Radar is required because there are no "published non-radar transitions" for this approach. Since most (almost all) instrument approach procedures are designed to allow a non-radar transition from the enroute phase of flight to the approach phase, any instrument approach that does not have published transitions requires "Radar."

Also, if there is a mandatory stepdown fix on the approach that cannot be identified by any other means (GPS/DME/VOR), the approach stipulates "Radar Required" (ref: FAA Oder 8260.19f)

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

From the FAA's hand book on IFR flying (page 4-17). It seems that it is the minimum equipment required to fly the approach.

In some cases, other types of navigation systems, including radar, are required to execute other portions of the approach or to navigate to the IAF (for example, an NDB procedure turn to an ILS, or an NDB in the missed approach, or radar required to join the procedure or identify a fix). When ATC radar or other equipment is required for procedure entry from the en route environment, a note is charted in the plan view of the approach procedure chart (for example, RADAR REQUIRED or AUTOMATIC DIRECTION FINDER (ADF) REQUIRED). When radar or other equipment is required on portions of the procedure outside the final approach segment, including the missed approach, a note is charted in the notes box of the pilot briefing portion of the approach chart (for example, RADAR REQUIRED or DISTANCE MEASURING EQUIPMENT (DME) REQUIRED). Notes are not charted when VOR is required outside the final approach segment. Pilots should ensure that the aircraft is equipped with the required NAVAIDs to execute the approach, including the missed approach. Refer to the AIM paragraph 5-4-5 for additional options with regards to equipment requirements for IAPs.

Later on they talk about Radar Approaches (Page 4-71)

The two types of radar approaches available to pilots when operating in the NAS are precision approach radar (PAR) and airport surveillance radar (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 OpSpecs.

They can also be useful in helping disabled aircraft in (page 4-74).

Perhaps the greatest benefit of either type of radar approach is the ability to use radar to execute a no gyro approach. Assuming standard rate turns, ATC 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.

$\endgroup$
2
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ You appear to be explaining what "Radar Required" means, not explaining why it might appear on an approach. $\endgroup$
    – abelenky
    Commented Dec 23, 2015 at 18:20
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Good citation regarding procedure entry from the enroute environment. However, I really don't think the PAR and ASR approaches have anything to do with this question, certainly not the PAR. $\endgroup$
    – J W
    Commented Dec 23, 2015 at 18:25

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .