2
$\begingroup$

I see so many plates that contain lines of minima requiring the use of DME, but the title does not indicate DME is required. For example, the "LOC RWY 27" approach into CYYJ. The title indicates that DME is not an additional navigation requirement, however the line of minima (only one in this case) says the opposite (LOC/DME, meaning DME is required). Why is it not then titled "LOC/DME RWY 27"? The CAP GEN says that any additional navigation requirements are indicated within the minima lines of the approach, so if there is only one minima line requiring the use of certain equipment, why is it not in the title?

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ For the US, the title now only includes navigation equipment for the lateral guidance of the final approach course. As an example, a previously named ILS or LOC/DME is now just ILS or LOC. Did the Canadians adopt a similar practice? I would suspect that is the case but I cannot find anything definitively. $\endgroup$
    – Timbo
    Jun 9, 2023 at 2:29
  • $\begingroup$ @Timbo I bet we did...we massively overhauled our plates a few years ago, I imagine we adopted this as well. Thank you for the insight, this makes a lot of sense. I'm going to go through more plates and see if I can find any examples that would either prove/disprove this. $\endgroup$ Jun 10, 2023 at 20:00

1 Answer 1

2
$\begingroup$

Most likely from amendments over time. Here is the current version of this approach:

new approach, no circling minima

and an older version:

old approach, with circling minima

As you can see, the older version has circling minima in addition to the LOC/DME minima. From a literal reading, circling to land does not require DME, thus why this is not called LOC/DME RWY 27.

However, there doesn't seem to be any way to identify the FAF or the MAP without DME. I can think of a couple possibilities here:

  • The plate has had errors in all its forms.
  • On some previous form of the plate, there was some other method to identify the FAF and MAP. Perhaps outer and middle markers? Thus, at some point, this approach could be flown without DME, and the name has stuck.
$\endgroup$
5
  • $\begingroup$ Are you saying the older version should have had DME in the title? $\endgroup$
    – user22445
    Jun 8, 2023 at 20:59
  • $\begingroup$ @757toga A literal reading of older plate indicates that circling to land doesn't require DME. I'm not sure how one is meant to identify the FAF without DME, though. Radar? RNAV? $\endgroup$
    – Chris
    Jun 8, 2023 at 21:03
  • $\begingroup$ I agree. Circling would still require DME (same as the LOC approach) for the FAF and MAP. $\endgroup$
    – user22445
    Jun 8, 2023 at 21:05
  • $\begingroup$ @757toga It's definitely possible this is just a mistake, and it always should have been called LOC/DME. $\endgroup$
    – Chris
    Jun 8, 2023 at 21:14
  • $\begingroup$ @Chris-RegenerateResponse thank you for including the older plate. That the name carried over makes sense. $\endgroup$ Jun 10, 2023 at 20:02

You must log in to answer this question.

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