Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site pixar.pixar
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!ucsfcgl!pixar!good
From: good@pixar (Nuke 'em 'till they glow, then shoot 'em in the dark.)
Newsgroups: net.aviation
Subject: Re: Glideslope
Message-ID: <2540@pixar.pixar>
Date: Wed, 5-Mar-86 22:59:32 EST
Article-I.D.: pixar.2540
Posted: Wed Mar  5 22:59:32 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 9-Mar-86 00:04:45 EST
References: <2508@pixar.pixar> <5060@alice.uUCp>
Organization: Pixar -- Marin County, California
Lines: 24

In article <5060@alice.uUCp>, ark@alice.UucP (Andrew Koenig) writes:
> >	I should have been more specific.  The approach I had in mind was
> > one where we knew that we were getting very close to the localizer, and
> > we also knew that we had to lose altitude before getting established on it.
> > We also knew that we could descend to whatever altitude that was without
> > dropping below MSA for that area.  Using the GS a minute early simply prevented
> > us from having to drop like a rock to get to the right place.  The idea
> > that you should check your altitude at each appropriate fix to make sure you
> > are on the real GS still holds.
> 
> I don't think that's right.  There is presumably a minimum altitude to
> fly until you're on the localizer, and you shouldn't descend below
> that altitude until you're established.  This is true even if the
> glideslope makes it look like you're actually established.

	That minimum altitude is the one I meant.  No way am I going *below* it
until I'm on the localizer and at the appropriate fix.  I'm just starting
*towards* it if I happen to still be above it.  You gotta come down anyway
in that case, and the GS is very likely to be a good way to get you there.
Remember, we're talking *very close* to the localizer anyway.  Maybe I should
just be quiet for a while...

		--Craig
		...ucbvax!pixar!good