曝光臺 注意防騙 網曝天貓店富美金盛家居專營店坑蒙拐騙欺詐消費者

   b) SOIA LDA/PRM AAUP Items. The AAUP for the SOIA LDA/PRM approach contains most information found on ILS/PRM AAUPs. It replaces certain information as seen below and provides pilots with the procedures to be used in the visual segment of the LDA/PRM approach, from the time the ILS aircraft is visually acquired until landing.
   c) SOIA LDA/PRM Navigation (replaces ILS/ PRM 20.4.2.4 and 20.4.2.5   a) above). The pilot may find crossing altitudes along the final approach course. The pilot is advised that descending on the LDA glideslope ensures complying with any charted crossing restrictions. Remain on the LDA course until passing XXXXX (LDA MAP name) intersec-tion prior to maneuvering to align with the centerline of runway XXX.
   d) SOIA (Name) Airport Visual Segment (replaces ILS/PRM 20.4.2.5   a) above). Pilot procedures for navigating beyond the LDA MAP are spelled out. If ATC advises that there is traffic on the adjacent ILS, pilots are authorized to continue past the LDA MAP to align with runway centerline when:
 1) the ILS traffic is in sight and is expected to remain in sight,
 2) ATC has been advised that “traffic is in sight.”
 3) the runway environment is in sight.
Otherwise, a missed approach must be executed. Between the LDA MAP and the runway threshold, pilots of the LDA aircraft are responsible for separating themselves visually from traffic on the ILS approach, which means maneuvering the aircraft as necessary to avoid the ILS traffic until landing, and providing wake turbulence avoidance, if applicable. Pilots should advise ATC, as soon as practical, if visual contact with the ILS traffic is lost and execute a missed approach unless otherwise instructed by ATC.
20.5 SOIA LDA Approach Wake Turbulence.
Pilots are responsible for wake turbulence avoidance when maneuvering between the LDA missed approach point and the runway threshold.

Federal Aviation Administration Twentieth Edition
20.6 Differences between ILS and ILS/PRM approaches of importance to the pilot.
20.6.1 Runway Spacing. Prior to ILS/PRM and LDA/PRM approaches, most ATC directed breakouts were the result of two aircraft in.trail on the same final approach course getting too close together. Two aircraft going in the same direction did not mandate quick reaction times. With PRM ap-proaches, two aircraft could be along side each other, navigating on courses that are separated by less than 4,300 feet. In the unlikely event that an aircraft “blunders” off its course and makes a worst case turn of 30 degrees toward the adjacent final approach course, closing speeds of 135 feet per second could occur that constitute the need for quick reaction. A blunder has to be recognized by the monitor controller, and breakout instructions issued to the endangered aircraft. The pilot will not have any warning that a breakout is eminent because the blundering aircraft will be on another frequency. It is important that, when a pilot receives breakout instructions, he/she assumes that a blundering aircraft is about to or has penetrated the NTZ and is heading toward his/her approach course. The pilot must initiate a breakout as soon as safety allows. While conducting PRM approaches, pilots must maintain an increased sense of awareness in order to immediately react to an ATC instruction (breakout) and maneuver as instructed by ATC, away from a blundering aircraft.
20.6.2 Communications. To help in avoiding communication problems caused by stuck micro-phones and two parties talking at the same time, two frequencies for each runway will be in use during ILS/PRM and LDA/PRM approach operations, the primary tower frequency and the PRM monitor frequency. The tower controller transmits and receives in a normal fashion on the primary frequency and also transmits on the PRM monitor frequency. The monitor controller’s transmissions override on both frequencies. The pilots flying the approach will listen to both frequencies but only transmit on the primary tower frequency. If the PRM monitor controller initiates a breakout and the primary frequency is blocked by another transmission, the breakout instruction will still be heard on the PRM monitor frequency.
20.6.3 Hand.flown Breakouts. The use of the autopilot is encouraged while flying an ILS/PRM or LDA/PRM approach, but the autopilot must be disengaged in the rare event that a breakout is issued. Simulation studies of breakouts have shown that a hand.flown breakout can be initiated consistently faster than a breakout performed using the autopilot.
20.6.4 TCAS. The ATC breakout instruction is the primary means of conflict resolution. TCAS, if installed, provides another form of conflict resolution in the unlikely event other separation standards would fail. TCAS is not required to conduct a closely spaced approach.
The TCAS provides only vertical resolution of aircraft conflicts, while the ATC breakout instruction provides both vertical and horizontal guidance for conflict resolutions. Pilots should always immediate-ly follow the TCAS Resolution Advisory (RA), whenever it is received. Should a TCAS RA be received before, during, or after an ATC breakout instruction is issued, the pilot should follow the RA, even if it conflicts with the climb/descent portion of the breakout maneuver. If following an RA requires deviating from an ATC clearance, the pilot shall advise ATC as soon as practical. While following an RA, it is extremely important that the pilot also comply with the turn portion of the ATC breakout instruction unless the pilot determines safety to be factor. Adhering to these procedures assures the pilot that acceptable “breakout” separation margins will always be provided, even in the face of a normal procedural or system failure.
　
中國航空網 www.k6050.com
航空翻譯 www.aviation.cn
本文鏈接地址：美國航行情報匯編 AERONAUTICAL INFORMATION PUBLICATION AIP 2(109)