Du bist nicht angemeldet.

Zur Zeit sind keine Benutzer aktiv.

TeamSpeak

Discord

Clausewitz für unterwegs

„Die Strategie bestimmt den Punkt, auf welchem, die Zeit, in welcher und die Streitkräfte, mit welchen gefochten werden soll; sie hat also durch diese dreifache Bestimmung einen sehr wesentlichen Einfluss auf den Ausgang des Gefechts.“

Dieser Satz Clausewitz' aus den 1830er Jahren hat die Entwicklung der Waffentechnik bis heute überlebt und zeigt sich auf Ebene unserer Simulation beispielsweise hervorragend in der Einsatzplanung eines Package:
In Planung und Koordination der Aufgaben der einzelnen Flights im Package liegt die Grundlage, ob es erfolgreich wirken kann, sein Einsatz abgebrochen werden muss oder ob es, im schlimmsten Fall, aufgerieben wird.

Dass es dabei nicht darum geht, möglichst ausgefeilte Schlachtpläne zu entwerfen und komplizierte Manöver auszuführen, ist später aufbauend auf Clausewitz' Grundaussage in zahlreichen Studien als „Ökonomieprinzip“ erkannt und dargelegt worden. Basierend unter anderem auf den Tücken der FRIKTION, die wir bereits kennengelernt haben, kommt beispielsweise Einstein zu seiner Feststellung „Man muss die Dinge so einfach wie möglich machen. Aber nicht einfacher.“

Einfachheit beginnt für Clausewitz mit der Überlegenheit der Zahl und der Konzentration der Kräfte im Raum. „Die beste Strategie ist: immer recht stark zu sein, zuerst überhaupt und demnächst auf dem entscheidenden Punkt. [Es gibt] kein höheres und einfacheres Gesetz für die Strategie als das: seine Kräfte zusammenhalten.“

21

Mittwoch, 21. Oktober 2015, 10:57

MIssed approach new Kasteli layout

@ NEYSTRATIOU

Hi,

thanks for your reply

I have to admit I did misinterpret something : the position of the holding

Due to the postion WE USED and the insert on the top right corner I did put the holding back to the north north east of KLI (we had it on the 010R)

Now I see that it is at the extension of the R202 which makes the approach a simple straight in approach and of course - wether you use your equasion or mine (it's basically the same) it was just a miscalculation of the AMOUNT OF RADIALS on the arc you have to travel back to the IP

Off course you are right, the complete travel is only those 24.7 (plus turn after the missed approach) and the 13.18 NM along the arc for a mere of 28 radials.
To reach a holding in the NNE of KLI I calculated a lot more radials to be traveled through along the arc...

Wrong thinking! (still right formula!) :D

The correct total of approx. 40 NM is totally acceptable!!

Also now that the approach starts south of the airport my concern of joining with a missed approach directly in the approach pattern does NOT EXIST anymore

Also concerning the minimum: with a continuation (or better the use of a constant descent approach) 'til minimum descent Altitude (reaching this at around 3.5 NM KLI) and the position of KLI now well BEHIND the RWY 02/20 it makes sense to arrive at 300 ft AGL approx 1 NM prior threshold RWY 02

So til there, everything seems perfect !!!

ONE Remark: :D
maybe the printed information of 1400 at 3.3 DME (in both the letdown and in the vertical structure) let me to a misunderstanding because this figure can only be an additional information after RWY in sight because 1400 is BELOW MDA
I think this depiction of that Altitude is MISLEADING
Better to put 1450 at 3.5 KLI or something pretty close to that - and together with the MAPt at 2.8 it makes more sense !!

Thanks anyway and - again - sorry for my confusion

appreciate your intervention :thumbup:

SPARROW

Dieser Beitrag wurde bereits 2 mal editiert, zuletzt von »Sparrow« (21. Oktober 2015, 13:44)


22

Mittwoch, 21. Oktober 2015, 15:07

Well, thank you "Sparrow" my friend that you got my polite clarification with no wrong meaning. I'm trying to help in order to clear any confusions and to enjoy the Aegean and its procedures the maximum.
Now 2 things:
1) About your remark for a possible misunderstanding of where is the position of the holding, i will insert also the radial as an extra clarification. Thanks for spotting this. Of course the experienced pilots will not confuse it, because i give the mention (IAF), and IAF is unique inside the chart. And since we crossing it with heading of 022 deg. then it can be ONLY on R-202!
2) About your remark for the fix of 3.3 DME on KLI R-202 at 1,400 FT, i can tell you these:
First i think that you understand that this is the fix that we leave the KLI R-202 with heading of 022 deg. and we make the left turn on track 020 deg. almost perfectly align with the RWY 02 in order to land.
This fix should be seemed into the chart and it is one of the most important ones! Always in all charts that we have a non direct/line in approach (like all the ILS approaches) and needed a final turn, we must specify that fix that we have the final turn.
You should not be confused with the fix that we have the MDA, in our case at KLI 3.5 DME on R-202 at 1,450 FT.
So when we reach the MDA at 1,450 FT (of course very near to KLI 3.5 DME) we must check to see if we can see the RWY or its ALS.
- If we can see on of them, THEN and only then we can continue to descend with our 2.5 deg. gradient (or 265 FT/NM) and then when we cross the KLI 3.3 DME at 1,400 FT we must make our left turn on track 020 deg. to land on RWY 02.
- If we don't have in sights any of the previous (RWY or its ALS) THEN it is mandatory to we maintain the MDA altitude (1,450 FT) and continue to fly level on that altitude.
Then we have 2 options:
a) If until and MAPt fix at KLI 2.8 DME we have the RWY or its ALS in sight, then it is up to us (to the pilot) if he will try to land or to go around.
b) If we cross the MAPt fix at KLI 2.8 DME and don't have the RWY or its ALS in sight, then we MUST go around.

So i think that now it is very clear that the fix of KLI 3.3 DME on R-202 is very important and can't be not shown in the chart.
Also that there is no really need to be shown the MDA fix in the profile section (since it is very clearly specified at the minimums section) , as the most real charts also do.

Please feel free to discuss or ask anything you want from me about the procedures or anything that i can help.
Very nice to meet you as also to help with these small clarifications.
Have a great time in Aegean theater and stay tuned. The new version 1.6 is very close to the release now with a GREAT Kasteli airbase :).
Nikos.

23

Mittwoch, 21. Oktober 2015, 18:23


First i think that you understand that this is the fix that we leave the KLI R-202 with heading of 022 deg. and we make the left turn on track 020 deg. almost perfectly align with the RWY 02 in order to land.
This fix should be seemed into the chart and it is one of the most important ones! Always in all charts that we have a non direct/line in approach (like all the ILS approaches) and needed a final turn, we must specify that fix that we have the final turn.
You should not be confused with the fix that we have the MDA, in our case at KLI 3.5 DME on R-202 at 1,450 FT.
s.



Hi NIKOS,

well I certainly DO UNDERSTAND the meaning of MDA and MAPt and of course it was very "sloppy" from my first view of the new procedure that I didn't realize WHERE the IAF is and that it HAS TO BE in the SSW of the airfield...

Just let me tell you that off course there might be a necessity to point out a DME at which it might be necessary to turn the aircraft away from the approach heading to the final course of the RWY in case the approach course is different from the extended centerline of that specific RWY heading.

IN IMC - and ONLY there (!) - this surely is a most important fix

Here - during this approach - according to this layout - you CAN BE BELOW the MDA in order to reach the fix - being mapped as at or above 1400 ft

To me - STILL - for KLI 02 TACAN this does not make too much sense because in case you are below MDA you HAVE TO BE IN VISUAL CONTACT (as you yourself explained it) with either the RWY or the Approach lights - which also means, that the pilot should be able to establish his a/c lined up with the RWY just by visual clues and NOT only by flying past 3.3 DME KLI (anybody looking in the charts in WX at 250ft AGL?? - you definitely have to memorize that !!!)
What an increase in workload
As I remember all those approaches are beeing laid out so as to reach VMC PRIOR reaching the necessary final turn correction - but I might be forgetting some in the meantime..

But do you see my point??
And anyway... what are we talking about: 2 ° !!! of heading change

Let me stress again that my concern ist the depiction of 1400 ft - NOT the fix at 3.3 DME to make this turn - may it be useful in VFR or not...

1400 ft in this case still leaves the idea that this is an MDA (as it is very close to the RWY) OR EVEN A STEPDOWN ALT - given my experience when pilots in stress look towards the chart and concentrate on the vertical profile....
you might say : MDA is clearly and SEPERATELY depicted at the side and I do agree, nevertheless in my opinion it might be distracting

BUT THIS WHOLE DISCUSSION IS DEFINITELY VERY SPECIFIC and to 99% we both do agree - I think. Lets keep up the work together - we appreciate your business!!!

So thanks again for clarification

SPARROW

Dieser Beitrag wurde bereits 1 mal editiert, zuletzt von »Sparrow« (21. Oktober 2015, 18:35)


24

Donnerstag, 22. Oktober 2015, 01:42

Hi there "Sparrow".
Well as you said, of course and we agree.
And i can see and understand your nice point. But let's leave it as it is, due to the fact that is an IFR procedure (and NOT a VFR one) as also because the U.S. and NATO military procedures use the same method, means to concentrate on the fix that is the final turn instead of the fix of the MDA.
Of course we are talking always for IFR procedures that need a final turn.
So thank you for pointing out your ideas and i will have them in mind.
Take care my friend.
By the way after your remark, the radial at holding already added, just as an extra clarification :winki:.
Nikos.

Ähnliche Themen