Quote:
Originally Posted by B767Driver  Therefore, you must find an approach that is fully operable at your alternate airport...look what column it falls under...and that's the alternate wx minimums for you. |
What do you mean "what column it falls under"?
Let me be a little more concrete. Pullman, Washington (PUW) has RNAV (GPS) approaches to Rwy 5 and 23, VOR Rwy 5, and VOR/DME-A. The plates for RNAV Rwy 23, VOR Rwy 5, and VOR/DME-A do not have the "A" symbol...indicating they all have standard alternate minimums...
The RNAV Rwy 5 has the "A" symbol...looking at the Alternate Minimums section (Section E of the NACO charts), it has the following:
PULLMAN/MOSCOW,WA
PULLMAN/MOSCOW MUNI ............ RNAV (GPS) Rwy 5,800-2¼
So, am I to assume that if the winds favor GPS Rwy 5 approach, I must have 800-2¼ to file as an alternate...but if I have 800-2 I can plan on using the VOR/DME-A, because it has standard alternate minimums...
I guess I'm just bewildered as to why I could have a valid alternate based on one approach to an airport, and not based on another...especially when the forecasted winds (the primary reason for one approach over another) are not identified as defining criteria for alternate selection.