FDC Notams

4EngineETOPS

Well-Known Member
Yea it has all authorized airports. I’m saying if the airport is only in there as an alternate would it make sense to delist it if the FDC alt min NA had a Xxxx-PERM on the time stamps?
It is the airline's responsibility to add or remove C070 airports and then get those changes approved by the FSDO. Also, if an approach is NOTAMd "alternate minimums not authorized," that only means that that particular approach is not useable for deriving alternate minimums. You can still use any other authorized approach at the airport for alternate minimums purposes, so there would be no sense in removing the entire airport from C070.
 

A1TAPE

Well-Known Member
It is the airline's responsibility to add or remove C070 airports and then get those changes approved by the FSDO. Also, if an approach is NOTAMd "alternate minimums not authorized," that only means that that particular approach is not useable for deriving alternate minimums. You can still use any other authorized approach at the airport for alternate minimums purposes, so there would be no sense in removing the entire airport from C070.
Yes but what if the only available authorized approaches are all NOTAM alt mins NA.
 

A1TAPE

Well-Known Member
They would publish an alternate missed approach procedure. I don't think I've ever seen an airport permanently get rid of alternate minimums entirely.
It wouldn't be the airports call it would be the FAAs. Thank god for the advent of RNAV approaches otherwise airports would be delisted as alternates at the drop of a hat when the FAA said, yea we know VOR XYX is unmonititored or broken and we don't wanna spend the funding to fix it sooo (all approaches) ALT MINS NA 200507-PERM
 

Heliman81

Well-Known Member
It wouldn't be the airports call it would be the FAAs. Thank god for the advent of RNAV approaches otherwise airports would be delisted as alternates at the drop of a hat when the FAA said, yea we know VOR XYX is unmonititored or broken and we don't wanna spend the funding to fix it sooo (all approaches) ALT MINS NA 200507-PERM
What?

The airline has to invest money into getting airports listed. Into. The C070, why would they just remove them? They wouldn't.
 

A1TAPE

Well-Known Member
What?

The airline has to invest money into getting airports listed. Into. The C070, why would they just remove them? They wouldn't.
So they would leave the airport on the list despite it being unusable at all due to the NOTAM in place
 

flynryan692

Well-Known Member
So they would leave the airport on the list despite it being unusable at all due to the NOTAM in place
No, because the FAA isn't going leave an airport without any alternate minimums permanently. Any airline would have an opspec that works around it anyway so again, they're not going to remove it.
 

Dx81

Well-Known Member
So they would leave the airport on the list despite it being unusable at all due to the NOTAM in place
Yes, yes they would. Adding airports to a C70 is no small feat. KCLE NOTAMS out alt mins all the time, as do other airports. Equipment getting fixed is much easier than amending a C70.

Sent from my SM-G988U1 using Tapatalk
 

Frenchie

Well-Known Member
Had a situation come up at work a few days ago that I needed a bit of clarification on. A coworker had a flight going into bad weather and a NOTAM for said airport said the PAPI was U/S and the coworker said he couldn’t dispatch the flight because of the weather. Is this a matter of preference thing or did I totally miss something during school?
 

Mindsage25

Well-Known Member
Had a situation come up at work a few days ago that I needed a bit of clarification on. A coworker had a flight going into bad weather and a NOTAM for said airport said the PAPI was U/S and the coworker said he couldn’t dispatch the flight because of the weather. Is this a matter of preference thing or did I totally miss something during school?
PAPI doesn’t affect weather minimums, unless specifically stated which I don’t think any airport has that.. Maybe the TAF was forecasted below pilot mins / approach mins?
 

Luigi

Well-Known Member
Had a situation come up at work a few days ago that I needed a bit of clarification on. A coworker had a flight going into bad weather and a NOTAM for said airport said the PAPI was U/S and the coworker said he couldn’t dispatch the flight because of the weather. Is this a matter of preference thing or did I totally miss something during school?
I agree with @Mindsage25 either your coworker is extremely misinformed or we’re not getting the full picture. I tend to lean towards the latter.
 

4EngineETOPS

Well-Known Member
Had a situation come up at work a few days ago that I needed a bit of clarification on. A coworker had a flight going into bad weather and a NOTAM for said airport said the PAPI was U/S and the coworker said he couldn’t dispatch the flight because of the weather. Is this a matter of preference thing or did I totally miss something during school?
Unless I'm missing something, there is no requirement for a PAPI on an approach and no penalty for it being inoperative.
 

kalan31

Well-Known Member
Company policy may require it in special circumstances such as at SAAT IV airports for operation at night. But that would be rare.
 

Frenchie

Well-Known Member
Apparently there was more to it than just the PAPI being U/S ... as usual you guys are an amazing source of information ... THANKS again!
 

LastMinuteAirline

Well-Known Member
In some cases (at my airline), you need VASI/PAPI or a published ILS glide slope angle to use VNAV on final to DA. Thats getting down to some real nitty gritty though. Improbable that it would be a deciding factor.
 
Top