According to the weather forecasts at KMLB and using the proposed time of departure in the scenario guide, what instrument approach(s) should you plan for?

Question

BlackTom AI · Accepted Answer

The question asks which instrument approach(es) should be planned for based on weather forecasts at KMLB and the proposed time of departure in the scenario guide. We will evaluate each option in light of typical instrument approach selection rules and the given context.
Option 1: 'VOR RWY 09R' — This option suggests using a VOR-based approach to Runway 09R. If the forecast or procedures indicate a precision approach or an approach that requires a microwave or RNAV capability, a VOR-only approach may not be the planned choice. Also, VOR approaches to a specific runway are less common when an ILS or localizer approach is available for that runway, especially for a primary landing runway and current published procedures. Without explicit forecasted weather minima or notes indicating VOR as the preferred approach, this option is unlikely to be the recommended plan.
Option 2: 'ILS or LOC RWY 09R' — This option presents two instrument approaches: an ILS approach to Runway 09R or a localizer (LOC) approach to the same runway. In many flight scenarios, if precision approaches (like ILS) are available and weather conditions permit, pilots plan for the ILS as the primary approach and may use LOC as a non-precision alternative if ILS is unavailable or if localizer-only minimums are acceptable. Given that the scenario mentions forecasts and a proposed departure time, this combined plan aligns with common practice of having both an ILS and LOC option for the same runway.
Option 3: 'LOC BC 27L' — This option refers to a localizer approach to Runway 27L, which is a different runway than 09R. Unless the scenario explicitly requires RWY 27L or a LOC approach to that runway due to weather or operational constraints, selecting a LOC BC 27L would not match a plan for RWY 09R and seems inconsistent with the provided context.
Option 4: 'PRICY TWO' — This appears to be a non-standard or fictitious approach designation and does not correspond to published instrument approaches for typical airports. Using a non-existent or nonsensical approach would not be a viable planning option in real-world operations, making this choice incorrect.
In summary, the options include one that matches the expected published approaches for RWY 09R (ILS or LOC) and several alternatives that either reference a different runway, rely on an unusual or invalid designation, or are otherwise unsupported by standard procedures. The reasoning here favors approaches that are both published for the runway and appropriate for typical instrument flight operations given forecast conditions.

FA_221 Lesson 32 Quiz

According to the weather forecasts at KMLB and using the proposed time of departure in the scenario guide, what instrument approach(s) should you plan for?

View Explanation

Log in for full answers

Similar Questions

What is the Final Approach Fix for a Non-Precision Approach?

RNAV Approaches that have Lateral and Vertical guidance are considered:

What is the final approach fix for the DAB RNAV 16 LPV approach straight in?

Which of the following is true concerning GPS approaches?

How many stepdown waypoints are there on the ORD RNAV Z 28L if you are shooting the LNAV approach and starting the approach at VOGLR at 9,000ft?

Is GREYZ a fly over waypoint or a fly by waypoint and what is the speed restriction?

What is the final approach fix for the DAB RNAV 16 LPV approach straight in?

In a consumer society, many adults channel creativity into buying things

More Practical Tools for Students Powered by AI Study Helper

Homework AI Solver

Stylized AI Paper Writer

Plagiarism Checker Assistant

Citation AI Academic Writing Tool

In-Class Translation Assistant

AI Note Generator

AI Quiz Answers

Past Exam Questions from University Test Bank

Smart Practice Assistant

Adaptive Practice

Making Your Study Simpler