Sign in to follow this  
andy a

Would appreciate explanation of final entries on Legs page.

Recommended Posts

Hi

 I hope someone can advise me on a couple of items which are probably basic to everyone, except me. :huh:

I  have recently bought the PMDG777, and have flown the short UK domestic flight EGPF-EGCC, and I used FS Build for the flight plan, and Radar Contact v4.

 

The plan used was EGPF(RWY05) SID LUSI1B LUSIV LAKEY STAR DALE2A EGCC(RWY23R). The flight was successful, but what I would like to know is, what the "CI23R", and "FI23R" entries mean prior to the RW23R entry on the final Legs page. I would also like to know why "CI" and "FI" entries do not show when I flew KSFO -KLAX. This has all been a steep learning curve for my old brain to take in, but I enjoy trying.

 

Regards

Andy

 

 

 

 

Andrew Allan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

 

Procedure Fix Waypoints

 

Runway–related fixes – waypoints located at unnamed runway–related fixes are identified by adding a two–letter prefix to the runway number. The following list is used to determine the applicable prefix:

 

• RX – runway extension fix

• FA – VFR final approach fix

• CF – final approach course fix

• FF – final approach fix

• IF – initial approach fix

• OM – outer marker

• MM – middle marker

• IM – inner marker

• BM – back course marker

• MD – minimum descent altitude

• A – (+ an alpha) step down fix

• RW – runway threshold

• MA – missed approach point other than RW

• TD – touchdown point inboard of RW

 

e.g. OM25L, MM09, IM23, RW04, RW18L.

 

For airports with more than one approach to the same runway, the two letter prefix may change to allow different identifiers for the same waypoint. The first letter identifies the type of fix and the second letter identifies the type approach as follows:

 

• C( ) – final approach course fix

• F( ) – final approach fix

• P( ) – missed approach point

• I( ) – initial approach fix

• D( ) – minimum descent altitude

• T( ) – touch down point

• R( ) – runway centerline intercept.

 

• ( )I – ILS

• ( )L – Localizer only

• ( )B– Backcourse ILS

• ( )D – VOR/DME

• ( )V – VOR only

• ( )S – VOR with DME points

• ( )N – NDB

• ( )Q – NDB with DME points

• ( )M – MLS

• ( )T – Tacan

• ( )R – RNAV

 

e.g. CI32R, PV15, FN24L.

 

Took that from a forum post somewhere else.

 

CI means, you will intercept the ILS localizer course at that fix and FI is the fix where you intercept the ILS vertical navigation, i.e. glide slope.

 

Have fun checking those out at the airports you fly to. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


The plan used was EGPF(RWY05) SID LUSI1B LUSIV LAKEY STAR DALE2A EGCC(RWY23R). The flight was successful, but what I would like to know is, what the "CI23R", and "FI23R" entries mean prior to the RW23R entry on the final Legs page. I would also like to know why "CI" and "FI" entries do not show when I flew KSFO -KLAX. This has all been a steep learning curve for my old brain to take in, but I enjoy trying.

 

...because our airspace system is better organized  :P *

 

In actuality, it's all about the availability of fixes, and how the approach is designed. The two letter ID hints at what the leg is meant to accomplish. In the case of CI and FI, you're looking at a Course to Intercept (CI) and Final approach to ILS (FI).

 

Here's a good thread for a whole bunch of the others: http://forum.avsim.net/topic/453261-approach-abbreviations/

 

 

 

*My shot at non-FAA folk is meant to be tongue-in-cheek, so put the pitchforks and torches down.


Took that from a forum post somewhere else.

 

CI means, you will intercept the ILS localizer course at that fix and FI is the fix where you intercept the ILS vertical navigation, i.e. glide slope.

 

Have fun checking those out at the airports you fly to. :)

 

Beat me to it! Great find, by the way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you both very much for your prompt and informative replies. Much appreciated.

Regards

Andy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


..because our airspace system is better organized :P *

 

Quite possibly so. But another aspect of the problem is that we are a small country in area but a relatively high population density and we have a lot of busy regional airports close to each other. This means our airspace is congested most of the time. Must be an ATC nightmare most of the time.

 

Iain Smith

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite possibly so. But another aspect of the problem is that we are a small country in area but a relatively high population density and we have a lot of busy regional airports close to each other. This means our airspace is congested most of the time. Must be an ATC nightmare most of the time.

 

Iain Smith

 

It was meant as a joke. The only serious part of it was that we usually develop procedures with names for them instead of database/procedural names, e.g. "WAXIN" instead of "FI01R." As far as a complaint would go, that's very minor and almost silly.

 

Air traffic in that area is pretty complex, much like our N90 and SCT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't taking offence Kyle or anything like it! I was merely commenting that you might have a point. If your reference to a complaint was meant to imply that I was complaining you're well wide of the mark.

I was merely trying to have a friendly conversation. After all, isn't that one purpose of these forums?

 

Iain Smith

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't taking offence Kyle or anything like it! I was merely commenting that you might have a point. If your reference to a complaint was meant to imply that I was complaining you're well wide of the mark.

I was merely trying to have a friendly conversation. After all, isn't that one purpose of these forums?

Haha - sorry. I meant "as far as a complaint (about fix names) would go, mine is minor/silly."

 

I see how why you misinterpreted it though. I should've made it more clear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this