B737 FO RPTS THAT FMC DATABASE FOR PHL HAS ONLY A SINGLE ILS RWY 9R APCH WHILE THE AERO CHARTS INCLUDE AN ADDITIONAL 'CONVERGING' ILS. NOTES THAT MINIMUMS AND MISSED APCH DIFFER.

Narrative

SUBJECT: FMC DATABASE APCH PLATES DIFFERENCES AT PHL. OUR APCH PLATES HAVE 2 ILS RWY 9R'S TO PHL; 11-2 AND 11-3; THE ILS RWY 9R AND CONVERGING ILS RWY 9R. THEY HAVE DIFFERENT MISSED APCH PROCS AND MINIMUMS. THE FMC DATABASE ONLY CONTAINS 1 ILS RWY 9R; WHICH IS THE ILS RWY 9R WITH ITS MISSED (NOT THE CONVERGING). THE STANDARD ILS RWY 9R (11-2) MISSED APCH PROC IS ABOVE 1500 FT RIGHT 3000 FT WHILE THE CONVERGING (11-3) MISSED IS RIGHT 3000 FT; SO AS TO AVOID THE APCH CORRIDOR FOR RWY 17/35. THE CONVERGING DECISION ALT IS SOONER -- 621 FT VERSUS 222 FT FOR STANDARD ILS. PROB IS; IF A CREW DID AN LNAV MISSED OFF THE CONVERGING ILS RWY 9R; THE FMC COURSE WOULD HAVE THE ACFT CLB STRAIGHT AHEAD TO 1500 FT BEFORE TURNING; VERSUS THE IMMEDIATE R THAT IS CALLED FOR; THUS; POSSIBLY IMPINGING ON THE RWY 17/35 CORRIDOR. SUGGESTION: EITHER 1) ADD A CONVERGING ILS RWY 9R TO FMC DATABASE OR; 2) EXPAND THE NOTE ON 10-7 SO THAT IT MAKES IT CLR THE FMC CONTAINS THE REGULAR ILS MISSED; NOT THE CONVERGING MISSED AND RECOMMEND USING HDG SELECT OR AUTOPLT OFF; BUT NOT LNAV FOR THE MISSED. P.S. I WILL ALSO SUBMIT AN IRREGULARITY RPT. WASN'T SURE WHICH WAS MORE APPROPRIATE. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR ADVISED THE COMPANY WAS AWARE OF THE ISSUE AND HAD ADDRESSED IT IN THEIR IN-HOUSE PUBS.