![]() program the STAR and ILS Approach in the FMC, select a Flap/Speed (40/145) setting at the REF Page ILS - The plane captures after the satellite-based waypoints of the STAR the two "guiding beams° of the runway for lateral and vertical guidance and could perform theoretically an automatic landing. Sorry if my english is not so good, I am originally from Germany :-) "How long is the pilot flying the respective approach by autopilot, from what point does he have to turn of the AP and have to fly by hand? "What approach procedure (ILS/LOC/RNAV) does the crew use and who decide it?" Instead, they're just like an LNAV only approach, decreasing to 0.3 NM sensitivity when you're within 2 miles of the final approach fix, all the way to the missed approach point.I use the PMDG 737 NG in P3DV4 and trying to get the procedures as realistic as possible. ![]() Unlike LPV approaches, LNAV/VNAV approaches don't have increasing angular guidance as you approach the runway. They were originally designed for baro-aided GPS units, but most WAAS receivers can use them today as well. LNAV/VNAV approaches were actually the first type of GPS approach that had vertical guidance. The second type of GPS based APV approach is LNAV/VNAV. (There are a few more details as well, which you can find in AIM 1-2-3, paragraph D.) LNAV/VNAV: Lateral Navigation/Vertical Navigation Since LPV approaches aren't considered precision approaches, you can't use precision alternate minimums for airports that only have LPV.Īccording to the FAA, if you're using an airport with LPV only (no ILS or other ground-based navaid approach) as your alternate airport, you need weather minimums that meet the LNAV or circling MDA, or the LNAV/VNAV DA if you're equipped to fly it. A baro-aided GPS won't work.īut there is a downside. Keep in mind though, to fly them, you need a WAAS receiver. And, just like an ILS, an LPV approach's angular guidance scales down the closer you get to the runway. ![]() So how do they work? The extremely accurate WAAS system (7.6 meters or better accuracy) gives you lateral and vertical guidance down to a decision altitude (DA) like an ILS. The precision approach definition also carries a lot of documentation, definition, and cost with it, so the FAA and ICAO adopted the APV definition, so they could build new approaches and not be burdened with the cost and paperwork. So what's the difference? APV approaches don't meet the ICAO and FAA precision approach definitions, which apply mostly to localizer and glideslope transmitters. Instead, they're an approach with vertical guidance (APV). Even though LPV approaches have vertical guidance, they're not considered precision approaches. LPV approaches are a WAAS/GPS based approach, and they're very similar to the ILS. LPV: Localizer Performance With Vertical Guidance So what's the difference between LPV and LNAV/VNAV approaches? They're both GPS based approaches with vertical guidance, but the similarities end there. With GPS, the number of approaches with vertical guidance has tripled. Over the past several years, the FAA has created GPS based LPV and LNAV/VNAV approaches at thousands of airports across the US. And if you weren't flying an ILS, you were managing step-down altitudes on a non-precision approach. It wasn't that long ago when you only had one kind of approach with vertical guidance: the ILS.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |