VansAirForceForums  
Home > VansAirForceForums

-POSTING RULES
-Advertise in here!
- Today's Posts | Insert Pics

Keep VAF Going
Donate methods

Point your
camera app here
to donate fast.


Go Back   VAF Forums > Education > Instrument Flight Rules
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #11  
Old 03-09-2022, 09:52 AM
NTex NTex is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Dallas
Posts: 237
Default

Strange, I have a different interpretation than the posters above me.

To me, this is only applicable to the Section 61 .65(d)(2)(ii)(C) requirements, which is the cross country flight with 3 different approaches.

This doesn't change the practical test or what is considered precision/non-precision.
__________________
RV-9A finished/sold
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 03-09-2022, 11:12 AM
FireMedic_2009 FireMedic_2009 is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 262
Default Totally confused

What is ACS?

What’s the original verbiage?

What’s the new verbiage?

How is an LPV not a precision approach? It has the same decision altitude as an ILS approach. ILS equipment at airports are out of service quite often. And when they are out of service they are out for weeks or months. I have yet to see or hear of gps satellites be out of service
__________________
RV-6A IO-320 FP sold
RV3B O-320 160hp
Donated 2018 and continue annually
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 03-09-2022, 11:23 AM
BobTurner BobTurner is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Livermore, CA
Posts: 8,226
Default

LPV: technically an LPV does not quite meet the ‘precision approach’ standards. However, the current ACS already says that an LPV to minimums of 300’ or lower can be used in lieu of an ILS.

Different non precision approaches but all using gps: my interpretation is that the faa is preparing to allow LPV to 400’ min, LNAV to straight in min, LNAV to circle to land, as different kinds of approaches.

New verbage: not out yet. This memo directs some faa division to fix the ACS.

GPS perfect? I have experienced first a downgrade (LPV to LNAV), then a complete loss (big red X over the GTN) while doing a gps approach, so it can happen. Don’t get too complacent.

Last edited by BobTurner : 03-09-2022 at 11:30 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 03-09-2022, 11:37 AM
FireMedic_2009 FireMedic_2009 is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 262
Default LPV

Currently LPV’s are 300’ minimums. Do you mean the FAA is going to increase it to 400’ minimums and are going to allow LPV’s to be equivalent to ILS? Isn’t ILS equipment for airports expensive to maintain and many airports are no longer fixing them since the airports have GPS approaches?

Is all this to get your IFR rating or does this also apply for your IFR currency?
__________________
RV-6A IO-320 FP sold
RV3B O-320 160hp
Donated 2018 and continue annually
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 03-09-2022, 11:54 AM
BobTurner BobTurner is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Livermore, CA
Posts: 8,226
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FireMedic_2009 View Post
Currently LPV’s are 300’ minimums. Do you mean the FAA is going to increase it to 400’ minimums and are going to allow LPV’s to be equivalent to ILS? Isn’t ILS equipment for airports expensive to maintain and many airports are no longer fixing them since the airports have GPS approaches?

Is all this to get your IFR rating or does this also apply for your IFR currency?
There are now many LPV approaches to DA(H) of 200’, ‘just like’ a cat 1 ILS. But technically they are just out of some tolerance requirement to be called ‘precision’ approaches, but the existing ACS explicitly allows their use, when DH is 300’ or lower, to demonstrate the precision approach requirement even though they are not precision approaches!

LPV’s to higher than 300’ DH have always been on the ACS list of approaches that can be used to meet the non-precision requirement. The limitation was in the phrase ‘using different nav aides’, which, apparently, no longer has any legal basis so this will be removed.

This has little to do with IFR currency. The ‘6 approaches in 6 months’ rule never specified different approach types.

BTW, sorry for the achronyms. ACS is ‘airmen certification standards’, the successor to the PTS, ‘Practical Test standards’.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 03-09-2022, 03:39 PM
airguy's Avatar
airguy airguy is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Garden City, Tx
Posts: 5,842
Default

What is the requirement for IFR alternates in low weather? IIRC there used to be a bit about needing VHF equipment at either the primary or alternate in low weather - did that get changed?
__________________
Greg Niehues - SEL, IFR, Repairman Cert.
Garden City, TX VAF 2022 dues paid
N16GN flying 1,000 hrs and counting on 91E10; IO360, SDS, WWRV200, Dynon HDX, IFD440, G5
Built an off-plan RV9A with too much fuel and too much HP. Should drop dead any minute now.
Pending Repeat Offender - 10 kit is on order. TDI? Turbine? Stay tuned!
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 03-09-2022, 04:23 PM
jrs14855 jrs14855 is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Lake Havasu City AZ
Posts: 2,782
Default LPV

The precision approach issue is an ICAO issue. Essentially most LPV approaches are to the same DH/DA as an ILS. The difference is that most LPV approaches require 3/4 mile visibility vs 1/2 for most ILS. This is really only a factor for Part 135 where the operator cannot start the approach unless the visibility is above minimums.
Also many LPV approaches have only runway lights. Full approach lights, touchdown and centerline lights allow approaches as low as 1800 RVR for Cat I ILS.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 03-09-2022, 04:27 PM
BobTurner BobTurner is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Livermore, CA
Posts: 8,226
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by airguy View Post
What is the requirement for IFR alternates in low weather? IIRC there used to be a bit about needing VHF equipment at either the primary or alternate in low weather - did that get changed?
This requirement still exists, but only for GPS's that are TSO'd under TSO 129 (non-WASS). WAAS-enabled GPS units which are TSO'd under 145/146 (WAAS TSO) are approved for sole-source navigation, with no requirements for non-gps backup.

BTW, I'm with you. I like having a non-gps method of navigation just in case, and, as I mentioned, I have seen a TSO'd GTN fail while doing an approach (fortunately we were getting close to the airport and were in VMC by then). A no-nav miss out of LVK could raise the blood pressure: LVK is in a valley, below radar service. And the surrounding hills (up to 4000') result in non-standard climb gradient requirements. No issue for most RV's but in a loaded 172 climbing blind, trying to find the low spots in the hills...I don't like to think about it. I never did learn what happened on that approach. GTN worked the next day. Might have been bad satellite geometry (but box didn't generate a warning). I suspect interference, either big brother testing, or a truck going down the interstate.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 03-09-2022, 04:38 PM
BobTurner BobTurner is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Livermore, CA
Posts: 8,226
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jrs14855 View Post
The precision approach issue is an ICAO issue. Essentially most LPV approaches are to the same DH/DA as an ILS. The difference is that most LPV approaches require 3/4 mile visibility vs 1/2 for most ILS. This is really only a factor for Part 135 where the operator cannot start the approach unless the visibility is above minimums.
Also many LPV approaches have only runway lights. Full approach lights, touchdown and centerline lights allow approaches as low as 1800 RVR for Cat I ILS.
This is a bit of a "chicken or egg" issue. Most LPV approaches have only runway lights is correct. But all approaches to such a runway will always have visibility minimums of 3/4 mile or more, not because of an issue with gps, but because if the visibility was down to 1/2 mile then at a 200' decision height you would see NOTHING!. You always need approach lighting to get 1/2 mile visibility minimums, ILS or LPV. And most of the airports with approach lighting get LPV minimums of 200' - 1/2 mile.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 03-09-2022, 05:33 PM
Auburntsts's Avatar
Auburntsts Auburntsts is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 3,117
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lr172 View Post
Does that mean that they now accept an LPV as a precision approach? I always thought there position was it was not. Also, how do you get two different non-precision approaches via GPS.

Larry
I flew an LPV for my precision approach during my checkride back in 2014. The Flight School, the Kings training material and obviously the DPE were in agreement that an LPV, while not technically classified as a precision approach, nevertheless qualified and the instrument PTS listed it as such too.

So the 2013 change 5 to the 2010 PTS replaced the APV note with LPV verbiage in Aircraft and Equipment Required for the Practical Test section and said this: “Note: A localizer performance with vertical guidance (LPV) approach with a decision altitude (DA) greater than 300 feet height above terrain (HAT) may be used as a nonprecision approach; however, due to the precision of its glidepath and localizer-like lateral navigation characteristics, an LPV can be used to demonstrate precision approach proficiency (AOA VI Task B) if the DA is equal to or less than 300 feet HAT.”

The current ACS basically says the exact same thing:
Localizer Performance with Vertical Guidance (LPV Minimums)
Localizer performance with vertical guidance (LPV) minimums with a decision altitude (DA) greater than 300 feet height above touchdown (HAT) may be used as a nonprecision approach; however, due to the precision of its glidepath and localizer-like lateral navigation characteristics, an LPV minimums approach can be used to demonstrate precision approach proficiency if the DA is equal to or less than 300 feet HAT.”

So you see, the FAA has allowed the use of an LPV with a low enough DA to be used as a precision approach for many years now.
__________________
Todd "I drink and know things" Stovall
PP ASEL-IA
RV-10 N728TT - Flying!
WAR EAGLE!

Last edited by Auburntsts : 03-10-2022 at 11:49 AM.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:31 PM.


The VAFForums come to you courtesy Delta Romeo, LLC. By viewing and participating in them you agree to build your plane using standardized methods and practices and to fly it safely and in accordance with the laws governing the country you are located in.