![]() When you're using a highly-accurate 'space-based' mode of navigation - GPS - you don't really need to concern yourself with your proximity to ground-based Navaids (VOR's and their associated radials, NDB's, Marker Beacons, Fan Markers, etc.). And here's the beautiful thing about that concept. One thing to keep in mind regarding all the aforementioned approaches is that they don't rely on any ground-based Navaids (other than the WAAS component but don't worry about that right now). Once you figured out LNAV/VNAV and LPV minimums, LP approaches began popping up (the RNAV approaches at Gillespie and Lindbergh are the only two LP’s in Southern California). (Technically, you could fly the LNAV/VNAV without WAAS if you had a baro-VNAV and FMS, but I'm pretty sure you don't have that in your Skyhawk, so you need WAAS.) When you see an LNAV/VNAV and LPV approach, think of them as relatively the same, at least in terms of both requiring a WAAS-enabled GPS. You may download the PDF by clicking here: RNAV Approach Table.pdf. ![]() I put together a one-page table and diagram that will help you digest the elements and features of these various ‘lines of minima’. You're still flying the same approach on that plate those different lines of minima simply define various altitudes (DA or MDA) and visibility requirements based on your equipment capabilities. Well, the LP, LPV, LNAV and LNAV/VNAV are very much in that same vein. You didn't have glideslope (higher minimums, no vertical navigation, resulting in a localizer-only non-precision approach).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |