To fly an LPV approach you need an aircraft /  FMS that has a WAAS receiver and approved for WAAS approaches.

PMDG737 will fly an IAN approach.

No I can't - I only heard this from Ed at ES. It's the reason the old WIP MV King air couldn't do approaches with WAAS minimums, i.e. GPS approaches with vertical guidance.... They used navigraph.

 

 

Some one must of forgot to tell that to PMDG. I just flew the 737NGX to LPV minima at KAPA RNAV (GPS) Z RWY 35R fully coupled.

 

As long as the MAP altitude is correctly programmed in it works just fine. 

 

 

To fly an LPV approach you need an aircraft /  FMS that has a WAAS receiver and approved for WAAS approaches.

 

PMDG737 will fly an IAN approach.

You are losing me slowly guys but it's still interesting trying to follow :-). 

The WAAS approach isn't based on the MAP altitude, and an RNAV approach is not always a WAAS approach. Not all WAAS approaches are 3 degrees. There are lots of data missing regarding approaches in the Navigraph database. It's one of the reasons we don't support it. The other is even simpler... we needed a database that was legal for use in commercial training environments. No one provides that, until now (RealNav). So, yes we made our own. Regarding an approach there are several data values necessary for WAAS that isn't in the Navigraph database... like... exactly what type of GPS approach is authorized, what it's RNP level is, what channel to use if it's WAAS.

 

There's more, but honestly... the choice was driven by the need for commercial grade accuracy. What subscriptions we offer is controlled by the licensing from our data source.

There you go!

Most FMS based avionics can compute a descent path down to a point above the threshold of the runway... that has nothing to do with WAAS at all.

No I can't - I only heard this from Ed at ES. It's the reason the old WIP MV King air couldn't do approaches with WAAS minimums, i.e. GPS approaches with vertical guidance.... They used navigraph.

I asked that question in the Milviz subforum here and they told that the MV KIng Air 350i is going to support Navigraph.

The WAAS approach isn't based on the MAP altitude, and an RNAV approach is not always a WAAS approach.

 

WAAS is nothing more then a correction. An LPV approach requires this correction and it makes the RNAV approach digitally more of a cone like an ILS, however it is still a non-precision approach. GLS is the RNAV precision approach.

 

MSFS does not need WAAS because the variables provide perfect location, unlike the real-world where a GPS location can be off. 

 

Interesting that other vendors can fake RAIM for an LNAV/VNAV approach, but only your choice of database database vendor allows you to fake WAAS, which is not needed at all inside of MSFS. 

 

Bottom line is there is no such thing as RAIM or WAAS in the MSFS environment that vendors don't fake into the environment. 

In short I think the CJ is well worth it. I have the S550 aswell with a GTN750 in place of the FMC. I really do like the CJ and the proline system is pretty good. If your still on the fence I'll be posting a review soon. I've actually flown a Citiation CJ (right seat)

 

 

If your still on the fence I'll be posting a review soon.

 

Sounds great.

 

Maybe add your takeoff vspds and approx landing speeds .. I understand some data not in supplied docs.

WAAS is nothing more then a correction. An LPV approach requires this correction and it makes the RNAV approach digitally more of a cone like an ILS, however it is still a non-precision approach. GLS is the RNAV precision approach.

This entire statement is completely inaccurate. Also, it's off topic... a lot. I will not be responding to your argument further.

 

Actually... it's not about the non-precision... though that's not quite correct either. Guess I should be more careful about 'entire'. At any rate WAAS is a lot more complex than knowing a lat/lon/alt and RAIM isn't simulated anywhere in the sim, or third-party. Just saying.

Bottom line is there is no such thing as RAIM or WAAS in the MSFS environment that vendors don't fake into the environment.

Are you the coding expert Ken or did you just stay at a Holiday Inn last night?

If, as you say, vendors are required to "fake" it into the environment then it begs the question?

Would you prefer an accurate "fake" or an inaccurate "fake"?

By your measure, everything in flight simulation environment could be categorized as "fake".

WAAS is nothing more then a correction. An LPV approach requires this correction and it makes the RNAV approach digitally more of a cone like an ILS, however it is still a non-precision approach. GLS is the RNAV precision approach.

 

MSFS does not need WAAS because the variables provide perfect location, unlike the real-world where a GPS location can be off. 

 

Interesting that other vendors can fake RAIM for an LNAV/VNAV approach, but only your choice of database database vendor allows you to fake WAAS, which is not needed at all inside of MSFS. 

 

Bottom line is there is no such thing as RAIM or WAAS in the MSFS environment that vendors don't fake into the environment. 

 

Thanks for the additional background information on WAAS and LPV as it applies to aircraft systems in MSFS. Very interesting.

Are you the coding expert Ken or did you just stay at a Holiday Inn last night?

If, as you say, vendors are required to "fake" it into the environment then it begs the question?

Would you prefer an accurate "fake" or an inaccurate "fake"?

By your measure, everything in flight simulation environment could be categorized as "fake".

 

I'm curious how is WAAS modeled in flight sims? 

I'm curious how is WAAS modeled in flight sims?

KenG would be the guy to ask.. He made those statements in the #22 post above.

We simply disagree with any attribution of accuracy to his statements. :smile:

Fairly good discussion, 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CeIEs9l9aws

 

Realize WAAS is the North American version of SBAS. Yes I can fly an LPV approach without WAAS, it is called EGSOS in Europe or MSAS in Japan. 

 

My statement that WAAS is a correction is accurate. For the digital cone here is an explanation from my Universal book since they provide good graphics. I think the FAA also has a graphic of this if you like digging through ACs. 

 

 

Yes, I think I might have stayed at a Holiday Inn Express when I attended training at Universal Avionics, however for my Rockwell-Collins training I am certain I stayed with a Marriott brand.