Rnav Approach

[G7USL 117]

Dave, FCTM Flight Crew Training Manual may have what you are looking for. Check Section 5 that covers approaches in the NG, specifically 5.9 for GPS, IAN or VNAV topics. This is a good place to read about things like fail operational or passive too.

It's always nicer to see someone do it, in a video when your 74,  Dan. lol

[downscc 1,327]

It's always nicer to see someone do it, in a video when your 74,  Dan. lol

Really, I'm almost that grumpy and I hate how to do it videos... they always seem to take ten times longer to convey information than a well written guide takes to read. Maybe it's just me..., and I don't hang out at utube like many youngsters. Interesting to hear this from someone only a few years older.

[pete_auau 1,159]

Really, I'm almost that grumpy and I hate how to do it videos.

 

sure  Kyle would  disagree  with you  since  he  has  made  very good  ones :smile:

[scandinavian13 5,192]

sure  Kyle would  disagree  with you  since  he  has  made  very good  ones :smile:

Doing them is kind of a pain, and I still prefer the manuals for the fact that it's knowledge through a primary source and not filtered through someone of unknown credential on a website.

 

Videos have a fun element to them, but they're a lot of work to do.

[rondon9898 84]

I'm quite happy to do a decent, well researched vid on RNAV approaches in the 737 on my channel if you would find it useful, Dave. Even though I don't do these procedures in real life, as I'm not a professional pilot, I like to think that my videos are as well-informed, detailed and succinct as I can make them. I understand the sentiments expressed above though.

[G7USL 117]

I'm quite happy to do a decent, well researched vid on RNAV approaches in the 737 on my channel if you would find it useful, Dave. Even though I don't do these procedures in real life, as I'm not a professional pilot, I like to think that my videos are as well-informed, detailed and succinct as I can make them. I understand the sentiments expressed above though.

Thank you John.

 

I have just subscribed.

[VHOJT 177]

Really, I'm almost that grumpy and I hate how to do it videos... they always seem to take ten times longer to convey information than a well written guide takes to read. Maybe it's just me..., and I don't hang out at utube like many youngsters. Interesting to hear this from someone only a few years older.

 

I'm not too old and I have to agree 100% with you, Dan!

 

Rudy Fidao

[JD396 38]

Great thread, people... thanks.

 

They say a picture is worth a thousand words, and I'd extrapolate that idea out and say that a good tutorial is worth a thousand pages of a manual... those of us who aren't around aviation in the real world often have trouble knowing what to do with the raw information that's out there. Some of it is great, some of it is garbage, and a lot of it is accurate but too technical for laypeople to understand without help. 

 

In the real world I'm a trainer and get to sift through the text of state and federal law, the interpretation of said law as it varies between two separate wings of the state's department of public safety and Lord knows how many federal agencies, our company policies as dictated by management which may or may not conflict with state and federal law... and boil it down into 12-15 hours of new hire training, turn it into workshop presentations that have to meet certain competencies for the state but also need to be interesting enough to engage my co-workers for two hours, using that information to make our annual one-on-one evaluations as meaningful as possible, etc. All of the information is freely available on or offline, but... if it didn't matter how information was compiled and presented, they wouldn't need me.

 

The tutorials that come with our PMDG products are top-quality and that goes beyond just flight sim stuff - usually you get a manual and that's it, it's up to you to 1) already know how to use it or 2) read through the manual like it's crossword puzzle clues trying to figure it out what they mean. The tutorials we get with PMDG products are approachable for laypeople like me, and present the information without getting too caught up in details OR just skipping over stuff or dumbing it down (again, as a trainer, I appreciate how difficult that can be) Heck, I used the NGX Innsbruck tutorial with a totally different addon aircraft because the information on how to get everything set up and wind through a tough approach like that is kind of universal.

[rondon9898 84]

I am just in the process of uploading a video to my channel about this which might be of some help. Give it a few hours to load.

[cmpbellsjc 2,963]

After reading this thread I don't see the difficulty in how to fly the RNAV approach. Once it's selected in the FMC and your flying on course at the correct altitude and position you just arm the approach button and either let the autopilot fly it like a regular ILS approach or you take control and fly it yourself. The autopilot will fly it just like it does with the ILS, simple.

 

I just fly the RNAV approach into SBRJ runway 02 which is a tough approach to hand fly as is, but the autopilot did a fine job of doing it. I also flew it again the second time disconnecting the autopilot and followed the flight director and it worked out the same.

[rondon9898 84]

I don't think there's any need to arm the APP function - that's for the ILS. Correct me if I'm wrong.

[Budbud 227]

I don't think there's any need to arm the APP function - that's for the ILS. Correct me if I'm wrong.

 

Hi,

 

It depends on which aircraft you are talking about. On the T7, no you don't arm the approach (you don't press the APP button on the MCP).

On the 737, you can press the APP button and the F/D will switch to IAN (Integrate Approach Navigation mode), an ILS look alike non-precision approach type with the different specificity:

 

ILS:

_ LOC / GS displayed on the FMA

_ Precision approach, the guidance is provided by the ground radio equipment

 

IAN:

_ FAC / GP displayed on the FMA

_ Non-precision approach, the guidance is provided by the GNSS signals (RNAV approach)

[rondon9898 84]

What's the advantage of that over staying in LNAV/VNAV PTH?

[downscc 1,327]

What's the advantage of that over staying in LNAV/VNAV PTH?

Let Boeing explain it (Google is your friend): http://www.boeing.com/commercial/aeromagazine/aero_22/737approach_story.html#3

 

There's several operational safety issues, first that comes to mind is in IAN mode you can select missed approach altitude on the MCP after glidepath capture...., VNAV requires the MCP ALT to be set at or above the decision height.  The IAN mode is a perfect fit for the GLS approach, which is starting to crop up at more and more places like KEWR and KIAH.

[lencarne 6]

Airports are equipped with approaches based on necessity, along with other fluid requests (I'll explain the latter as we go).

 

 

 

The type of approach is highly dependent on the type of airport, and the types of operators into that airport. If it's a small general aviation airport, then it usually gets (at best) an RNAV approach, and/or perhaps a VOR approach if one is nearby. NDB approaches are also occasional, but usually only for airports that have been around for quite some time, and the NDB itself hasn't died yet (at which point they're simply decommissioned). Why do even the smallest of GA airports get an RNAV approach? They're the cheapest due to the lack of equipment. There's no LOC array, glide slope antenna, monitoring equipment, and so on.

 

Stepping up to a larger GA airport with more traffic and larger operators, you start to see LOC and ILS approaches. The reason is that, as mentioned earlier, these are more expensive to develop, set up, and maintain. Either the FAA or local government - or more likely, a combination of both - have a business and safety reason to install the equipment and maintain it. At this level, though, there's usually only one ILS approach to the most frequently used runway, with an RNAV approach on the reciprocal side.

 

Moving up to a regional airports and above, you usually see that there's generally a business reason to commission and maintain multiple approach types. Additionally, these approaches are set up to both ends of the runways, and potentially multiple runways. The RNAV approaches remain to handle ILS outages, or offer different routing options around terrain. As an example, KROA is buried in (low) mountains, which means that the "ILS" to Runway 6 has to be offset due to terrain, making it an LDA. Runway 34 has an ILS because the mechanics of the approach actually worked out. Runway 24 wasn't found to be used enough for landing to require setting up an LDA approach, but enough that an RNAV could be set up. Runway 16 can't have an approach at all due to terrain on the north side making the approach too steep. In this case, while the airport has more sophisticated options available, the curved paths of the RNAV are available to handle the terrain.

 

At international airports, you generally only see ILS approaches to each runway, along with RNAV for the same reasons as regional airports. There may be one or two VOR approaches as a last ditch effort back up. RNAV approaches are generally overlay-type approaches that are just about the same thing as the ILS approach, but navigated via GPS/INS. These approaches generally also have curved entries that help to smooth traffic flows off of the STAR, or navigate complex paths. An example of the latter case here is the RNAV Runway 19 approach to KDCA, which follows a relatively complex curvy approach following the Potomac River to the airport.

 

Taking this last point to a larger extreme are certain operators who are utilizing RNAV approaches to get into specific airports in specific situations. Alaska Airlines has a number of approaches that they have specifically sponsored up in Alaska (and since they've footed the bill, they're not public). Similarly, jetBlue paid a pretty penny to create an RNAV approach into Runway 13L at JFK, which they can use when conditions are jamming up operations in NY airspace. If JFK goes to the 13s, LGA also has to go to 13, which then causes issues for EWR for both the 4s or the 22s. As such, ILS 13L at JFK is avoided at all costs. jetBlue's RNAV approach, though, cuts in a lot closer to the airport than would be required for the ILS, so they can use a more favorable runway while other operators take a delay in trying to get in on the ILS, or take a less wind-favored runway.

 

 

 

Short version?

Contrary to the common sim belief that the ILS is the King of All Approaches, the RNAV offers a more consistent and wide-spread approach to airports. The only true advantage that you get with the ILS is its current approval for autolands, if your aircraft is so equipped and it's necessary (another sim misconception...autolands are very very infrequent). RNAV hasn't been approved for autoland yet.

Hi Kyle, as usual the fount of all knowledge  Can you tell me why at LEBL ( Barcelona) I get in the 737NGX options like runway ILS25LY and ILS25LZ as landing runway options when the charts dont show those options. I use navigraph both for the charts and FMC database, TIA