Good responses already, but if you're looking for flight routes that have actually been filed in the real world and approved by the FAA, have a look at fltplan.com. One does need to register, and yes, this service is used by RL pilots to create flight plans and file them with the FAA, but it also welcomes simmers. 

A nice no-cost option.

Not sure why it's putting me in another hold even though I answered NO

6 minutes ago, captain420 said:

I see, so as far as automation goes, RNAV is the 2nd best type of approach then?

Not really... ILS is the older technology.. does not make it better..

2 minutes ago, captain420 said:

Not sure why it's putting me in another hold even though I answered NO

That looks strange, indeed... what does the FPL page show?

So you would recommend doing RNAV approaches over ILS whenever possible when in a GA plane with an G1000 NXI or capable avionics system?

1 minute ago, captain420 said:

So you would recommend doing RNAV approaches over ILS whenever possible when in a GA plane with an G1000 NXI or capable avionics system?

That is what I do.

19 minutes ago, captain420 said:

Looks OK to me.. just flew that approach without course reversal and it does work... You just need to make sure you are at the target altitude (or below it) and push APR when the CDI switches to "LPV" and the glideslope indicator is live.

The course reversal gives you more time..

3 hours ago, captain420 said:

So you would recommend doing RNAV approaches over ILS whenever possible when in a GA plane with an G1000 NXI or capable avionics system?

In the real world, an ILS will probably have slightly lower minimums than an RNAV approach in most cases, so if the weather is extremely marginal, the ILS probably gives you a better chance of seeing the runway and landing. 

That said, since an ILS only goes in a straight line, they almost never connect to the enroute environment seamlessly (whereas quite a few RNP approaches are connected to a point on a STAR or airway), and since GPS-based approaches can have curved legs, it's not uncommon to see airports where the ILS involves a 15-20 mile final, but there's an RNP approach that hits almost the same minimums, while basically flying a path that's only slightly wider than a VFR traffic pattern.

16 hours ago, captain420 said:

so as far as automation goes, RNAV is the 2nd best type of approach then?

As Bert said, many smaller airports only have RNAV (GPS) approaches, and one reason is often cost. An ILS approach requires expensive equipment on the ground -- localizer and glide slope antenna, marker beacons, and maintenance of all that.  A GPS approach, however, is based on satellite guidance so there is no ground based antennas and associated maintenance. Some GPS LPV approaches have minimums similar to the typical ILS (about 200ft AGL), but this usually requires a WAAS ( Wide Area Augmentation System) capable receiver in the aircraft (as part of the GPS unit). WAAS improves (augments) GPS position accuracy to within a few meters or so.

A GTN750Xi (which is WAAS capable) typically goes for around $16,000, while a G1000NXi is closer to $30,000 I think, but I'm not sure if that includes installation. Maybe some others here have better numbers and can speak from experience! I suppose one way to look at all this is an RNAV (GPS) approach shifts some of the associated costs from the airport owner to the 'users'.  😉

Al

Edited September 25, 20214 yr by ark

I'm assuming that for GA planes equipped with the proper avionics such as G3000, G1000's, GTN 750's that they would most likely use RNAV approaches (when flying by IFR) for the reason you mentioned above then. Since most smaller airports don't have ILS systems in place. 

 

4 hours ago, captain420 said:

I'm assuming that for GA planes equipped with the proper avionics such as G3000, G1000's, GTN 750's that they would most likely use RNAV approaches (when flying by IFR) for the reason you mentioned above then. Since most smaller airports don't have ILS systems in place. 

 

If you are asking is it common to fly an RNAV approach at a smaller GA airport; yes.  And of course, many smaller airports don't have ILS or RNAV approaches. Although there is no ground based equipment required for an RNAV approach, I would think getting one designed and approved by the FAA has substantial costs involved, but I have no idea how much that might be. I also think there is some kind of yearly 'fee' paid to the FAA -- maybe they come out and check conditions have not changed, like a large tree suddenly grew up near the runway threshold! 😉

Bottom line, when landing IFR pilot's select an available approach that best fits their situation given on-board equipment, weather conditions, direction of flight inbound to the airport, fuel remaining (should have at least 45 minutes), ATC request, etc.

Al

Edited September 25, 20214 yr by ark