When IFR GPS broke onto the scene nearly two decades ago, it caused a
sea change in the way approaches could be flown into airports too small
to have an ILS. Rather than conducting an approach referencing a
relatively inaccurate VOR or NDB signal, every airport in the country
could be approached with localizer accuracy. What the first GPS did for
lateral navigation, WAAS has done for vertical navigation. Yet some
pilots still aren’t taking full advantage of WAAS capability, and some
training providers are teaching procedures that hobble a major safety
benefit that WAAS presents.
The issue is the ability of WAAS-capable Garmin navigators to create
vertical guidance as part of most GPS approaches without published WAAS
minimums. This advisory vertical guidance turns an LNAV-only approach
into an "LNAV+V" approach. Where "+V" vertical guidance is available,
the autopilot is fully capable of coupling to the vertical path, as if
the approach was a full-blown LPV or ILS.
Yet many pilots conduct this type of approach in the same manner they
would a VOR or NDB, setting the MDA in the altitude selector and using
vertical speed mode to reach MDA. It is true that the presence of
vertical guidance on an LNAV approach doesn’t change the MDA, nor make
it an official APV (approach with vertical guidance) in the eyes of the
FAA. However, there’s no reason not to use the same procedure to fly the
approach as if it were an LPV, coupling vertically via the GP (glide
path) mode, and never leveling off at MDA.
Flying an LNAV+V in the manner of a precision, rather than
non-precision, approach offers several safety benefits. The most
important is that the aircraft can be configured to land and be on-speed
outside the FAF, with no further configuration or power changes
required. Wherever the pilot may be when visual contact with the runway
is acquired, the aircraft will be on a stable path to the touchdown
zone.
In contrast, a pilot who dives down to MDA at a high rate of descent
may visually acquire the runway before the aircraft is in a position to
begin further descent. Deciding when it’s safe to leave MDA can require
quick thinking at a time when the aircraft is very close to terrain ––
not a desirable situation.
Another benefit is that, as level-off at MDA is not required, the
altitude pre-selector can be set to the level-off altitude of the missed
approach once the FAF is passed. Forgetting to set missed approach
altitude after level-off at MDA is one of the most common errors made by
transitioning jet pilots, and beginning the missed without the correct
altitude set can lead to undesirable autopilot behavior or an ATC
violation.
You can employ a trick to turn an MDA into a DA. Built into a
published DA is consideration that if a pilot looks up at DA, the
aircraft will still be traveling downwards while the pilot makes the
decision to go missed, adds power, and transitions to a climb. An MDA,
however, is exactly what it says –– a minimum altitude below which the
pilot must not go unless landing. The solution is simple: add "padding"
to the MDA so that even if it takes a few seconds to get the plane
climbing, MDA will not be violated.
A light jet flying on a three-degree descent path will be descending
about 550 FPM, or a little over 9 feet per second. Assuming a worst-case
scenario of five seconds to transition from descent to climb and
rounding the result up, you get 50 feet. So, adding 50 feet to the
published MDA results in the new functional DA –– the altitude at which
the missed approach will commence, and which should be bugged as
"minimums."
No comments:
Post a Comment