I'm sure that's all correct.We do RNAV RNP approaches down to RNP 0.10 and with RF-legs.
Some of us can do GLS approaches which are a form of LAAS, though they call it something else now.
The E-175 can do LPV approaches but not RNP, AFAIK.
I'm sure that's all correct.We do RNAV RNP approaches down to RNP 0.10 and with RF-legs.
Some of us can do GLS approaches which are a form of LAAS, though they call it something else now.
The E-175 can do LPV approaches but not RNP, AFAIK.
Airlines already run on razor thin profit margins. They’re not going to spend money on things that they don’t see financially fit for the operation.
Simple question - i think?
Let's say I am flying into an airport, weather is going to be OVC005 and the airport publishes an ILS and RNAV approach into the favored runway. All approaches have mins of 200' AGL - all approaches basically have the same published missed - climb straight to 1500, left turn to 3000 to hold (The ILS has a heading - the RNAV is a direct to .. but both to the IAF/IF basically). Nothing NOTAM'd INOP and the aircraft is well equipped to handle basically anything. The ILS even has a feeder similar to the T structure of the RNAV - so no difference there either.
So which approach would you choose? ground based or space based? If weather is low with rain etc, do you gain efficiency or reliability using one versus the other? Anything else I'm not considering?
move to chicago!weird, that 2nd pilot wasn't me............. hhhmmmfff
why?You take whichever is getting advertised
why?
Perhaps you always take what’s advertised. I ask for what I want.
We all have our own choices.Unless there is a compelling reason, sure… it makes little difference
We all have our own choices.
Besides I see way too many pilots who are not assertive with ATC, so I wish more asked just as an exercise. I get looked at funny by trainees when I tell ATC what I want. I remember a 20 gazillion hour retired airline pilot who was shocked when I once asked for a different runway than advertised. Who ever heard of such a thing?!?!
You might also begin to see a lot more controller use of approach clearances direct to the IF instead of vectors to intercept final as they get more appreciative of the reduction of workload that gives them without impacting on traffic flow.Back to the original topic, I really like some of the newer GPS/ILS approaches that use the same fix names for FAF, etc. Makes the controller jobs easier, and less confusion then them clearing you to a fix on the GPS, when you have the ILS loaded, etc..
Yea but they still generally won’t spend money on things that they don’t think will have a decent ROI8% (DL’s 2023 full year number) ain’t bad; a lot of auto/property insurers hope to get half that to call it a good year.
Yea but they still generally won’t spend money on things that they don’t think will have a decent ROI
This is the correct answer.RNAV backed up by ILS.
Huh?The interior regions of the US have had about all the ILS approaches shut down 5 years ago except the MON airports.
RNAV: Load the approach.Dial ILS freq in the receiver. Follow the needles. Couple autopilot if available.
I don't think that it takes less to set-up and activate an RNAV approach.
Huh?
I'm in the "interior regions of the US" and I'm not aware of any ILS approaches being decommissioned yet, and I just went and looked and even the ones I've flown to podunk uncontrolled municipal airports are still there.
Yes, they will go away if not enough people fly them. Military or air carrier service, significantly better minimums (>50ft), and at least 6200 operations using them per year will be kept. GA airports where they get used <1400 times per year, they'll go away. In between, remains to be seen.
But, if there's an LPV approach with the same minimums, I'd rather the FAA decommission the ILS and spend all the money it takes to maintain them (I've heard ~$1 million per year) for something more useful, like certifying an unleaded universal replacement for 100LL.
ILS on the Block - IFR Magazine
In 2015, the FAA began looking to rationalize ILS approaches. In this context, rationalize means cut. The following year, the FAA developed a cost/benefit quantitative model and conducted an analysis at about 2900 airports with few or no RNAV SIDs or STARs. The finished product was a plan to...www.ifr-magazine.com
RNAV: Load the approach.
ILS: Load the approach, verify (and possibly tune, depending on your equipment) the frequency, turn the marker beacons back on on your audio panel, wait until you're in range, verify the ID.
It's not hard, but it is more.