GTN750 LNAV+V Question

W

Walboy

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Feb 11, 2014
Messages
503
Display Name
Display name:
Walboy
.
 

Attachments

  • GPS RWY 5.pdf
    140.5 KB · Views: 20
Last edited:
Only works on my 530 if your database is current.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Sounds like to me there was a momentary glitch in the comms between the 750 and the 106 caused by either something internal to the devices or a loose connection in the wiring harness and nothing to do with the approach,database, or GPS reception.
 
Is your database current? From what I understand if your database isn't current Garmin locks out the GS.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
gsengle said:
Is your database current? From what I understand if your database isn't current Garmin locks out the GS.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

The OP said he shot this approach multiple times with no problems and the GS flagged only once--doesn't sound like a database currency issue to me.
 
Last edited:
Usually when the GP flags on a Garmin, it means SBAS (WAAS) is not available.

Note it' s not a GS. That's for ILS's. It's a glidepath. GTN650 annunciations don't distinguish, but G1000 does.
 
I have aspen PFD and G 530 WAAS. I shoot LNAV regularly. GS always works - database current or not. Unusual for WAAS not to work when it was working during the previous approaches
 
Walboy said:
I had a nice opportunity to practice approaches in IMC several days ago here in S AZ. I practiced the KCGZ GPS RWY 5 approach multiple times and each time my GTN indicated LNAV+V minimums. However, on one of the approaches the CDI's (GI-106A) glide slope needle was flagged. There were no messages indicating any sort of degraded performance. Unit seems to work flawlessly otherwise.

What would cause this? I can't find any explanation in the GTN manual.
Click to expand...
Not sure if this was your issue....but for me (using the 530W) if you didn't sequence properly to the segment on the approach you won't get the glide slope.

I saw this as I was transitioning from a hold to the approach. Instead of deleting the hold I went direct to one of the fixes. I got the localizer but no vertical guidance till I was past the first fix.
 
MAKG1 said:
...
Note it' s not a GS. That's for ILS's. It's a glidepath...
Click to expand...

....quit picking all those nits


And as someone following the complementary v nav, or a ILS/LPV how does that change HOW I follow it???

I'll follow a ILS glide path down to 200', just the same as I would follow a complementary v nav down to 500', or whatever.
 
btw.....my 530W nav data is two years old and still provides gps glide slope guidance. :D
 
James331 said:
....quit picking all those nits


And as someone following the complementary v nav, or a ILS/LPV how does that change HOW I follow it???

I'll follow a ILS glide path down to 200', just the same as I would follow a complementary v nav down to 500', or whatever.
Click to expand...

Always? They are different at Livermore. Better uncouple your autopilot by 1700 if you're using the GS. LPV can go down to 600 MSL.
 
MAKG1 said:
Always? They are different at Livermore. Better uncouple your autopilot by 1700 if you're using the GS. LPV can go down to 600 MSL.
Click to expand...

So do you not keep the needles centered on one vs the other or something?
 
gsengle said:
Is your database current? From what I understand if your database isn't current Garmin locks out the GS.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure that my GTN750 will show the glideslope even if the database isn't current. I've been doing a lot of practice approaches lately without a current database and definitely have gotten vertical guidance for LNAV/VNAV and LPV where available. I have noticed that if you turn (or get turned, which you shouldn't in the real world) inside the FAF it won't sequence and you have to go missed and come back around to hit the FAF. Probably a good thing to have in reality flying, but doing practice approaches sometimes you end up turning before the FAF.
 
MAKG1 said:
As an instrument pilot, you should know about false GS. There is no such thing as false GP. So, yes, you do fly them differently.
Click to expand...

Yeah, there are some different failure modes

But when it comes to actually flying it, shy of trying to dive bomb onto the vertical, it's the same thing, needles centered till you hit the magic numbers.
 
Walboy said:
I had a nice opportunity to practice approaches in IMC several days ago here in S AZ. I practiced the KCGZ GPS RWY 5 approach multiple times and each time my GTN indicated LNAV+V minimums.
Click to expand...

Maybe it's something to do with air data hookup (which I don't have), but my GTN never indicates minimums, on any approach. What am I missing?
 
James331 said:
Yeah, there are some different failure modes

But when it comes to actually flying it, shy of trying to dive bomb onto the vertical, it's the same thing, needles centered till you hit the magic numbers.
Click to expand...

Although I agree with you that the terminology of glidepath or glideslope is virtually irrelevant, the last bit of your statement isn't quite true.

An LNAV+V glidepath is not quite the same as any of the others: LPV, LNAV/VNAV, or ILS.

LNAV+V plots an advisory glidepath that has not been TERPS-evaluated by the FAA, but has been entered into the database by the Jeppesen or Garmin or whoever is supplying the database. As such, you are still flying to an MDA, not a DA.

On an ILS, LPV or LNAV/VNAV, you fly down to the DA, make your decision, and in the process of executing the missed approach, may temporarily dip down below that DA. That is fine and expected.

On an LNAV+V, you fly down to the MDA, and need to level off at that altitude without dipping below it. You can stay there, level, and drive it in to the MAP, but whether you do that or start your climb right away, there is no protection below the MDA. This may require you to begin leveling off, and therefore going slightly above glidepath, before you get to that MDA.

So you do and should fly them a bit differently.
 
So you're flying the complementary vnav down to a number, like I said, be it DA or MDA, you keep the needles centered and fly till you hit said number, land or go around.
 
Walboy said:
What I was referring to is the green annunciator at the lower left side of the unit as it sequences from terminal to approach mode. Some RNAV approaches have different minima like the RNAV approach shown below. I don't have air data hookup. I don't have an autopilot either.

View attachment 50377
Click to expand...

No problem. I somehow imagined you were getting minimum descent information (like the big boys), which would have been very cool. :)
 
James331 said:
So you're flying the complementary vnav down to a number, like I said, be it DA or MDA, you keep the needles centered and fly till you hit said number, land or go around.
Click to expand...

That's how you fly an MDA. For a decision height, you need to level off a bit earlier, or you'll bust through it. ACS standard for a DH is -0, not -100 like other minima. The rule of thumb I use in a 182 is 50 feet high to begin the level-out. It will be more on a faster airplane. You also continue level at the DH until you reach the MAP (or decide you can't land). An MDA goes missed immediately.
 
MAKG1 said:
That's how you fly an MDA. For a decision height, you need to level off a bit earlier, or you'll bust through it. ACS standard for a DH is -0, not -100 like other minima. The rule of thumb I use in a 182 is 50 feet high to begin the level-out. It will be more on a faster airplane. You also continue level at the DH until you reach the MAP (or decide you can't land). An MDA goes missed immediately.
Click to expand...
It might just be a matter of wording, or for that matter, my own reading skills... but it sounds to me as if you have MDA and DA reversed as far as your first sentence is concerned. So, just for clarity (paraphrased from the P/CG):

DA is the altitude at which you must make the decision to continue or go missed. Your momentum will carry you a bit lower than the charted altitude, and that is expected.

MDA is Minimum Descent Altitude and is a hard minimum: you aren't authorized to continue below the MDA. If flying an advisory GS, you have to level off a bit early so as not to bust it.

Actually, rereading the rest of your post, it sounds as if you have the two reversed consistently, not just in your first sentence. But I'm not familiar with the ACS so I'm not sure about that. But I'd be very surprised if the ACS criteria were in conflict with the standard definitions from the P/CG.
 
azure said:
Actually, rereading the rest of your post, it sounds as if you have the two reversed consistently, not just in your first sentence.
Click to expand...

I agree. @MAKG1, you have it backwards. DA is used on the vertically-guided approaches, MDA on the non-vertically guided. DA has the expected height loss below it, MDA is the hard altitude.
 
RussR said:
I agree. @MAKG1, you have it backwards. DA is used on the vertically-guided approaches, MDA on the non-vertically guided. DA has the expected height loss below it, MDA is the hard altitude.
Click to expand...

Mea culpa. Yes, it's backwards.

Precision (including LPV) = descend to altitude, then decide to go missed, possibly passing the minimum while executing the missed.

Nonprecision = don't go below the minimum at all; level off if necessary to the MAP.
 
I had a similar problem recently.

The 430 stopped giving LPV approaches and would default to LNAV. This continued happening for a couple months. Later, I noticed on one cross country that every time transmitting on 132.025 caused the GPS to completely lose reception and go into "Ded Reckoning Mode". A minute after transmitting, it would gain reception again. This was IFR at night. The 496 was not affected. After getting a frequency change, I didn't see the problem again. I was able to shoot the ILS and land at my destination. But I was now willing to fly IMC again until it was fixed. The avionics shop diagnosed interfere between the comm antenna and the WAAS antenna and after $700 and a new antenna (bent instead of straight) both problems (unable to pick up LPV and losing reception when transmitting on a range of frequencies) disappeared.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top