LPV 200'

[elmetal]

Gonna be expensive!!!

Even if WAAS could support a CAT 3 approach, your bird still needs 2 (maybe 3) autopilots, redundant nav source, radio altimeter, maybe an inertial nav system, and I think CAT 3 requires 2 crewmembers (which might be tough to get in after adding all that radio gear).

That would be the sickest 152 around.

You'd probably need to weight about 120 a piece and possibily have to strip the seats off and sit on pillows

but it would be totally worth it!

 

[elmetal]

Can you imagine showing up for a Cat 3 Authorization checkride in a C-152?

You gotta wear the pilot shirt for sure.

 

[Sam D]

BTW, this issue is always hard to teach folks going for their IR because the answer varies depending on what GPS you have, and it is a question often asked on IR practical tests if the plane has a GPS.

Kind of like: how wide is the course guidance en route? Five miles either way of the centerline? Two miles either way?

And its especially hard to read AIM 1-1-19 (e.g. you need backup nav instruments) knowing that 1-1-20 contradicts some of it (e.g. don't need backup nav instruments with WAAS).

Oh well, at least I've got 1-1-15 figured out.

 

[bbchien]

That is not true, they have the same obstacle requirements as an ILS and an up to date survey for an ILS may be able to be used. In the case of my airport, there is an ILS, but the survey was dated and not loaded into the FAA database, so it had to be repeated, plus both runways were included in the new survey in comparison to only one for the ILS.

To get the lowest minimums on an LPV, such as LPV 200, the airport needs to meet certain requirements including runway length, parallel taxiways, runway markings, and approach lighting systems. Without an adequate approach lighting system, a DH of 200 feet is still possible, but the visibility will be a minimum of 3/4 mile.

Thank you John. We've obviously hit right in the core of your expertise.