Section 4. Arrival
5-4-1. Standard Terminal
Arrival (STAR) Procedures
STAR is an ATC coded IFR arrival route established for application to arriving
IFR aircraft destined for certain airports. STARs simplify clearance delivery
procedures, and also facilitate transition between en route and instrument
procedures may have mandatory speeds and/or crossing altitudes published. Other
STARs may have planning information depicted to inform pilots what clearances or
restrictions to “expect.”
altitudes/speeds are not considered STAR procedures crossing restrictions unless
verbally issued by ATC. Published speed restrictions are independent of altitude
restrictions and are mandatory unless modified by ATC. Pilots should plan to
cross waypoints with a published speed restriction, at the published speed, and
should not exceed this speed past the associated waypoint unless authorized by
ATC or a published note to do so.
altitudes/speeds are published so that pilots may have the information for
planning purposes. These altitudes/speeds must not be used in the event of lost
communications unless ATC has specifically advised the pilot to expect these
altitudes/speeds as part of a further clearance.
14 CFR Section 91.185(c)(2)(iii).
navigating on STAR procedures must maintain last assigned altitude until
receiving authorization to descend so as to comply with all published/issued
restrictions. This authorization will contain the phraseology “DESCEND VIA.”
to “descend via” authorizes pilots to:
at pilot's discretion to meet published restrictions and laterally navigate on a
cleared to a waypoint depicted on a STAR, to descend from a previously assigned
altitude at pilot's discretion to the altitude depicted at that waypoint.
established on the depicted arrival, to descend and to meet all published or
assigned altitude and/or speed restrictions.
1. When otherwise
cleared along a route or procedure that contains published speed restrictions,
the pilot must comply with those speed restrictions independent of any descend
anticipates pilots will begin adjusting speed the minimum distance necessary
prior to a published speed restriction so as to cross the waypoint/fix at the
published speed. Once at the published speed, ATC expects pilots will maintain
the published speed until additional adjustment is required to comply with
further published or ATC assigned speed restrictions or as required to ensure
compliance with 14 CFR Section 91.117.
“descend via” is used in conjunction with STARs to reduce phraseology by not
requiring the controller to restate the altitude at the next waypoint/fix to
which the pilot has been cleared.
traffic will assign an altitude to cross the waypoint/ fix, if no altitude is
depicted at the waypoint/fix, for aircraft on a direct routing to a STAR. Air
traffic must ensure obstacle clearance when issuing a “descend via” instruction
to the pilot.
en route altitudes (MEA) are not considered restrictions; however, pilots must
remain above all MEAs, unless receiving an ATC instruction to descend below the
“Cleared Tyler One arrival.”
In Example 1, pilots are cleared to fly the lateral path of the procedure.
Compliance with any published speed restrictions is required. No descent is
with assigned altitude.
“Cleared Tyler One arrival, descend and
maintain flight level two four zero.”
“Cleared Tyler One arrival, descend at pilot's discretion, maintain flight level
two four zero.”
In Example 2, the first clearance requires the pilot to descend to FL 240 as
directed, comply with any published speed restrictions, and maintain FL 240
until cleared for further vertical navigation with a newly assigned altitude or
a“descend via” clearance.
The second clearance authorizes the pilot to descend to FL 240 at his
discretion, to comply with any published speed restrictions, and then maintain
FL 240 until issued further instructions.
3. Lateral/routing and vertical navigation
“Descend via the Eagul Five arrival.”
“Descend via the Eagul Five arrival, except, cross Vnnom at or above one two
In Example 3, the first clearance authorized the aircraft to descend at pilot's
discretion on the Eagul Five arrival; the pilot must descend so as to comply
with all published altitude and speed restrictions.
The second clearance authorizes the same, but requires the pilot to descend so
as to cross at Vnnom at or above 12,000.
and vertical navigation clearance when assigning altitude not published on
“Descend via the Eagul Five arrival, except
after Geeno, maintain one zero thousand.”
“Descend via the Eagul Five arrival, except cross Geeno at one one thousand then
maintain seven thousand.”
In Example 4, the first clearance authorized the aircraft to track laterally on
the Eagul Five Arrival and to descend at pilot's discretion so as to comply with
all altitude and speed restrictions until reaching Geeno and then maintain
10,000. Upon reaching 10,000, aircraft should maintain 10,000 until cleared by
ATC to continue to descend.
The second clearance requires the same, except the aircraft must cross Geeno at
11,000 and is then authorized to continue descent to and maintain 7,000.
routing to intercept a STAR and vertical navigation clearance.
“Proceed direct Leoni, descend via the Leoni
“Proceed direct Denis, cross Denis at or above flight level two zero zero, then
descend via the Mmell One arrival.”
In Example 5, in the first clearance an altitude is published at Leoni; the
aircraft proceeds to Leoni, crosses Leoni at the published altitude and then
descends via the arrival. If a speed restrictions is published at Leoni, the
aircraft will slow to comply with the published speed.
In the second clearance, there is no altitude published at Denis; the aircraft
must cross Denis at or above FL200, and then descends via the arrival.
cleared for vertical navigation using the phraseology “descend via” must inform
ATC upon initial contact with a new frequency, of the altitude leaving,
“descending via (procedure name),” the runway transition or landing direction if
assigned, and any assigned restrictions not published on the procedure.
1. Delta 121 is
cleared to descend via the Eagul Five arrival, runway 26 transition: “Delta One
Twenty One leaving flight level one niner zero, descending via the Eagul Five
arrival runway twosix transition.”
121 is cleared to descend via the Eagul Five arrival, but ATC has changed the
bottom altitude to 12,000: “Delta One Twenty One leaving flight level one niner
zero for one two thousand, descending via the Eagul Five arrival, runway twosix
602 is cleared to descend via the Ivane Two arrival, landing south): “JetBlue
six zero two leaving flight level two one zero descending via the Ivane Two
arrival landing south.”
of IFR aircraft destined to locations for which STARs have been published may be
issued a clearance containing a STAR whenever ATC deems it appropriate.
of STARs requires pilot possession of at least the approved chart. RNAV STARs
must be retrievable by the procedure name from the aircraft database and conform
to charted procedure. As with any ATC clearance or portion thereof, it is the
responsibility of each pilot to accept or refuse an issued STAR. Pilots should
notify ATC if they do not wish to use a STAR by placing “NO STAR” in the remarks
section of the flight plan or by the less desirable method of verbally stating
the same to ATC.
charts are published in the Terminal Procedures Publications (TPP) and are
available on subscription from the National Aeronautical Charting Office.
e. RNAV STAR.
public RNAV STARs are RNAV1. These procedures require system performance
currently met by GPS or DME/DME/IRU RNAV systems that satisfy the criteria
discussed in AC 90-100A, U.S. Terminal and En Route Area Navigation (RNAV)
Operations. RNAV1 procedures must maintain a total system error of not more than
1 NM for 95% of the total flight time.
procedures requiring GPS, if the navigation system does not automatically alert
the flight crew of a loss of GPS, the operator must develop procedures to verify
correct GPS operation.
AIM, Global Positioning
1-1-18l, Impact of Magnetic Variation on RNAV
5-4-2. Local Flow Traffic
program is a continuing effort by the FAA to enhance safety, minimize the impact
of aircraft noise and conserve aviation fuel. The enhancement of safety and
reduction of noise is achieved in this program by minimizing low altitude
maneuvering of arriving turbojet and turboprop aircraft weighing more than
12,500 pounds and, by permitting departure aircraft to climb to higher altitudes
sooner, as arrivals are operating at higher altitudes at the points where their
flight paths cross. The application of these procedures also reduces exposure
time between controlled aircraft and uncontrolled aircraft at the lower
altitudes in and around the terminal environment. Fuel conservation is
accomplished by absorbing any necessary arrival delays for aircraft included in
this program operating at the higher and more fuel efficient altitudes.
fuel efficient descent is basically an uninterrupted descent (except where level
flight is required for speed adjustment) from cruising altitude to the point
when level flight is necessary for the pilot to stabilize the aircraft on final
approach. The procedure for a fuel efficient descent is based on an altitude
loss which is most efficient for the majority of aircraft being served. This
will generally result in a descent gradient window of 250-350 feet per nautical
crossing altitudes and speed restrictions are issued verbally or are depicted on
a chart, ATC will expect the pilot to descend first to the crossing altitude and
then reduce speed. Verbal clearances for descent will normally permit an
uninterrupted descent in accordance with the procedure as described in paragraph
b above. Acceptance of a charted fuel efficient descent (Runway Profile
Descent) clearance requires the pilot to adhere to the altitudes, speeds, and
headings depicted on the charts unless otherwise instructed by ATC. PILOTS
RECEIVING A CLEARANCE FOR A FUEL EFFICIENT DESCENT ARE EXPECTED TO ADVISE ATC IF
THEY DO NOT HAVE RUNWAY PROFILE DESCENT CHARTS PUBLISHED FOR THAT AIRPORT OR ARE
UNABLE TO COMPLY WITH THE CLEARANCE.
5-4-3. Approach Control
control is responsible for controlling all instrument flight operating within
its area of responsibility. Approach control may serve one or more airfields,
and control is exercised primarily by direct pilot and controller
communications. Prior to arriving at the destination radio facility,
instructions will be received from ARTCC to contact approach control on a
b. Radar Approach Control.
radar is approved for approach control service, it is used not only for radar
approaches (Airport Surveillance Radar [ASR] and Precision Approach Radar [PAR])
but is also used to provide vectors in conjunction with published nonradar
approaches based on radio NAVAIDs (ILS, VOR, NDB, TACAN). Radar vectors can
provide course guidance and expedite traffic to the final approach course of any
established IAP or to the traffic pattern for a visual approach. Approach
control facilities that provide this radar service will operate in the following
aircraft are either cleared to an outer fix most appropriate to the route being
flown with vertical separation and, if required, given holding information or,
when radar handoffs are effected between the ARTCC and approach control, or
between two approach control facilities, aircraft are cleared to the airport or
to a fix so located that the handoff will be completed prior to the time the
aircraft reaches the fix. When radar handoffs are utilized, successive arriving
flights may be handed off to approach control with radar separation in lieu of
release to approach control, aircraft are vectored to the final approach course
(ILS, RNAV, GLS, VOR, ADF, etc.). Radar vectors and altitude or flight levels
will be issued as required for spacing and separating aircraft. Therefore,
pilots must not deviate from the headings issued by approach control.
Aircraft will normally be informed when it is necessary to vector across the
final approach course for spacing or other reasons. If approach course crossing
is imminent and the pilot has not been informed that the aircraft will be
vectored across the final approach course, the pilot should query the
pilot is not expected to turn inbound on the final approach course unless an
approach clearance has been issued. This clearance will normally be issued with
the final vector for interception of the final approach course, and the vector
will be such as to enable the pilot to establish the aircraft on the final
approach course prior to reaching the final approach fix.
the case of aircraft already inbound on the final approach course, approach
clearance will be issued prior to the aircraft reaching the final approach fix.
When established inbound on the final approach course, radar separation will be
maintained and the pilot will be expected to complete the approach utilizing the
approach aid designated in the clearance (ILS, RNAV, GLS, VOR, radio beacons,
etc.) as the primary means of navigation. Therefore, once established on the
final approach course, pilots must not deviate from it unless a clearance to do
so is received from ATC.
passing the final approach fix on final approach, aircraft are expected to
continue inbound on the final approach course and complete the approach or
effect the missed approach procedure published for that airport.
are approved for and may provide approach control services to specific airports.
The radar systems used by these centers do not provide the same precision as an
ASR/PAR used by approach control facilities and towers, and the update rate is
not as fast. Therefore, pilots may be requested to report established on the
final approach course.
aircraft are vectored to the appropriate final approach course or provide their
own navigation on published routes to it, radar service is automatically
terminated when the landing is completed or when instructed to change to
advisory frequency at uncontrolled airports, whichever occurs first.
Information on Instrument Approach
landing at airports with approach control services and where two or more IAPs
are published, pilots will be provided in advance of their arrival with the type
of approach to expect or that they may be vectored for a visual approach. This
information will be broadcast either by a controller or on ATIS. It will not be
furnished when the visibility is three miles or better and the ceiling is at or
above the highest initial approach altitude established for any low altitude IAP
for the airport.
purpose of this information is to aid the pilot in planning arrival actions;
however, it is not an ATC clearance or commitment and is subject to change.
Pilots should bear in mind that fluctuating weather, shifting winds, blocked
runway, etc., are conditions which may result in changes to approach information
previously received. It is important that pilots advise ATC immediately they are
unable to execute the approach ATC advised will be used, or if they prefer
another type of approach.
c. Aircraft destined to uncontrolled airports,
which have automated weather data with broadcast capability, should monitor the
ASOS/AWSS/AWOS frequency to ascertain the current weather for the airport. The
pilot must advise ATC when he/she has received the broadcast weather and state
1. ASOS/AWSS/AWOS should be set to provide
one-minute broadcast weather updates at uncontrolled airports that are without
weather broadcast capability by a human observer.
will consider the long line disseminated weather from an automated weather
system at an uncontrolled airport as trend and planning information only and
will rely on the pilot for current weather information for the airport. If the
pilot is unable to receive the current broadcast weather, the last long line
disseminated weather will be issued to the pilot. When receiving IFR services,
the pilot/aircraft operator is responsible for determining if weather/visibility
is adequate for approach/landing.
making an IFR approach to an airport not served by a tower or FSS, after ATC
advises “CHANGE TO ADVISORY FREQUENCY APPROVED” you should broadcast your
intentions, including the type of approach being executed, your position, and
when over the final approach fix inbound (nonprecision approach) or when over
the outer marker or fix used in lieu of the outer marker inbound (precision
approach). Continue to monitor the appropriate frequency (UNICOM, etc.) for
reports from other pilots.
Approach Procedure Charts
CFR Section 91.175(a), Instrument approaches to civil airports, requires the use
of SIAPs prescribed for the airport in 14 CFR Part 97 unless otherwise
authorized by the Administrator (including ATC). If there are military
procedures published at a civil airport, aircraft operating under 14 CFR Part 91
must use the civil procedure(s). Civil procedures are defined with “FAA” in
parenthesis; e.g., (FAA), at the top, center of the procedure chart. DOD
procedures are defined using the abbreviation of the applicable military service
in parenthesis; e.g., (USAF), (USN), (USA). 14 CFR Section 91.175(g), Military
airports, requires civil pilots flying into or out of military airports to
comply with the IAPs and takeoff and landing minimums prescribed by the
authority having jurisdiction at those airports. Unless an emergency exists,
civil aircraft operating at military airports normally require advance
authorization, commonly referred to as “Prior Permission Required” or “PPR.”
Information on obtaining a PPR for a particular military airport can be found in
the Airport/Facility Directory.
Civil aircraft may conduct practice VFR approaches using DOD instrument approach
procedures when approved by the air traffic controller.
(standard and special, civil and military) are based on joint civil and military
criteria contained in the U.S. Standard for TERPS. The design of IAPs based on
criteria contained in TERPS, takes into account the interrelationship between
airports, facilities, and the surrounding environment, terrain, obstacles, noise
sensitivity, etc. Appropriate altitudes, courses, headings, distances, and other
limitations are specified and, once approved, the procedures are published and
distributed by government and commercial cartographers as instrument approach
all IAPs are published in chart form. Radar IAPs are established where
requirements and facilities exist but they are printed in tabular form in
appropriate U.S. Government Flight Information Publications.
navigation equipment required to join and fly an instrument approach procedure
is indicated by the title of the procedure and notes on the chart.
IAPs are identified by the navigational system providing the final approach
guidance and the runway to which the approach is aligned (e.g., VOR RWY 13).
Circling only approaches are identified by the navigational system providing
final approach guidance and a letter (e.g., VOR A). More than one navigational
system separated by a slash indicates that more than one type of equipment must
be used to execute the final approach (e.g., VOR/DME RWY 31). More than one
navigational system separated by the word "or” indicates either type of
equipment may be used to execute the final approach (e.g., VOR or GPS RWY 15).
(b) In some cases, other types of navigation
systems including radar may be required to execute other portions of the
approach or to navigate to the IAF (e.g., an NDB procedure turn to an ILS, an
NDB in the missed approach, or radar required to join the procedure or identify
a fix). When radar or other equipment is required for procedure entry from the
en route environment, a note will be charted in the
planview of the approach procedure chart (e.g., RADAR REQUIRED or ADF
REQUIRED). When radar or other equipment is required on portions of the
procedure outside the final approach segment, including the missed approach, a
note will be charted in the notes box of the pilot briefing portion of
the approach chart (e.g., RADAR REQUIRED or DME REQUIRED). Notes are not charted
when VOR is required outside the final approach segment. Pilots should ensure
that the aircraft is equipped with the required NAVAID(s) in order to execute
the approach, including the missed approach.
Some military (i.e., U.S. Air Force and U.S. Navy)
IAPs have these “additional equipment required" notes charted only in the
planview of the approach procedure and do not conform to the same application
standards used by the FAA.
FAA has initiated a program to provide a new notation for LOC approaches when
charted on an ILS approach requiring other navigational aids to fly the final
approach course. The LOC minimums will be annotated with the NAVAID required
(e.g., “DME Required” or “RADAR Required”). During the transition period, ILS
approaches will still exist without the annotation.
ILS approaches having minima based on RVR are eligible for a landing minimum of
RVR 1800. Some of these approaches are to runways that have touchdown zone and
centerline lights. For many runways that do not have touchdown and centerline
lights, it is still possible to allow a landing minimum of RVR 1800. For these
runways, the normal ILS minimum of RVR 2400 can be annotated with a single or
double asterisk or the dagger symbol “†”; for example “** 696/24 200
(200/1/2).” A note is included on the chart stating “**RVR 1800 authorized with
use of FD or AP or HUD to DA.” The pilot must use the flight director, or
autopilot with an approved approach coupler, or head up display to decision
altitude or to the initiation of a missed approach. In the interest of safety,
single pilot operators should not fly approaches to 1800 RVR minimums on runways
without touchdown and centerline lights using only a flight director, unless
accompanied by the use of an autopilot with an approach coupler.
naming of multiple approaches of the same type to the same runway is also
changing. Multiple approaches with the same guidance will be annotated with an
alphabetical suffix beginning at the end of the alphabet and working backwards
for subsequent procedures (e.g., ILS Z RWY 28, ILS Y RWY 28, etc.). The existing
annotations such as ILS 2 RWY 28 or Silver ILS RWY 28 will be phased out and
replaced with the new designation. The Cat II and Cat III designations are used
to differentiate between multiple ILSs to the same runway unless there are
multiples of the same type.
(GPS) approaches to LNAV, LP, LNAV/VNAV and LPV lines of minima using WAAS and
RNAV (GPS) approaches to LNAV and LNAV/VNAV lines of minima using GPS are
charted as RNAV (GPS) RWY (Number) (e.g., RNAV (GPS) RWY 21). VOR/DME RNAV
approaches will continue to be identified as VOR/DME RNAV RWY (Number) (e.g.,
VOR/DME RNAV RWY 21). VOR/DME RNAV procedures which can be flown by GPS will be
annotated with “or GPS” (e.g., VOR/DME RNAV or GPS RWY 31).
minimums are based on the local altimeter setting for that airport, unless
annotated otherwise; e.g., Oklahoma City/Will Rogers World approaches are based
on having a Will Rogers World altimeter setting. When a different altimeter
source is required, or more than one source is authorized, it will be annotated
on the approach chart; e.g., use Sidney altimeter setting, if not received, use
Scottsbluff altimeter setting. Approach minimums may be raised when a nonlocal
altimeter source is authorized. When more than one altimeter source is
authorized, and the minima are different, they will be shown by separate lines
in the approach minima box or a note; e.g., use Manhattan altimeter setting;
when not available use Salina altimeter setting and increase all MDAs 40 feet.
When the altimeter must be obtained from a source other than air traffic a note
will indicate the source; e.g., Obtain local altimeter setting on CTAF. When the
altimeter setting(s) on which the approach is based is not available, the
approach is not authorized. Baro-VNAV must be flown using the local altimeter
setting only. Where no local altimeter is available, the LNAV/VNAV line will
still be published for use by WAAS receivers with a note that Baro-VNAV is not
authorized. When a local and at least one other altimeter setting source is
authorized and the local altimeter is not available Baro-VNAV is not authorized;
however, the LNAV/VNAV minima can still be used by WAAS receivers using the
alternate altimeter setting source.
Barometric Vertical Navigation (baro-VNAV). An RNAV system function which uses
barometric altitude information from the aircraft's altimeter to compute and
present a vertical guidance path to the pilot. The specified vertical path is
computed as a geometric path, typically computed between two waypoints or an
angle based computation from a single waypoint. Further guidance may be found in
Advisory Circular 90-105.
pilot adhering to the altitudes, flight paths, and weather minimums depicted on
the IAP chart or vectors and altitudes issued by the radar controller, is
assured of terrain and obstruction clearance and runway or airport alignment
during approach for landing.
are designed to provide an IFR descent from the en route environment to a point
where a safe landing can be made. They are prescribed and approved by
appropriate civil or military authority to ensure a safe descent during
instrument flight conditions at a specific airport. It is important that pilots
understand these procedures and their use prior to attempting to fly instrument
criteria are provided for the following types of instrument approach procedures:
Approach (PA). An instrument approach based on a navigation system that provides
course and glidepath deviation information meeting the precision standards of
ICAO Annex 10. For example, PAR, ILS, and GLS are precision approaches.
with Vertical Guidance (APV). An instrument approach based on a navigation
system that is not required to meet the precision approach standards of ICAO
Annex 10 but provides course and glidepath deviation information. For example,
Baro-VNAV, LDA with glidepath, LNAV/VNAV and LPV are APV approaches.
Approach (NPA). An instrument approach based on a navigation system which
provides course deviation information, but no glidepath deviation information.
For example, VOR, NDB and LNAV. As noted in subparagraph
i, Vertical Descent Angle (VDA) on Nonprecision Approaches, some approach
procedures may provide a Vertical Descent Angle as an aid in flying a stabilized
approach, without requiring its use in order to fly the procedure. This does not
make the approach an APV procedure, since it must still be flown to an MDA and
has not been evaluated with a glidepath.
method used to depict prescribed altitudes on instrument approach charts differs
according to techniques employed by different chart publishers. Prescribed
altitudes may be depicted in four different configurations: minimum, maximum,
mandatory, and recommended. The U.S. Government distributes charts produced by
National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) and FAA. Altitudes are depicted on
these charts in the profile view with underscore, overscore, both or none to
identify them as minimum, maximum, mandatory or recommended.
altitude will be depicted with the altitude value underscored. Aircraft are
required to maintain altitude at or above the depicted value, e.g., 3000.
altitude will be depicted with the altitude value overscored. Aircraft are
required to maintain altitude at or below the depicted value, e.g., 4000.
altitude will be depicted with the altitude value both underscored and
overscored. Aircraft are required to maintain altitude at the depicted value,
altitude will be depicted with no overscore or underscore. These altitudes are
depicted for descent planning, e.g., 6000.
1. Pilots are cautioned to adhere to
altitudes as prescribed because, in certain instances, they may be used as the
basis for vertical separation of aircraft by ATC. When a depicted altitude is
specified in the ATC clearance, that altitude becomes mandatory as defined
ILS glide slope is intended to be intercepted at the published glide slope
intercept altitude. This point marks the PFAF and is depicted by the ”lightning
bolt” symbol on U.S. Government charts. Intercepting the glide slope at this
altitude marks the beginning of the final approach segment and ensures required
obstacle clearance during descent from the glide slope intercept altitude to the
lowest published decision altitude for the approach. Interception and tracking
of the glide slope prior to the published glide slope interception altitude
does not necessarily ensure that minimum, maximum, and/or mandatory altitudes
published for any preceding fixes will be complied with during the descent. If
the pilot chooses to track the glide slope prior to the glide slope interception
altitude, they remain responsible for complying with published altitudes for any
preceding stepdown fixes encountered during the subsequent descent.
used for simultaneous (parallel) independent and simultaneous close parallel
operations procedurally require descending on the glideslope from the altitude
at which the approach clearance is issued (refer to 5-4-15
and 5-4-16). For simultaneous close parallel (PRM)
approaches, the Attention All Users Page (AAUP) may publish a note which
indicates that descending on the glideslope/glidepath meets all crossing
restrictions. However, if no such note is published, and for simultaneous
independent approaches (4300 and greater runway separation) where an AAUP is not
published, pilots are cautioned to monitor their descent on the glideslope/path
outside of the PFAF to ensure compliance with published crossing restrictions
during simultaneous operations.
parallel approach courses are less than 2500 feet apart and reduced intrail
spacing is authorized for simultaneous dependent operations, a chart note will
indicate that simultaneous operations require use of vertical guidance and that
the pilot should maintain last assigned altitude until established on glide
slope. These approaches procedurally require utilization of the ILS glide slope
for wake turbulence mitigation. Pilots should not confuse these simultaneous
dependent operations with (SOIA) simultaneous close parallel PRM approaches,
where PRM appears in the approach title.
c. Minimum Safe/Sector Altitudes (MSA) are
published for emergency use on IAP charts. For conventional navigation systems,
the MSA is normally based on the primary omnidirectional facility on which the
IAP is predicated. The MSA depiction on the approach chart contains the facility
identifier of the NAVAID used to determine the MSA altitudes. For RNAV
approaches, the MSA is based on the runway waypoint (RWY WP) for straight-in
approaches, or the airport waypoint (APT WP) for circling approaches. For GPS
approaches, the MSA center will be the missed approach waypoint (MAWP). MSAs are
expressed in feet above mean sea level and normally have a 25 NM radius;
however, this radius may be expanded to 30 NM if necessary to encompass the
airport landing surfaces. Ideally, a single sector altitude is established and
depicted on the plan view of approach charts; however, when necessary to obtain
relief from obstructions, the area may be further sectored and as many as four
MSAs established. When established, sectors may be no less than 90° in spread.
MSAs provide 1,000 feet clearance over all obstructions but do not necessarily
assure acceptable navigation signal coverage.
d. Terminal Arrival
The TAA provides a transition from the en
route structure to the terminal environment with little required pilot/air
traffic control interface for aircraft equipped with Area Navigation (RNAV)
systems. A TAA provides minimum altitudes with standard obstacle clearance when
operating within the TAA boundaries. TAAs are primarily used on RNAV approaches
but may be used on an ILS approach when RNAV is the sole means for navigation to
the IF; however, they are not normally used in areas of heavy concentration of
basic design of the RNAV procedure underlying the TAA is normally the “T” design
(also called the “Basic T”). The “T” design incorporates two IAFs plus a dual
purpose IF/IAF that functions as both an intermediate fix and an initial
approach fix. The T configuration continues from the IF/IAF to the final
approach fix (FAF) and then to the missed approach point (MAP). The two base leg
IAFs are typically aligned in a straightline perpendicular to the intermediate
course connecting at the IF/IAF. A HoldinLieuof Procedure Turn (HILPT) is
anchored at the IF/IAF and depicted on U.S. Government publications using the
“hold-in-lieu -of-PT” holding pattern symbol. When the HILPT is necessary for
course alignment and/or descent, the dual purpose IF/IAF serves as an IAF during
the entry into the pattern. Following entry into the HILPT pattern and when
flying a route or sector labeled “NoPT," the dualpurpose fix serves as an IF,
marking the beginning of the Intermediate Segment. See
FIG 5-4-1 and FIG
5-4-2 for the Basic “T” TAA configuration.
3. The standard TAA based on the “T” design
consists of three areas defined by the Initial Approach Fix (IAF) legs and the
intermediate segment course beginning at the IF/IAF. These areas are called the
straight-in, left-base, and right-base areas. (See FIG 5-4-3).
TAA area lateral boundaries are identified by magnetic courses TO the IF/IAF.
The straight-in area can be further divided into pie-shaped sectors with the
boundaries identified by magnetic courses TO the (IF/ IAF), and may contain
stepdown sections defined by arcs based on RNAV distances from the IF/IAF. (See
FIG 5-4-4). The right/left-base areas can only be subdivided using arcs
based on RNAV distances from the IAFs for those areas.
from the terminal area onto the procedure is normally accomplished via a no
procedure turn (NoPT) routing or via a course reversal maneuver. The published
procedure will be annotated “NoPT” to indicate when the course reversal is not
authorized when flying within a particular TAA sector. Otherwise, the pilot is
expected to execute the course reversal under the provisions of 14 CFR Section
91.175. The pilot may elect to use the course reversal pattern when it is not
required by the procedure, but must receive clearance from air traffic control
before beginning the procedure.
should not clear an aircraft to the left base leg or right base leg IAF within a
TAA at an intercept angle exceeding 90 degrees. Pilots must not execute the
HILPT course reversal when the sector or procedure segment is labeled “NoPT.”
may clear aircraft direct to the fix labeled IF/IAF if the course to the IF/IAF
is within the straightin sector labeled “NoPT” and the intercept angle does not
exceed 90 degrees. Pilots are expected to proceed direct to the IF/IAF and
accomplish a straightin approach. Do not execute HILPT course reversal. Pilots
are also expected to fly the straight-in approach when ATC provides radar
vectors and monitoring to the IF/IAF and issues a “straightin” approach
clearance; otherwise, the pilot is expected
to execute the HILPT course reversal.
5-4-6, Approach Clearance
rare occasions, ATC may clear the aircraft for an approach at the airport
without specifying the approach procedure by name or by a specific approach (for
example, “cleared RNAV Runway 34 approach”) without specifying a particular IAF.
In either case, the pilot should proceed direct to the IAF or to the IF/IAF
associated with the sector that the aircraft will enter the TAA and join the
approach course from that point and if required by that sector (i.e., sector is
not labeled “NoPT), complete the HILPT course reversal.
If approaching with a TO bearing that is on a sector boundary, the pilot is
expected to proceed in accordance with a “NoPT” routing unless otherwise
instructed by ATC.
published within the TAA replace the MSA altitude. However, unlike MSA altitudes
the TAA altitudes are operationally usable altitudes. These altitudes provide at
least 1,000 feet of obstacle clearance, more in mountainous areas. It is
important that the pilot knows which area of the TAA the aircraft will enter in
order to comply with the minimum altitude requirements. The pilot can determine
which area of the TAA the aircraft will enter by determining the magnetic
bearing of the aircraft TO the fix labeled IF/IAF. The bearing should then be
compared to the published lateral boundary bearings that define the TAA areas.
Do not use magnetic bearing to the rightbase or leftbase IAFs to determine
ATC clearance direct to an IAF or to the IF/IAF without an approach
clearance does not authorize a pilot to descend to a lower TAA altitude. If a
pilot desires a lower altitude without an approach clearance, request the lower
TAA altitude from ATC. Pilots not sure of the clearance should confirm their
clearance with ATC or request a specific clearance. Pilots entering the TAA with
two-way radio communications failure (14 CFR Section 91.185, IFR Operations:
Two-way Radio Communications Failure), must maintain the highest altitude
prescribed by Section 91.185(c)(2) until arriving at the appropriate IAF.
cleared for the approach, pilots may descend in the TAA sector to the minimum
altitude depicted within the defined area/subdivision, unless instructed
otherwise by air traffic control. Pilots should plan their descent within the
TAA to permit a normal descent from the IF/IAF to the FAF. In
FIG 5-4-4, pilots within the left or right-base areas
are expected to maintain a minimum altitude of 6,000 feet until within 17 NM of
the associated IAF. After crossing the 17 NM arc, descent is authorized to the
lower charted altitudes. Pilots approaching from the northwest are expected to
maintain a minimum altitude of 6,000 feet, and when within 22 NM of the IF/IAF,
descend to a minimum altitude of 2,000 feet MSL until crossing the IF/IAF.
Sectored TAA Areas
6. U.S. Government charts depict TAAs using icons
located in the plan view outside the depiction of the actual approach procedure.
(See FIG 5-4-5). Use of icons is necessary to avoid
obscuring any portion of the “T” procedure (altitudes, courses, minimum
altitudes, etc.). The icon for each TAA area will be located and oriented on the
plan view with respect to the direction of arrival to the approach procedure,
and will show all TAA minimum altitudes and sector/radius subdivisions. The IAF
for each area of the TAA is included on the icon where it appears on the
approach to help the pilot orient the icon to the approach procedure. The IAF
name and the distance of the TAA area boundary from the IAF are included on the
outside arc of the TAA area icon.
RNAV (GPS) Approach Chart
7. TAAs may be modified from the standard size and
shape to accommodate operational or ATC requirements. Some areas may be
eliminated, while the other areas are expanded. The “T” design may be modified
by the procedure designers where required by terrain or ATC considerations. For
instance, the “T” design may appear more like a regularly or irregularly shaped
“Y,” upside down “L,” or an “I.”
5-4-6 depicts a TAA without a left base leg and right base leg. In this
generalized example, pilots approaching on a bearing TO the IF/IAF from 271
clockwise to 089 are expected to execute a course reversal because the amount of
turn required at the IF/IAF exceeds 90 degrees. The term “NoPT” will be
annotated on the boundary of the TAA icon for the other portion of the TAA.
TAA with Left and Right Base Areas Eliminated
5-4-7 depicts another TAA modification that pilots may encounter. In this
generalized example, the left base area and part of the straightin area have
been eliminated. Pilots operating within the TAA between 210 clockwise to 360
bearing TO the IF/IAF are expected to proceed direct to the IF/IAF and then
execute the course reversal in order to properly align the aircraft for entry
onto the intermediate segment or to avoid an excessive descent rate. Aircraft
operating in areas from 001 clockwise to 090 bearing TO the IF/IAF are expected
to proceed direct to the right base IAF and not execute course reversal
maneuver. Aircraft cleared direct the IF/IAF by ATC in this sector will be
expected to accomplish HILTP. Aircraft operating in areas 091 clockwise to 209
bearing TO the IF/IAF are expected to proceed direct to the IF/IAF and not
execute the course reversal. These two areas are annotated “NoPT” at the TAA
boundary of the icon in these areas when displayed on the approach chart's plan
TAA with Left Base and Part of Straight-In Area Eliminated
5-4-8 depicts a TAA with right base leg and part of the straightin area
TAA with Right Base Eliminated
8. When an airway does not cross the lateral TAA
boundaries, a feeder route will be established from an airway fix or NAVAID to
the TAA boundary to provide a transition from the en route structure to the
appropriate IAF. Each feeder route will terminate at the TAA boundary and will
be aligned along a path pointing to the associated IAF. Pilots should descend to
the TAA altitude after crossing the TAA boundary and cleared for the approach by
(See FIG 5-4-9).
Examples of a TAA with Feeders from an Airway
waypoint on the “T” is assigned a pronounceable 5-letter name, except the missed
approach waypoint. These names are used for ATC communications, RNAV databases,
and aeronautical navigation products. The missed approach waypoint is assigned a
pronounceable name when it is not located at the runway threshold.
Minimum Vectoring Altitude Charts
e. Minimum Vectoring
Altitudes (MVAs) are established for use by ATC
when radar ATC is exercised. MVA charts are prepared by air traffic facilities
at locations where there are numerous different minimum IFR altitudes. Each MVA
chart has sectors large enough to accommodate vectoring of aircraft within the
sector at the MVA. Each sector boundary is at least 3 miles from the obstruction
determining the MVA. To avoid a large sector with an excessively high MVA due to
an isolated prominent obstruction, the obstruction may be enclosed in a buffer
area whose boundaries are at least 3 miles from the obstruction. This is done to
facilitate vectoring around the obstruction. (See FIG
minimum vectoring altitude in each sector provides 1,000 feet above the highest
obstacle in nonmountainous areas and 2,000 feet above the highest obstacle in
designated mountainous areas. Where lower MVAs are required in designated
mountainous areas to achieve compatibility with terminal routes or to permit
vectoring to an IAP, 1,000 feet of obstacle clearance may be authorized with the
use of Airport Surveillance Radar (ASR). The minimum vectoring altitude will
provide at least 300 feet above the floor of controlled airspace.
OROCA is an off-route altitude which provides obstruction clearance with a 1,000
foot buffer in nonmountainous terrain areas and a 2,000 foot buffer in
designated mountainous areas within the U.S. This altitude may not provide
signal coverage from ground-based navigational aids, air traffic control radar,
or communications coverage.
of differences in the areas considered for MVA, and those applied to other
minimum altitudes, and the ability to isolate specific obstacles, some MVAs may
be lower than the nonradar Minimum En Route Altitudes (MEAs), Minimum
Obstruction Clearance Altitudes (MOCAs) or other minimum altitudes depicted on
charts for a given location. While being radar vectored, IFR altitude
assignments by ATC will be at or above MVA.
Circling minimums charted on an RNAV (GPS) approach chart
may be lower than the LNAV/VNAV line of minima, but never lower than the
LNAV line of minima (straightin approach). Pilots may safely perform the
circling maneuver at the circling published line of minima if the approach and
circling maneuver is properly performed according to aircraft category and
Example of LNAV and Circling Minima Lower Than LNAV/VNAV DA.
Harrisburgh International RNAV (GPS) RWY 13
||558/24 250 (300 -
||1572 - 5 1264 (1300 -
||1180 / 24
872 (900 - 1/2)
|1180 / 40
872 (900 - 3/4)
|1180 / 2
872 (900 - 2)
|1180 / 2 1/4
872 (900 - 2 1/4)
||1180 - 1
870 (900 -1)
|1180 - 1
870 (900 - 1 1/4)
|1180 - 2 1/2
870 (900 - 2 1/2)
|1180 - 2 3/4
870 (900 - 2 3/4)
Explanation of LNAV and/or Circling Minima Lower than LNAV/VNAV DA
5-4-12 provides a visual representation of an obstacle evaluation and
calculation of LNAV MDA, Circling MDA, LNAV/VNAV DA.
1. No vertical guidance
(LNAV). A line is drawn horizontal at obstacle
height and 250 feet added for Required Obstacle Clearance (ROC). The controlling
obstacle used to determine LNAV MDA can be different than the controlling
obstacle used in determining ROC for circling MDA. Other factors may force a
number larger than 250 ft to be added to the LNAV OCS. The number is rounded up
to the next higher 20 foot increment.
2. Circling MDA.
The circling MDA will provide 300 foot obstacle clearance within the area
considered for obstacle clearance and may be lower than the LNAV/VNAV DA, but
never lower than the straight in LNAV MDA. This may occur when different
controlling obstacles are used or when other controlling factors force the LNAV
MDA to be higher than 250 feet above the LNAV OCS. In FIG
5-4-11, the required obstacle clearance for both the LNAV and Circle
resulted in the same MDA, but lower than the LNAV/VNAV DA.
FIG 5-4-12 provides an illustration of this type of
3. Vertical guidance (LNAV/VNAV). A line is drawn
horizontal at obstacle height until reaching the obstacle clearance surface
(OCS). At the OCS, a vertical line is drawn until reaching the glide path. This
is the DA for the approach. This method places the offending obstacle in front
of the LNAV/VNAV DA so it can be seen and avoided. In some situations, this may
result in the LNAV/VNAV DA being higher than the LNAV and/or Circling MDA.
h. Visual Descent
Points (VDPs) are being incorporated in
nonprecision approach procedures. The VDP is a defined point on the final
approach course of a nonprecision straight-in approach procedure from which
normal descent from the MDA to the runway touchdown point may be commenced,
provided visual reference required by 14 CFR Section 91.175(c)(3) is
established. The VDP will normally be identified by DME on VOR and LOC
procedures and by along-track distance to the next waypoint for RNAV procedures.
The VDP is identified on the profile view of the approach chart by the symbol:
are intended to provide additional guidance where they are implemented. No
special technique is required to fly a procedure with a VDP. The pilot should
not descend below the MDA prior to reaching the VDP and acquiring the necessary
not equipped to receive the VDP should fly the approach procedure as though no
VDP had been provided.
i. Visual Segment of a
Published Instrument Approach Procedure. Instrument
procedures designers perform a visual area obstruction evaluation off the
approach end of each runway authorized for instrument landing, straight-in, or
circling. Restrictions to instrument operations are imposed if penetrations of
the obstruction clearance surfaces exist. These restrictions vary based on the
severity of the penetrations, and may include increasing required visibility,
denying VDPs, prohibiting night instrument operations to the runway, and/or
provide a “Fly Visual” option to the landing surface.
isolated cases, due to procedure design peculiarities, an IAP may contain a
published visual flight path. These procedures are annotated “Fly Visual to
Airport” or “Fly Visual.” A dashed arrow indicating the visual flight path will
be included in the profile and plan views with an approximate heading and
distance to the end of the runway. The depicted ground track associated with the
visual segment should be flown as a “DR” course. When executing the visual
segment, the flight visibility must not be less than that prescribed in the IAP,
the pilot must remain clear of clouds and proceed to the airport maintaining
visual contact with the ground. Altitude on the visual flight path is at the
discretion of the pilot.
missed approach obstacle clearance is assured only if the missed approach is
commenced at the published MAP or above the DA/MDA, the pilot should have
preplanned climb out options based on aircraft performance and terrain features.
Obstacle clearance is the sole responsibility of the pilot when the approach is
continued beyond the MAP.
The FAA Administrator retains the authority to approve instrument approach
procedures where the pilot may not necessarily have one of the visual references
specified in CFR 14, part 91.175 and related rules. It is not a function of
procedure design to ensure compliance with part 91.175. The annotation “Fly
Visual to Airport” provides relief from part 91.175 requirements that the pilot
have distinctly visible and identifiable visual references prior to descent
j. Charting of Close in
Obstacles on Instrument Procedure Charts. Obstacles
that are close to the airport may be depicted in either the planview of the
instrument approach chart or the airport sketch. Obstacles are charted in only
one of the areas, based on space available and distance from the runway. These
obstacles could be in the visual segment of the instrument approach procedure.
On nonprecision approaches, these obstacles should be considered when
determining where to begin descent from the MDA (see “Pilot Operational
Considerations When Flying Nonprecision Approaches” in this paragraph).
k. Vertical Descent Angle (VDA)
on Nonprecision Approaches. FAA policy is to
publish VDAs on all nonprecision approaches. Published along with VDA is the
threshold crossing height (TCH) that was used to compute the angle. The descent
angle may be computed from either the final approach fix (FAF), or a stepdown
fix, to the runway threshold at the published TCH. A stepdown fix is only used
as the start point when an angle computed from the FAF would place the aircraft
below the stepdown fix altitude. The descent angle and TCH information are
charted on the profile view of the instrument approach chart following the fix
the angle was based on. The optimum descent angle is 3.00 degrees; and whenever
possible the approach will be designed using this angle.
1. The VDA provides the pilot with information not
previously available on nonprecision approaches. It provides a means for the
pilot to establish a stabilized descent from the FAF or stepdown fix to the MDA.
Stabilized descent is a key factor in the reduction of controlled flight into
terrain (CFIT) incidents. However, pilots should be aware that
the published angle is for information only
- it is strictly advisory in nature. There is no implicit additional obstacle
protection below the MDA. Pilots must still respect the published minimum
descent altitude (MDA) unless the visual cues stated 14 CFR Section 91.175 are
present and they can visually acquire and avoid obstacles once below the MDA.
The presence of a VDA does not guarantee obstacle protection in the visual
segment and does not change any of the requirements for flying a nonprecision
protection for the visual segment below the MDA is provided if a VDP is
published and descent below the MDA is started at or after the VDP. Protection
is also provided if a Visual Glide Slope Indicator (VGSI); e.g., VASI or PAPI,
is installed and the aircraft remains on the VGSI glide path angle from the MDA.
In either case, a chart note will indicate if the VDP or VGSI are not coincident
with the VDA. On RNAV approach charts, a small shaded arrowhead shaped symbol
(see the legend of the U.S. Terminal Procedures books, page H1) from the end of
the VDA to the runway indicates that the 34:1 visual surface is clear.
may use the published angle and estimated/actual groundspeed to find a target
rate of descent from the rate of descent table published in the back of the U.S.
Terminal Procedures Publication. This rate of descent can be flown with the
Vertical Velocity Indicator (VVI) in order to use the VDA as an aid to flying a
stabilized descent. No special equipment is required.
one of the reasons for publishing a circling only instrument landing procedure
is that the descent rate required exceeds the maximum allowed for a straight in
approach, circling only procedures may have VDAs which are considerably steeper
than the standard 3 degree angle on final. In this case, the VDA provides the
crew with information about the descent rate required to land straight in
from the FAF or step down fix to the threshold. This is not intended to imply
that landing straight ahead is recommended, or even possible, since the descent
rate may exceed the capabilities of many aircraft. The pilot must determine how
to best maneuver the aircraft within the circling obstacle clearance area in
order to land.
rare cases the LNAV minima may have a lower HAT than minima with a glide path
due to the location of the obstacles. This should be a clear indication to the
pilot that obstacles exist below the MDA which the pilot must see in order to
ensure adequate clearance. In those cases, the glide path may be treated as a
VDA and used to descend to the LNAV MDA as long as all the rules for a
nonprecision approach are applied at the MDA. However, the pilot must keep in
mind the information in this paragraph and in paragraph 5-4-5l.
l. Pilot Operational Considerations
When Flying Nonprecision Approaches. The missed
approach point (MAP) on a nonprecision approach is not designed with any
consideration to where the aircraft must begin descent to execute a safe
landing. It is developed based on terrain, obstructions, NAVAID location and
possibly air traffic considerations. Because the MAP may be located anywhere
from well prior to the runway threshold to past the opposite end of the runway,
the descent from the Minimum Descent Altitude (MDA) to the runway threshold
cannot be determined based on the MAP location. Descent from MDA at the MAP when
the MAP is located close to the threshold would require an excessively steep
descent gradient to land in the normal touchdown zone. Any turn from the final
approach course to the runway heading may also be a factor in when to begin the
are cautioned that descent to a straight-in landing from the MDA at the MAP may
be inadvisable or impossible, on a nonprecision approach, even if current
weather conditions meet the published ceiling and visibility. Aircraft speed,
height above the runway, descent rate, amount of turn and runway length are some
of the factors which must be considered by the pilot to determine if a landing
can be accomplished.
descent points (VDPs) provide pilots with a reference for the optimal location
to begin descent from the MDA, based on the designed vertical descent angle
(VDA) for the approach procedure, assuming required visual references are
available. Approaches without VDPs have not been assessed for terrain clearance
below the MDA, and may not provide a clear vertical path to the runway at the
normally expected descent angle. Therefore, pilots must be especially vigilant
when descending below the MDA at locations without VDPs. This does not
necessarily prevent flying the normal angle; it only means that obstacle
clearance in the visual segment could be less and greater care should be
exercised in looking for obstacles in the visual segment. Use of visual glide
slope indicator (VGSI) systems can aid the pilot in determining if the aircraft
is in a position to make the descent from the MDA. However, when the visibility
is close to minimums, the VGSI may not be visible at the start descent point for
a “normal” glidepath, due to its location down the runway.
3. Accordingly, pilots are advised to carefully
review approach procedures, prior to initiating the approach, to identify the
optimum position(s), and any unacceptable positions, from which a descent to
landing can be initiated (in accordance with 14 CFR Section 91.175(c)).
m. Area Navigation (RNAV)
Instrument Approach Charts. Reliance on RNAV
systems for instrument operations is becoming more commonplace as new systems
such as GPS and augmented GPS such as the Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS)
are developed and deployed. In order to support full integration of RNAV
procedures into the National Airspace System (NAS), the FAA developed a new
charting format for IAPs (See FIG 5-4-5). This format
avoids unnecessary duplication and proliferation of instrument approach charts.
The original stand alone GPS charts, titled simply “GPS,” are being converted to
the newer format as the procedures are revised. One reason for the revision is
the addition of WAAS based minima to the approach chart. The reformatted
approach chart is titled “RNAV (GPS) RWY XX.” Up to four lines of minima are
included on these charts. Ground Based Augmentation System (GBAS) Landing System
(GLS) was a placeholder for future WAAS and LAAS minima, and the minima was
always listed as N/A. The GLS minima line has now been replaced by the WAAS LPV
(Localizer Performance with Vertical Guidance) minima on most RNAV (GPS) charts.
LNAV/VNAV (lateral navigation/vertical navigation) was added to support both
WAAS electronic vertical guidance and Barometric VNAV. LPV and LNAV/VNAV are
both APV procedures as described in paragraph
5-4-5a7. The original GPS minima, titled “S-XX,” for
straight in runway XX, is retitled LNAV (lateral navigation). Circling minima
may also be published. A new type of nonprecision WAAS minima will also be
published on this chart and titled LP (localizer performance). LP will be
published in locations where vertically guided minima cannot be provided due to
terrain and obstacles and therefore, no LPV or LNAV/VNAV minima will be
published. GBAS procedures are published on a separate chart and the GLS minima
line is to be used only for GBAS. ATC clearance for the RNAV procedure
authorizes a properly certified pilot to utilize any minimums for which the
aircraft is certified (for example, a WAAS equipped aircraft utilizes the LPV or
LP minima but a GPS only aircraft may not). The RNAV chart includes information
formatted for quick reference by the pilot or flight crew at the top of the
chart. This portion of the chart, developed based on a study by the Department
of Transportation, Volpe National Transportation System Center, is commonly
referred to as the pilot briefing.
minima lines are:
(a) GLS. “GLS”
is the acronym for GBAS Landing System. The U.S. version of GBAS has
traditionally been referred to as LAAS. The worldwide community has adopted GBAS
as the official term for this type of navigation system. To coincide with
international terminology, the FAA is also adopting the term GBAS to be
consistent with the international community. This line was originally published
as a placeholder for both WAAS and LAAS minima and marked as N/A since no minima
was published. As the concepts for GBAS and WAAS procedure publication have
evolved, GLS will now be used only for GBAS minima, which will be on a separate
approach chart. Most RNAV(GPS) approach charts have had the GLS minima line
replaced by a WAAS LPV line of minima.
“LPV” is the acronym for localizer performance with
vertical guidance. RNAV (GPS) approaches to LPV lines of minima take advantage
of the improved accuracy of WAAS lateral and vertical guidance to provide an
approach that is very similar to a Category I Instrument Landing System (ILS).
The approach to LPV line of minima is designed for angular guidance with
increasing sensitivity as the aircraft gets closer to the runway. The
sensitivities are nearly identical to those of the ILS at similar distances.
This was done intentionally to allow the skills required to proficiently fly an
ILS to readily transfer to flying RNAV (GPS) approaches to the LPV line of
minima. Just as with an ILS, the LPV has vertical guidance and is flown to a DA.
Aircraft can fly this minima line with a statement in the Aircraft Flight Manual
that the installed equipment supports LPV approaches. This includes Class 3 and
4 TSO-C146 GPS/WAAS equipment.
(c) LNAV/VNAV. LNAV/VNAV identifies APV minimums
developed to accommodate an RNAV IAP with vertical guidance, usually provided by
approach certified Baro-VNAV, but with lateral and vertical integrity limits
larger than a precision approach or LPV. LNAV stands for Lateral Navigation;
VNAV stands for Vertical Navigation. This minima line can be flown by aircraft
with a statement in the Aircraft Flight Manual that the installed equipment
supports GPS approaches and has an approach-approved barometric VNAV, or if the
aircraft has been demonstrated to support LNAV/VNAV approaches. This includes
Class 2, 3 and 4 TSO-C146 GPS/WAAS equipment. Aircraft using LNAV/VNAV minimums
will descend to landing via an internally generated descent path based on
satellite or other approach approved VNAV systems. Since electronic vertical
guidance is provided, the minima will be published as a DA. Other navigation
systems may be specifically authorized to use this line of minima. (See Section
A, Terms/Landing Minima Data, of the U.S. Terminal Procedures books.)
“LP” is the acronym for localizer performance. Approaches
to LP lines of minima take advantage of the improved accuracy of WAAS to provide
approaches, with lateral guidance and angular guidance. Angular guidance does
not refer to a glideslope angle but rather to the increased lateral sensitivity
as the aircraft gets closer to the runway, similar to localizer approaches.
However, the LP line of minima is a Minimum Descent Altitude (MDA) rather than a
DA (H). Procedures with LP lines of minima will not be published with another
approach that contains approved vertical guidance (LNAV/VNAV or LPV). It is
possible to have LP and LNAV published on the same approach chart but LP will
only be published if it provides lower minima than an LNAV line of minima. LP is
not a fail-down mode for LPV. LP will only be published if terrain,
obstructions, or some other reason prevent publishing a vertically guided
procedure. WAAS avionics may provide GNSS-based advisory vertical guidance
during an approach to an LP line of minima. Barometric altimeter information
remains the primary altitude reference for complying with any altitude
restrictions. WAAS equipment may not support LP, even if it supports LPV, if it
was approved before TSO-C145b and TSO-C146b. Receivers approved under previous
TSOs may require an upgrade by the manufacturer in order to be used to fly to LP
minima. Receivers approved for LP must have a statement in the approved Flight
Manual or Supplemental Flight Manual including LP as one of the approved
This minima is for lateral navigation only, and the
approach minimum altitude will be published as a minimum descent altitude (MDA).
LNAV provides the same level of service as the present GPS stand alone
approaches. LNAV minimums support the following navigation systems: WAAS, when
the navigation solution will not support vertical navigation; and, GPS
navigation systems which are presently authorized to conduct GPS approaches.
GPS receivers approved for approach operations in accordance with: AC 20-138,
Airworthiness Approval of Positioning and Navigation Systems, qualify for this
minima. WAAS navigation equipment must be approved in accordance with the
requirements specified in TSO-C145() or TSO-C146() and installed in accordance
with Advisory Circular AC 20-138.
systems may be authorized to utilize these approaches. See the description in
Section A of the U.S. Terminal Procedures books for details. Operational
approval must also be obtained for Baro-VNAV systems to operate to the LNAV/VNAV
minimums. Baro-VNAV may not be authorized on some approaches due to other
factors, such as no local altimeter source being available. Baro-VNAV is not
authorized on LPV procedures. Pilots are directed to their local Flight
Standards District Office (FSDO) for additional information.
RNAV and Baro-VNAV systems must have a manufacturer supplied electronic database
which must include the waypoints, altitudes, and vertical data for the procedure
to be flown. The system must be able to retrieve the procedure by name from the
aircraft navigation database, not just as a manually entered series of
3. ILS or RNAV (GPS) charts.
RNAV (GPS) charts will also contain an ILS line of minima to make use of the ILS
precision final in conjunction with the RNAV GPS capabilities for the portions
of the procedure prior to the final approach segment and for the missed
approach. Obstacle clearance for the portions of the procedure other than the
final approach segment is still based on GPS criteria.
Some GPS receiver installations inhibit GPS navigation whenever
ANY ILS frequency is tuned. Pilots flying aircraft
with receivers installed in this manner must wait until they are on the
intermediate segment of the procedure prior to the PFAF (PFAF is the active
waypoint) to tune the ILS frequency and must tune the ILS back to a VOR
frequency in order to fly the GPS based missed approach.
(b) Charting. There
are charting differences between ILS, RNAV (GPS), and GLS approaches.
LAAS procedure is titled “GLS RWY XX” on the approach chart.
VDB provides information to the airborne receiver where the guidance is
LAAS procedure is identified by a four alpha-numeric character field referred to
as the RPI or approach ID and is similar to the IDENT feature of the ILS.
RPI is charted.
RNAV(GPS) approach charts have had the GLS (NA) minima line replaced by an LPV
line of minima.
the concepts for LAAS and WAAS procedure publication have evolved, GLS will now
be used only for LAAS minima, which will be on a separate approach chart.
4. Required Navigation
are advised to refer to the “TERMS/LANDING MINIMUMS DATA” (Section A) of the
U.S. Government Terminal Procedures books for aircraft approach eligibility
requirements by specific RNP level requirements.
aircraft have RNP approval in their AFM without a GPS sensor. The lowest level
of sensors that the FAA will support for RNP service is DME/DME. However,
necessary DME signal may not be available at the airport of intended operations.
For those locations having an RNAV chart published with LNAV/VNAV minimums, a
procedure note may be provided such as “DME/DME RNP-0.3 NA.” This means that RNP
aircraft dependent on DME/DME to achieve RNP-0.3 are not authorized to conduct
this approach. Where DME facility availability is a factor, the note may read
“DME/DME RNP-0.3 Authorized; ABC and XYZ Required.” This means that ABC and XYZ
facilities have been determined by flight inspection to be required in the
navigation solution to assure RNP-0.3. VOR/DME updating must not be used for
5. Chart Terminology
Altitude (DA) replaces the familiar term Decision Height (DH). DA conforms to
the international convention where altitudes relate to MSL and heights relate to
AGL. DA will eventually be published for other types of instrument approach
procedures with vertical guidance, as well. DA indicates to the pilot that the
published descent profile is flown to the DA (MSL), where a missed approach will
be initiated if visual references for landing are not established. Obstacle
clearance is provided to allow a momentary descent below DA while transitioning
from the final approach to the missed approach. The aircraft is expected to
follow the missed instructions while continuing along the published final
approach course to at least the published runway threshold waypoint or MAP (if
not at the threshold) before executing any turns.
Descent Altitude (MDA) has been in use for many years, and will continue to be
used for the LNAV only and circling procedures.
Crossing Height (TCH) has been traditionally used in “precision” approaches as
the height of the glide slope above threshold. With publication of LNAV/VNAV
minimums and RNAV descent angles, including graphically depicted descent
profiles, TCH also applies to the height of the “descent angle,” or glidepath,
at the threshold. Unless otherwise required for larger type aircraft which may
be using the IAP, the typical TCH is 30 to 50 feet.
MINIMA FORMAT will also change slightly.
line of minima on the RNAV IAP is titled to reflect the level of service
available; e.g., GLS, LPV, LNAV/VNAV, LP, and LNAV. CIRCLING minima will also be
(b) The minima title box indicates the nature of
the minimum altitude for the IAP. For example:
will be published next to the minima line title for
minimums supporting vertical guidance such as for GLS, LPV or LNAV/VNAV.
will be published as the minima line on approaches with lateral guidance only,
LNAV, or LP. Descent below the MDA must meet the conditions stated in 14 CFR
two or more systems, such as LPV and LNAV/VNAV, share the same minima, each line
of minima will be displayed separately.
Symbology changed slightly to include:
(a) Descent Profile.
The published descent profile and a graphical
depiction of the vertical path to the runway will be shown. Graphical depiction
of the RNAV vertical guidance will differ from the traditional depiction of an
ILS glide slope (feather) through the use of a shorter vertical track beginning
at the decision altitude.
is FAA policy to design IAPs with minimum altitudes established at
fixes/waypoints to achieve optimum stabilized (constant rate) descents within
each procedure segment. This design can enhance the safety of the operations and
contribute toward reduction in the occurrence of controlled flight into terrain
(CFIT) accidents. Additionally, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB)
recently emphasized that pilots could benefit from publication of the
appropriate IAP descent angle for a stabilized descent on final approach. The
RNAV IAP format includes the descent angle to the hundredth of a degree; e.g.,
3.00 degrees. The angle will be provided in the graphically depicted descent
stabilized approach may be performed by reference to vertical navigation
information provided by WAAS or LNAV/VNAV systems; or for LNAV-only systems, by
the pilot determining the appropriate aircraft attitude/groundspeed combination
to attain a constant rate descent which best emulates the published angle. To
aid the pilot, U.S. Government Terminal Procedures Publication charts publish an
expanded Rate of Descent Table on the inside of the back hard cover for use in
planning and executing precision descents under known or approximate groundspeed
(b) Visual Descent
Point (VDP). A VDP will be published on most RNAV
IAPs. VDPs apply only to aircraft utilizing LP or LNAV minima, not LPV or
(c) Missed Approach
Symbology. In order to make missed approach
guidance more readily understood, a method has been developed to display missed
approach guidance in the profile view through the use of quick reference icons.
Due to limited space in the profile area, only four or fewer icons can be shown.
However, the icons may not provide representation of the entire missed approach
procedure. The entire set of textual missed approach instructions are provided
at the top of the approach chart in the pilot briefing. (See
(d) Waypoints. All
RNAV or GPS stand-alone IAPs are flown using data pertaining to the particular
IAP obtained from an onboard database, including the sequence of all WPs used
for the approach and missed approach, except that step down waypoints may not be
included in some TSO-C129 receiver databases. Included in the database, in most
receivers, is coding that informs the navigation system of which WPs are
fly-over (FO) or fly-by (FB). The navigation system may provide guidance
appropriately - including leading the turn prior to a fly-by WP; or causing
overflight of a fly-over WP. Where the navigation system does not provide such
guidance, the pilot must accomplish the turn lead or waypoint overflight
manually. Chart symbology for the FB WP provides pilot awareness of expected
actions. Refer to the legend of the U.S. Terminal Procedures books.
are described in paragraph 5-4-5d, Terminal Arrival Area
(TAA). When published, the RNAV chart depicts the TAA areas through the use of
“icons” representing each TAA area associated with the RNAV procedure (See
FIG 5-4-5). These icons are depicted in the plan view of the approach chart,
generally arranged on the chart in accordance with their position relative to
the aircraft's arrival from the en route structure. The WP, to which navigation
is appropriate and expected within each specific TAA area, will be named and
depicted on the associated TAA icon. Each depicted named WP is the IAF for
arrivals from within that area. TAAs may not be used on all RNAV procedures
because of airspace congestion or other reasons.
(f) Hot and Cold Temperature Limitations. A minimum
and maximum temperature limitation is published on procedures which authorize
Baro-VNAV operation. These temperatures represent the airport temperature above
or below which Baro-VNAV is not authorized to LNAV/VNAV minimums. As an example,
the limitation will read: “Uncompensated Baro-VNAV NA below -8°C (+18°F) or
above 47°C (117°F).” This information will be found in the upper left hand box
of the pilot briefing. When the temperature is above the high temperature or
below the low temperature limit, Baro-VNAV may be used to provide a stabilized
descent to the LNAV MDA; however, extra caution should be used in the visual
segment to ensure a vertical correction is not required. If the VGSI is aligned
with the published glidepath, and the aircraft instruments indicate on
glidepath, an above or below glidepath indication on the VGSI may indicate that
temperature error is causing deviations to the glidepath. These deviations
should be considered if the approach is continued below the MDA.
Many systems which apply Baro-VNAV temperature compensation only correct for
cold temperature. In this case, the high temperature limitation still applies.
Also, temperature compensation may require activation by maintenance personnel
during installation in order to be functional, even though the system has the
feature. Some systems may have a temperature correction capability, but correct
the Baro-altimeter all the time, rather than just on the final, which would
create conflicts with other aircraft if the feature were activated. Pilots
should be aware of compensation capabilities of the system prior to disregarding
the temperature limitations.
Temperature limitations do not apply to flying the LNAV/VNAV line of minima
using approach certified WAAS receivers when LPV or LNAV/VNAV are annunciated to
(g) WAAS Channel
Number/Approach ID. The WAAS Channel Number is an
optional equipment capability that allows the use of a 5-digit number to select
a specific final approach segment without using the menu method. The Approach ID
is an airport unique 4-character combination for verifying the selection and
extraction of the correct final approach segment information from the aircraft
database. It is similar to the ILS ident, but displayed visually rather than
aurally. The Approach ID consists of the letter W for WAAS, the runway number,
and a letter other than L, C or R, which could be confused with Left, Center and
Right, e.g., W35A. Approach IDs are assigned in the order that WAAS approaches
are built to that runway number at that airport. The WAAS Channel Number and
Approach ID are displayed in the upper left corner of the approach procedure
locations where outages of WAAS vertical guidance may occur daily due to initial
system limitations, a negative W symbol ()
will be placed on RNAV (GPS) approach charts. Many of these outages will be very
short in duration, but may result in the disruption of the vertical portion of
the approach. The
symbol indicates that NOTAMs or Air Traffic advisories are not provided for
outages which occur in the WAAS LNAV/VNAV or LPV vertical service. Use LNAV or
circling minima for flight planning at these locations, whether as a destination
or alternate. For flight operations at these locations, when the WAAS avionics
indicate that LNAV/VNAV or LPV service is available, then vertical guidance may
be used to complete the approach using the displayed level of service. Should an
outage occur during the procedure, reversion to LNAV minima may be required. As
the WAAS coverage is expanded, the
will be removed.
Properly trained and approved, as required, TSOC145() and TSOC146() equipped
users (WAAS users) with and using approved baroVNAV equipment may plan for
LNAV/VNAV DA at an alternate airport. Specifically authorized WAAS users with
and using approved baroVNAV equipment may also plan for RNP 0.3 DA at the
alternate airport as long as the pilot has verified RNP availability through an
approved prediction program.
5-4-6. Approach Clearance
aircraft which has been cleared to a holding fix and subsequently “cleared . . .
approach” has not received new routing. Even though clearance for the approach
may have been issued prior to the aircraft reaching the holding fix, ATC would
expect the pilot to proceed via the holding fix (his/her last assigned route),
and the feeder route associated with that fix (if a feeder route is published on
the approach chart) to the initial approach fix (IAF) to commence the approach.
WHEN CLEARED FOR THE APPROACH, THE PUBLISHED OFF
AIRWAY (FEEDER) ROUTES THAT LEAD FROM THE EN ROUTE STRUCTURE TO THE IAF ARE PART
OF THE APPROACH CLEARANCE.
b. If a feeder route to an IAF begins at a fix
located along the route of flight prior to reaching the holding fix, and
clearance for an approach is issued, a pilot should commence the approach via
the published feeder route; i.e., the aircraft would not be expected to overfly
the feeder route and return to it. The pilot is expected to commence the
approach in a similar manner at the IAF, if the IAF for the procedure is located
along the route of flight to the holding fix.
a route of flight directly to the initial approach fix is desired, it should be
so stated by the controller with phraseology to include the words “direct . . .
,” “proceed direct” or a similar phrase which the pilot can interpret without
question. When uncertain of the clearance, immediately query ATC as to what
route of flight is desired.
name of an instrument approach, as published, is used to identify the approach,
even though a component of the approach aid, such as the glideslope on an
Instrument Landing System, is inoperative or unreliable. The controller will use
the name of the approach as published, but must advise the aircraft at the time
an approach clearance is issued that the inoperative or unreliable approach aid
component is unusable, except when the title of the published approach
procedures otherwise allows; for example, ILS Rwy 05 or LOC Rwy 05.
following applies to aircraft on radar vectors and/or cleared “direct to” in
conjunction with an approach clearance:
the last altitude assigned by ATC until the aircraft is established on a
published segment of a transition route, or approach procedure segment, or other
published route, for which a lower altitude is published on the chart. If
already on an established route, or approach or arrival segment, you may descend
to whatever minimum altitude is listed for that route or segment.
on the vector heading until intercepting the next published ground track
applicable to the approach clearance.
reaching the final approach fix via the published segments, the pilot may
continue on approach to a landing.
proceeding to an IAF with a published course reversal (procedure turn or
holdinlieu of PT pattern), except when cleared for a straight in approach by
ATC, the pilot must execute the procedure turn/holdinlieu of PT, and complete
cleared to an IAF/IF via a NoPT route, or no procedure turn/holdinlieu of PT
is published, continue with the published approach.
addition to the above, RNAV aircraft may be issued a clearance direct to the
IAF/IF at intercept angles not greater than 90 degrees for both conventional and
RNAV instrument approaches. Controllers may issue a heading or a course direct
to a fix between the IF and FAF at intercept angles not greater than 30 degrees
for both conventional and RNAV instrument approaches. In all cases, controllers
will assign altitudes that ensure obstacle clearance and will permit a normal
descent to the FAF. When clearing aircraft direct to the IF, ATC will radar
monitor the aircraft until the IF and will advise the pilot to expect clearance
direct to the IF at least 5 miles from the fix. ATC must issue a straightin
approach clearance when clearing an aircraft direct to an IAF/IF with a
procedure turn or hold-in-lieu of a procedure turn, and ATC does not want the
aircraft to execute the course reversal.
Refer to 14 CFR 91.175 (i).
aircraft may be issued a clearance direct to the FAF that is also charted as an
IAF, in which case the pilot is expected to execute the depicted procedure turn
or holdinlieu of procedure turn. ATC will not issue a straightin approach
clearance. If the pilot desires a straightin approach, they must request
vectors to the final approach course outside of the FAF or fly a published
“NoPT” route. When visual approaches are in use, ATC may clear an aircraft
direct to the FAF.
1. In anticipation
of a clearance by ATC to any fix published on an instrument approach procedure,
pilots of RNAV aircraft are advised to select an appropriate IAF or feeder fix
when loading an instrument approach procedure into the RNAV system.
of “VectorstoFinal” or “Vectors” option for an instrument approach may prevent
approach fixes located outside of the FAF from being loaded into an RNAV system.
Therefore, the selection of these options is discouraged due to increased
workload for pilots to reprogram the navigation system.
f. An RF leg is defined as a constant radius
circular path around a defined turn center that starts and terminates at a fix.
An RF leg may be published as part of a procedure. Since not all aircraft have
the capability to fly these leg types, pilots are responsible for knowing if
they can conduct an RNAV approach with an RF leg. Requirements for RF legs will
be indicated on the approach chart in the notes section or at the applicable
initial approach fix. Controllers will clear RNAVequipped aircraft for
instrument approach procedures containing RF legs:
published transitions, or
a heading or course direct to the IAF when a holdinlieu of procedure turn is
published, and the pilot will execute the procedure, or
a heading or course direct to the IAF/IF, at intercept angles no greater than 90
degrees and the distance to the waypoint beginning the RF leg is 6NM or greater,
radar monitoring, on a heading or course direct to any waypoint 3 miles or more
from the waypoint that begins the RF leg, at an intercept angle not greater than
30 degrees. (See FIG 5-4-13.)
will not clear aircraft direct to THIRD because that waypoint begins the RF leg,
and aircraft cannot be vectored or cleared to TURNN or vectored to intercept the
approach segment at any point between THIRD and FORTH because this is the RF
can clear Aircraft 1 direct to SCOND because the distance to THIRD, where the RF
leg begins is 3NM or greater and the intercept angle will be 30 degrees or less
and is radar monitored. Controllers can clear Aircraft 2 direct to FIRST because
the intercept angle is 90 degrees or less, and the distance from FIRST to THIRD
is 6NM or greater.
5-4-7. Instrument Approach
approach category means a grouping of aircraft based on a speed of VREF,
if specified, or if VREF is not specified, 1.3 VSO at the
maximum certified landing weight. VREF, VSO, and the
maximum certified landing weight are those values as established for the
aircraft by the certification authority of the country of registry. A pilot must
use the minima corresponding to the category determined during certification or
higher. Helicopters may use Category A minima. If it is necessary to operate at
a speed in excess of the upper limit of the speed range for an aircraft's
category, the minimums for the higher category must be used. For example, an
airplane which fits into Category B, but is circling to land at a speed of 145
knots, must use the approach Category D minimums. As an additional example, a
Category A airplane (or helicopter) which is operating at 130 knots on a
straight-in approach must use the approach Category C minimums. See the
following category limits:
A: Speed less than 91 knots.
B: Speed 91 knots or more but less than 121 knots.
C: Speed 121 knots or more but less than 141 knots.
D: Speed 141 knots or more but less than 166 knots.
E: Speed 166 knots or more.
VREF in the above definition refers to
the speed used in establishing the approved landing distance under the
airworthiness regulations constituting the type certification basis of the
airplane, regardless of whether that speed for a particular airplane is 1.3 VSO,
1.23 VSR, or some higher speed required for airplane controllability.
This speed, at the maximum certificated landing weight, determines the lowest
applicable approach category for all approaches regardless of actual landing
operating on an unpublished route or while being radar vectored, the pilot, when
an approach clearance is received, must, in addition to complying with the
minimum altitudes for IFR operations (14 CFR Section 91.177), maintain the last
assigned altitude unless a different altitude is assigned by ATC, or until the
aircraft is established on a segment of a published route or IAP. After the
aircraft is so established, published altitudes apply to descent within each
succeeding route or approach segment unless a different altitude is assigned by
ATC. Notwithstanding this pilot responsibility, for aircraft operating on
unpublished routes or while being radar vectored, ATC will, except when
conducting a radar approach, issue an IFR approach clearance only after the
aircraft is established on a segment of a published route or IAP, or assign an
altitude to maintain until the aircraft is established on a segment of a
published route or instrument approach procedure. For this purpose, the
procedure turn of a published IAP must not be considered a segment of that IAP
until the aircraft reaches the initial fix or navigation facility upon which the
procedure turn is predicated.
Cross Redding VOR at or above five thousand, cleared VOR runway three four
Five miles from outer marker, turn right heading three three zero, maintain two
thousand until established on the localizer, cleared ILS runway three six
The altitude assigned will assure IFR obstruction clearance from the point at
which the approach clearance is issued until established on a segment of a
published route or IAP. If uncertain of the meaning of the clearance,
immediately request clarification from ATC.
IAPs, using various navigation and approach aids may be authorized for an
airport. ATC may advise that a particular approach procedure is being used,
primarily to expedite traffic. If issued a clearance that specifies a particular
approach procedure, notify ATC immediately if a different one is desired. In
this event it may be necessary for ATC to withhold clearance for the different
approach until such time as traffic conditions permit. However, a pilot involved
in an emergency situation will be given priority. If the pilot is not familiar
with the specific approach procedure, ATC should be advised and they will
provide detailed information on the execution of the procedure.
AIM, Advance Information on Instrument Approach, Paragraph
name of an instrument approach, as published, is used to identify the approach,
even though a component of the approach aid, such as the glideslope on an
Instrument Landing System, is inoperative or unreliable. The controller will use
the name of the approach as published, but must advise the aircraft at the time
an approach clearance is issued that the inoperative or unreliable approach aid
component is unusable, except when the title of the published approach
procedures otherwise allows, for example, ILS or LOC.
when being radar vectored to the final approach course, when cleared for a
specifically prescribed IAP; i.e., “cleared ILS runway one niner approach” or
when “cleared approach” i.e., execution of any procedure prescribed for the
airport, pilots must execute the entire procedure commencing at an IAF or an
associated feeder route as described on the IAP chart unless an appropriate new
or revised ATC clearance is received, or the IFR flight plan is canceled.
planning flights to locations which are private airfields or which have
instrument approach procedures based on private navigation aids should obtain
approval from the owner. In addition, the pilot must be authorized by the FAA to
fly special instrument approach procedures associated with private navigation
aids (see paragraph 5-4-8). Owners of navigation aids that
are not for public use may elect to turn off the signal for whatever reason they
may have; e.g., maintenance, energy conservation, etc. Air traffic controllers
are not required to question pilots to determine if they have permission to land
at a private airfield or to use procedures based on privately owned navigation
aids, and they may not know the status of the navigation aid. Controllers
presume a pilot has obtained approval from the owner and the FAA for use of
special instrument approach procedures and is aware of any details of the
procedure if an IFR flight plan was filed to that airport.
should not rely on radar to identify a fix unless the fix is indicated as
“RADAR” on the IAP. Pilots may request radar identification of an OM, but the
controller may not be able to provide the service due either to workload or not
having the fix on the video map.
a missed approach is required, advise ATC and include the reason (unless
initiated by ATC). Comply with the missed approach instructions for the
instrument approach procedure being executed, unless otherwise directed by ATC.
AIM, Missed Approach, Paragraph 5-4-21.
AIM, Missed Approach, Paragraph
5-4-8. Special Instrument Approach
Instrument Approach Procedure (IAP) charts
reflect the criteria associated with the U.S. Standard for Terminal Instrument
[Approach] Procedures (TERPs), which prescribes standardized methods for use in
developing IAPs. Standard IAPs are published in the Federal Register (FR) in
accordance with Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 97, and are
available for use by appropriately qualified pilots operating properly equipped
and airworthy aircraft in accordance with operating rules and procedures
acceptable to the FAA. Special IAPs are also developed using TERPS but are not
given public notice in the FR. The FAA authorizes only certain individual pilots
and/or pilots in individual organizations to use special IAPs, and may require
additional crew training and/or aircraft equipment or performance, and may also
require the use of landing aids, communications, or weather services not
available for public use. Additionally, IAPs that service private use airports
or heliports are generally special IAPs.
5-4-9. Procedure Turn and Hold-in-lieu of
procedure turn is the maneuver prescribed when it is necessary to reverse
direction to establish the aircraft inbound on an intermediate or final approach
course. The procedure turn or hold-in-lieu-of-PT is a required maneuver when it
is depicted on the approach chart, unless cleared by ATC for a straight-in
approach. Additionally, the procedure turn or hold-in-lieu-of-PT is not
permitted when the symbol “No PT” is depicted on the initial segment being used,
when a RADAR VECTOR to the final approach course is provided, or when conducting
a timed approach from a holding fix. The altitude prescribed for the procedure
turn is a minimum altitude until the aircraft is established on the inbound
course. The maneuver must be completed within the distance specified in the
profile view. For a hold-in-lieu-of-PT, the holding pattern direction must be
flown as depicted and the specified leg length/timing must not be exceeded.
The pilot may elect to use the procedure turn or hold-in-lieu-of-PT when it is
not required by the procedure, but must first receive an amended clearance from
ATC. If the pilot is uncertain whether the ATC clearance intends for a procedure
turn to be conducted or to allow for a straight-in approach, the pilot must
immediately request clarification from ATC (14 CFR Section 91.123).
U.S. Government charts, a barbed arrow indicates the maneuvering side of the
outbound course on which the procedure turn is made. Headings are provided for
course reversal using the 45 degree type procedure turn. However, the point at
which the turn may be commenced and the type and rate of turn is left to the
discretion of the pilot (limited by the charted remain within xx NM distance).
Some of the options are the 45 degree procedure turn, the racetrack pattern, the
teardrop procedure turn, or the 80 degree $ 260 degree course reversal.
Racetrack entries should be conducted on the maneuvering side where the majority
of protected airspace resides. If an entry places the pilot on the
non-maneuvering side of the PT, correction to intercept the outbound course
ensures remaining within protected airspace. Some procedure turns are specified
by procedural track. These turns must be flown exactly as depicted.
to the procedure turn (PT) completion altitude from the PT fix altitude (when
one has been published or assigned by ATC) must not begin until crossing over
the PT fix or abeam and proceeding outbound. Some procedures contain a note in
the chart profile view that says “Maintain (altitude) or above until established
outbound for procedure turn” (See FIG 5-4-14). Newer
procedures will simply depict an “at or above” altitude at the PT fix without a
chart note (See FIG 5-4-15). Both are there to ensure
required obstacle clearance is provided in the procedure turn entry zone (See
FIG 5-4-16). Absence of a chart note or specified minimum altitude adjacent
to the PT fix is an indication that descent to the procedure turn altitude can
commence immediately upon crossing over the PT fix, regardless of the direction
of flight. This is because the minimum altitudes in the PT entry zone and the PT
maneuvering zone are the same.
Example of an RNAV Approach with RF Leg
the approach procedure involves a procedure turn, a maximum speed of not greater
than 200 knots (IAS) should be observed from first overheading the course
reversal IAF through the procedure turn maneuver to ensure containment within
the obstruction clearance area. Pilots should begin the outbound turn
immediately after passing the procedure turn fix. The procedure turn maneuver
must be executed within the distance specified in the profile view. The normal
procedure turn distance is 10 miles. This may be reduced to a minimum of 5 miles
where only Category A or helicopter aircraft are to be operated or increased to
as much as 15 miles to accommodate high performance aircraft.
teardrop procedure or penetration turn may be specified in some procedures for a
required course reversal. The teardrop procedure consists of departure from an
initial approach fix on an outbound course followed by a turn toward and
intercepting the inbound course at or prior to the intermediate fix or point.
Its purpose is to permit an aircraft to reverse direction and lose considerable
altitude within reasonably limited airspace. Where no fix is available to mark
the beginning of the intermediate segment, it must be assumed to commence at a
point 10 miles prior to the final approach fix. When the facility is located on
the airport, an aircraft is considered to be on final approach upon completion
of the penetration turn. However, the final approach segment begins on the final
approach course 10 miles from the facility.
5. A holding pattern in lieu of procedure turn may
be specified for course reversal in some procedures. In such cases, the holding
pattern is established over an intermediate fix or a final approach fix. The
holding pattern distance or time specified in the profile view must be observed.
For a hold-in-lieu-of-PT, the holding pattern direction must be flown as
depicted and the specified leg length/timing must not be exceeded. Maximum
holding airspeed limitations as set forth for all holding patterns apply. The
holding pattern maneuver is completed when the aircraft is established on the
inbound course after executing the appropriate entry. If cleared for the
approach prior to returning to the holding fix, and the aircraft is at the
prescribed altitude, additional circuits of the holding pattern are not
necessary nor expected by ATC. If pilots elect to make additional circuits to
lose excessive altitude or to become better established on course, it is their
responsibility to so advise ATC upon receipt of their approach clearance.
Some approach charts have an arrival holding pattern depicted at the IAF using a
“thin line” holding symbol. It is charted where holding is frequently required
prior to starting the approach procedure so that detailed holding instructions
are not required. The arrival holding pattern is not authorized unless assigned
by Air Traffic Control. Holding at the same fix may also be depicted on the
enroute chart. A hold-in-lieu of procedure turn is depicted by a “thick line”
symbol, and is part of the instrument approach procedure as described in
paragraph 5-4-9. (See U. S. Terminal Procedures booklets
page E1 for both examples.)
procedure turn is not required when an approach can be made directly from a
specified intermediate fix to the final approach fix. In such cases, the term
“NoPT” is used with the appropriate course and altitude to denote that the
procedure turn is not required. If a procedure turn is desired, and when cleared
to do so by ATC, descent below the procedure turn altitude should not be made
until the aircraft is established on the inbound course, since some NoPT
altitudes may be lower than the procedure turn altitudes.
b. Limitations on
the case of a radar initial approach to a final approach fix or position, or a
timed approach from a holding fix, or where the procedure specifies NoPT, no
pilot may make a procedure turn unless, when final approach clearance is
received, the pilot so advises ATC and a clearance is received to execute a
a teardrop procedure turn is depicted and a course reversal is required, this
type turn must be executed.
a holding pattern replaces a procedure turn, the holding pattern must be
followed, except when RADAR VECTORING is provided or when NoPT is shown on the
approach course. The recommended entry procedures will ensure the aircraft
remains within the holding pattern's protected airspace. As in the procedure
turn, the descent from the minimum holding pattern altitude to the final
approach fix altitude (when lower) may not commence until the aircraft is
established on the inbound course. Where a holding pattern is established
in-lieu-of a procedure turn, the maximum holding pattern airspeeds apply.
AIM, Holding, Paragraph
absence of the procedure turn barb in the plan view indicates that a procedure
turn is not authorized for that procedure.
5-4-10. Timed Approaches
from a Holding Fix
a. TIMED APPROACHES
may be conducted when the following conditions are met:
control tower is in operation at the airport where the approaches are conducted.
communications are maintained between the pilot and the center or approach
controller until the pilot is instructed to contact the tower.
more than one missed approach procedure is available, none require a course
only one missed approach procedure is available, the following conditions are
reversal is not required; and,
ceiling and visibility are equal to or greater than the highest prescribed
circling minimums for the IAP.
cleared for the approach, pilots must not execute a procedure turn. (14 CFR
the controller will not specifically state that “timed approaches are in
progress,” the assigning of a time to depart the final approach fix inbound
(nonprecision approach) or the outer marker or fix used in lieu of the outer
marker inbound (precision approach) is indicative that timed approach procedures
are being utilized, or in lieu of holding, the controller may use radar vectors
to the Final Approach Course to establish a mileage interval between aircraft
that will ensure the appropriate time sequence between the final approach
fix/outer marker or fix used in lieu of the outer marker and the airport.
c. Each pilot in an approach sequence will be given
advance notice as to the time they should leave the holding point on approach to
the airport. When a time to leave the holding point has been received, the pilot
should adjust the flight path to leave the fix as closely as possible to the
designated time. (See FIG 5-4-17.)
Timed Approaches from a Holding Fix
At 12:03 local time, in the example shown, a pilot holding, receives
instructions to leave the fix inbound at 12:07. These instructions are received
just as the pilot has completed turn at the outbound end of the holding pattern
and is proceeding inbound towards the fix. Arriving back over the fix, the pilot
notes that the time is 12:04 and that there are 3 minutes to lose in order to
leave the fix at the assigned time. Since the time remaining is more than two
minutes, the pilot plans to fly a race track pattern rather than a 360 degree
turn, which would use up 2 minutes. The turns at the ends of the race track
pattern will consume approximately 2 minutes. Three minutes to go, minus 2
minutes required for the turns, leaves 1 minute for level flight. Since two
portions of level flight will be required to get back to the fix inbound, the
pilot halves the 1 minute remaining and plans to fly level for 30 seconds
outbound before starting the turn back to the fix on final approach. If the
winds were negligible at flight altitude, this procedure would bring the pilot
inbound across the fix precisely at the specified time of 12:07. However, if
expecting headwind on final approach, the pilot should shorten the 30 second
outbound course somewhat, knowing that the wind will carry the aircraft away
from the fix faster while outbound and decrease the ground speed while returning
to the fix. On the other hand, compensating for a tailwind on final approach,
the pilot should lengthen the calculated 30 second outbound heading somewhat,
knowing that the wind would tend to hold the aircraft closer to the fix while
outbound and increase the ground speed while returning to the fix.
5-4-11. Radar Approaches
only airborne radio equipment required for radar approaches is a functioning
radio transmitter and receiver. The radar controller vectors the aircraft to
align it with the runway centerline. The controller continues the vectors to
keep the aircraft on course until the pilot can complete the approach and
landing by visual reference to the surface. There are two types of radar
approaches: Precision (PAR) and Surveillance (ASR).
radar approach may be given to any aircraft upon request and may be offered to
pilots of aircraft in distress or to expedite traffic, however, an ASR might not
be approved unless there is an ATC operational requirement, or in an unusual or
emergency situation. Acceptance of a PAR or ASR by a pilot does not waive the
prescribed weather minimums for the airport or for the particular aircraft
operator concerned. The decision to make a radar approach when the reported
weather is below the established minimums rests with the pilot.
and ASR minimums are published on separate pages in the FAA Terminal Procedures
1. A PRECISION APPROACH
(PAR) is one in which a controller provides highly
accurate navigational guidance in azimuth and elevation to a pilot. Pilots are
given headings to fly, to direct them to, and keep their aircraft aligned with
the extended centerline of the landing runway. They are told to anticipate
glidepath interception approximately 10 to 30 seconds before it occurs and when
to start descent. The published Decision Height will be given only if the pilot
requests it. If the aircraft is observed to deviate above or below the
glidepath, the pilot is given the relative amount of deviation by use of terms
“slightly” or “well” and is expected to adjust the aircraft's rate of
descent/ascent to return to the glidepath. Trend information is also issued with
respect to the elevation of the aircraft and may be modified by the terms
“rapidly” and “slowly”; e.g., “well above glidepath, coming down rapidly.” Range
from touchdown is given at least once each mile. If an aircraft is observed by
the controller to proceed outside of specified safety zone limits in azimuth
and/or elevation and continue to operate outside these prescribed limits, the
pilot will be directed to execute a missed approach or to fly a specified course
unless the pilot has the runway environment (runway, approach lights, etc.) in
sight. Navigational guidance in azimuth and elevation is provided the pilot
until the aircraft reaches the published Decision Height (DH). Advisory course
and glidepath information is furnished by the controller until the aircraft
passes over the landing threshold, at which point the pilot is advised of any
deviation from the runway centerline. Radar service is automatically terminated
upon completion of the approach.
2. A SURVEILLANCE
APPROACH (ASR) is one
in which a controller provides navigational guidance in azimuth only. The pilot
is furnished headings to fly to align the aircraft with the extended centerline
of the landing runway. Since the radar information used for a surveillance
approach is considerably less precise than that used for a precision approach,
the accuracy of the approach will not be as great and higher minimums will
apply. Guidance in elevation is not possible but the pilot will be advised when
to commence descent to the Minimum Descent Altitude (MDA) or, if appropriate, to
an intermediate step-down fix Minimum Crossing Altitude and subsequently to the
prescribed MDA. In addition, the pilot will be advised of the location of the
Missed Approach Point (MAP) prescribed for the procedure and the aircraft's
position each mile on final from the runway, airport or heliport or MAP, as
appropriate. If requested by the pilot, recommended altitudes will be issued at
each mile, based on the descent gradient established for the procedure, down to
the last mile that is at or above the MDA. Normally, navigational guidance will
be provided until the aircraft reaches the MAP. Controllers will terminate
guidance and instruct the pilot to execute a missed approach unless at the MAP
the pilot has the runway, airport or heliport in sight or, for a helicopter
point-in-space approach, the prescribed visual reference with the surface is
established. Also, if, at any time during the approach the controller considers
that safe guidance for the remainder of the approach cannot be provided, the
controller will terminate guidance and instruct the pilot to execute a missed
approach. Similarly, guidance termination and missed approach will be effected
upon pilot request and, for civil aircraft only, controllers may terminate
guidance when the pilot reports the runway, airport/heliport or visual surface
route (point-in-space approach) in sight or otherwise indicates that continued
guidance is not required. Radar service is automatically terminated at the
completion of a radar approach.
1. The published
MDA for straight-in approaches will be issued to the pilot before beginning
descent. When a surveillance approach will terminate in a circle-to-land
maneuver, the pilot must furnish the aircraft approach category to the
controller. The controller will then provide the pilot with the appropriate MDA.
APPROACHES ARE NOT AVAILABLE WHEN AN ATC FACILITY IS USING CENRAP.
3. A NO-GYRO APPROACH
is available to a pilot under radar control who experiences circumstances
wherein the directional gyro or other stabilized compass is inoperative or
inaccurate. When this occurs, the pilot should so advise ATC and request a
No-Gyro vector or approach. Pilots of aircraft not equipped with a directional
gyro or other stabilized compass who desire radar handling may also request a
No-Gyro vector or approach. The pilot should make all turns at standard rate and
should execute the turn immediately upon receipt of instructions. For example,
“TURN RIGHT,” “STOP TURN.” When a surveillance or precision approach is made,
the pilot will be advised after the aircraft has been turned onto final approach
to make turns at half standard rate.
5-4-12. Radar Monitoring
of Instrument Approaches
facilities operated by the FAA and the military services at some joint-use
(civil and military) and military installations monitor aircraft on instrument
approaches and issue radar advisories to the pilot when weather is below VFR
minimums (1,000 and 3), at night, or when requested by a pilot. This service is
provided only when the PAR Final Approach Course coincides with the final
approach of the navigational aid and only during the operational hours of the
PAR. The radar advisories serve only as a secondary aid since the pilot has
selected the navigational aid as the primary aid for the approach.
to starting final approach, the pilot will be advised of the frequency on which
the advisories will be transmitted. If, for any reason, radar advisories cannot
be furnished, the pilot will be so advised.
information, derived from radar observations, includes information on:
the final approach fix inbound (nonprecision approach) or passing the outer
marker or fix used in lieu of the outer marker inbound (precision approach).
At this point, the pilot may be requested to report sighting the approach lights
or the runway.
advisories with respect to elevation and/or azimuth radar position and movement
will be provided.
Whenever the aircraft nears the PAR safety limit, the pilot will be advised that
the aircraft is well above or below the glidepath or well left or right of
course. Glidepath information is given only to those aircraft executing a
precision approach, such as ILS. Altitude information is not transmitted to
aircraft executing other than precision approaches because the descent portions
of these approaches generally do not coincide with the depicted PAR glidepath.
3. If, after repeated advisories, the aircraft
proceeds outside the PAR safety limit or if a radical deviation is observed, the
pilot will be advised to execute a missed approach unless the prescribed visual
reference with the surface is established.
service is automatically terminated upon completion of the approach.
Approaches to Parallel Runways
procedures permit ILS/RNAV/GLS instrument approach operations to dual or triple
parallel runway configurations. ILS/RNAV/GLS approaches to parallel runways are
grouped into three classes: Simultaneous Parallel Dependent Approaches;
Simultaneous (Parallel) Independent Approaches; and Simultaneous Close Parallel
PRM Approaches. (See FIG 5-4-18.) RNAV approach
procedures that are approved for simultaneous operations require GPS as the
sensor for position updating. VOR/DME, DME/DME and IRU RNAV updating is not
authorized. The classification of a parallel runway approach procedure is
dependent on adjacent parallel runway centerline separation, ATC procedures, and
airport ATC radar monitoring and communications capabilities. At some airports
one or more parallel localizer courses may be offset up to 3 degrees. ILS
approaches with offset localizer configurations result in loss of Category
II/III capabilities and an increase in decision altitude/height (50').
approach operations demand heightened pilot situational awareness. A thorough
Approach Procedure Chart review should be conducted with, as a minimum, emphasis
on the following approach chart information: name and number of the approach,
localizer frequency, inbound localizer/azimuth course, glide slope intercept
altitude, glideslope crossing altitude at the final approach fix, decision
height, missed approach instructions, special notes/procedures, and the assigned
runway location/proximity to adjacent runways. Pilots will be advised that
simultaneous dependent approaches, simultaneous approaches, or simultaneous
close parallel PRM approaches are in use. This information may be provided
through the ATIS.
close proximity of adjacent aircraft conducting simultaneous (parallel)
independent approaches and simultaneous close parallel PRM approaches mandates
strict pilot compliance with all ATC clearances. ATC assigned airspeeds,
altitudes, and headings must be complied with in a timely manner. Autopilot
coupled approaches require pilot knowledge of procedures necessary to comply
with ATC instructions. Simultaneous (parallel) independent approaches and
simultaneous close parallel PRM approaches necessitate precise approach course
tracking to minimize final monitor controller intervention, and unwanted No
Transgression Zone (NTZ) penetration. In the unlikely event of a breakout, ATC
will not assign altitudes lower than the minimum vectoring altitude. Pilots
should notify ATC immediately if there is a degradation of aircraft or
radio discipline is mandatory during simultaneous (parallel) independent and
simultaneous close parallel PRM approach operations. This includes an alert
listening watch and the avoidance of lengthy, unnecessary radio transmissions.
Attention must be given to proper call sign usage to prevent the inadvertent
execution of clearances intended for another aircraft. Use of abbreviated call
signs must be avoided to preclude confusion of aircraft with similar sounding
call signs. Pilots must be alert to unusually long periods of silence or any
unusual background sounds in their radio receiver. A stuck microphone may block
the issuance of ATC instructions on the tower frequency by the final monitor
controller during simultaneous (parallel) independent and simultaneous close
parallel PRM approaches. In the case of PRM approaches, the use of a second
frequency by the monitor controller mitigates the “stuck mike” or other blockage
on the tower frequency.
Section 2, Radio Communications Phraseology and Techniques, gives additional
of Traffic Collision Avoidance Systems (TCAS) provides an additional element of
safety to parallel approach operations. Pilots should follow recommended TCAS
operating procedures presented in approved flight manuals, original equipment
manufacturer recommendations, professional newsletters, and FAA publications.
Simultaneous Parallel Approaches
(Parallel Runways and Approach Courses and Offset Approach Courses between 2.5
and 3.0 degrees)
5-4-14. Simultaneous (Parallel)
Dependent ILS/RNAV/GLS Approaches
(See FIG 5-4-19.)
Simultaneous (Parallel) Dependent Approaches
(parallel) dependent approaches are an ATC procedure permitting approaches to
airports having parallel runway centerlines separated by between 2,500 feet and
9,000 feet. Integral parts of a total system are ILS, radar, communications, ATC
procedures, and required airborne equipment. RNAV equipment in the aircraft or
GLS equipment on the ground and in the aircraft may replace the required
airborne and ground based ILS equipment.
simultaneous (parallel) dependent approach differs from a simultaneous
(parallel) independent approach in that, the minimum distance between parallel
runway centerlines is reduced; there is no requirement for radar monitoring or
advisories; and a staggered separation of aircraft on the adjacent final course
minimum of 1.5 NM radar separation (diagonal) is required between successive
aircraft on the adjacent final approach course when runway centerlines are at
least 2,500 feet but no more than 4,300 feet apart. When runway centerlines are
more than 4,300 feet but no more than 9,000 feet apart a minimum of 2 NM
diagonal radar separation is provided. Aircraft on the same final approach
course course within 10 NM of the runway end are provided a minimum of 3 NM
radar separation, reduced to 2.5 NM in certain circumstances. In addition, a
minimum of 1,000 feet vertical or a minimum of three miles radar separation is
provided between aircraft during turn on to the parallel final approach course.
parallel approaches are in progress, pilots are informed by ATC or via the ATIS
that approaches to both runways are in use. The charted IAP also notes which
runways may be used simultaneously. In addition, the radar controller will have
the interphone capability of communicating with the tower controller where
separation responsibility has not been delegated to the tower.
ATC will specifically identify these operations as being dependent when
advertised on the ATIS.
Simultaneous dependent ILS runway 19R and 19L in progress.
e. At certain airports, simultaneous (parallel)
dependent approaches are permitted to runways spaced less than 2500 feet apart.
In this case, ATC will stagger aircraft on the parallel approaches with the
leaders always arriving on the same runway. The trailing aircraft is permitted
diagonal separation of not less than 1.5 NM, instead of the single runway
separation normally utilized for runways spaced less than 2500 feet apart. For
wake turbulence mitigation reasons: a) 1.5 NM spacing is only permitted when the
leader is either in the large or small wake turbulence category, and b) all
aircraft must descend on the glideslope from the altitude at which they were
cleared for the approach during these operations. When 1.5 NM reduced separation
is authorized, the IAP briefing strip which indicates that simultaneous
operations require the use of vertical guidance and that the pilot should
maintain last assigned altitude until intercepting the glideslope. No special
pilot training is required to participate in these operations.
Either simultaneous dependent ILS approaches or SOIA LDA PRM and ILS PRM
approaches may be conducted to these runways depending on weather conditions and
traffic volume. Pilots should use caution so as not to confuse these operations.
Use SOIA procedures only when the ATIS advertises PRM approaches are in use,
refer to AIM paragraph 5416. SFO is the only airport where both procedures are
5-4-15. Simultaneous (Parallel)
Independent ILS/RNAV/GLS Approaches
(See FIG 5-4-20.)
Simultaneous (Parallel) Independent ILS/RNAV/GLS Approaches
a. System. An
approach system permitting simultaneous ILS/RNAV/GLS approaches to parallel
runways with centerlines separated by 4,300 to 9,000 feet (9,200' for airports
above 5,000') utilizing NTZ final monitor controllers. Simultaneous (parallel)
independent approaches require NTZ radar monitoring to ensure separation between
aircraft on the adjacent parallel approach course. Aircraft position is tracked
by final monitor controllers who will issue instructions to aircraft observed
deviating from the assigned final approach course. Staggered radar separation
procedures are not utilized. Integral parts of a total system are ILS, radar,
communications, ATC procedures, and required airborne equipment. The Approach
Procedure Chart permitting simultaneous approaches will contain a note
identifying the other runways or approaches that may be used simultaneously.
When advised that simultaneous approaches are in progress, pilots must advise
approach control immediately of malfunctioning or inoperative receivers, or if a
simultaneous approach is not desired.
ATC does not use the word independent or parallel when advertising these
operations on the ATIS.
Simultaneous ILS 24L and ILS 24R approaches in progress.
Services. These services are is provided for each simultaneous (parallel)
turn on to parallel final approach, aircraft will be provided 3 miles radar
separation or a minimum of 1,000 feet vertical separation. The assigned altitude
must be maintained until intercepting the glide path, unless cleared otherwise
by ATC. Aircraft will not be vectored to intercept the final approach course at
an angle greater than thirty degrees.
2. The final monitor controller will have the
capability of overriding the tower controller on the tower frequency.
will be instructed to contact the tower frequency prior to the point where NTZ
observed to overshoot the turn-on or to continue on a track which will penetrate
the NTZ will be instructed to return to the correct final approach course
immediately. The final monitor controller may cancel the approach clearance, and
issue missed approach or other instructions to the deviating aircraft.
“(Aircraft call sign) YOU HAVE CROSSED THE FINAL APPROACH COURSE. TURN
(left/right) IMMEDIATELY AND RETURN TO THE FINAL APPROACH COURSE,”
“(aircraft call sign) TURN (left/right) AND RETURN TO THE FINAL APPROACH
a deviating aircraft fails to respond to such instructions or is observed
penetrating the NTZ, the aircraft on the adjacent final approach course (if
threatened), will be issued a breakout instruction.
“TRAFFIC ALERT (aircraft call sign) TURN (left/right) IMMEDIATELY HEADING
(degrees), (climb/descend) AND MAINTAIN (altitude).”
monitoring will automatically be terminated when visual separation is applied,
the aircraft reports the approach lights or runway in sight, or the aircraft is
1 mile or less from the runway threshold. Final monitor controllers will not
advise pilots when radar monitoring is terminated.
Simultaneous independent approaches conducted to runways spaced greater than
9,000 feet (or 9,200' at airports above 5,000') do not require an NTZ. However,
from a pilot's perspective, the same alerts relative to deviating aircraft will
be provided by ATC as are provided when an NTZ is being monitored. Pilots may
not be aware as to whether or not an NTZ is being monitored.
5-4-16. Simultaneous Close Parallel ILS
PRM/RNAV PRM/GLS PRM Approaches and Simultaneous Offset Instrument Approaches
(See FIG 5-4-21.)
Simultaneous Close Parallel
is an acronym for the high update rate Precision Runway Monitor surveillance
system which is required to monitor the No Transgression Zone (NTZ) for specific
parallel runway separations used to conduct simultaneous close parallel
approaches. PRM is also pubpublished in the title as part of the approach name
for IAPs used to conduct Simultaneous Close Parallel approaches. “PRM” alerts
pilots that specific airborne equipment, training, and procedures are
Because Simultaneous Close Parallel PRM Approaches are independent, the NTZ and
normal operating zone (NOZ) airspace between the final approach courses is
monitored by two monitor controllers, one for each approach course. The NTZ
monitoring system consists of high resolution ATC radar displays, automated
tracking software which provides monitor controllers with aircraft
identification, position, speed and a tensecond projected position, as well as
visual and aural NTZ penetration alerts. A PRM high update rate surveillance
sensor is a component of this system only for specific runway spacing.
Additional procedures for simultaneous independent approaches are described in
Paragraph 5-4-15, Simultaneous (Parallel) Independent
ILS/RNAV/GLS Approaches. Simultaneous Close Parallel PRM approaches, whether
conducted utilizing a high update rate PRM surveillance sensor or not, must meet
all of the following requirements: pilot training, PRM in the approach title,
NTZ monitoring utilizing a final monitor aid, publication on an AAUP, and use of
a secondary PRM communication frequency.
Simultaneous close parallel ILS PRM approaches are depicted on a separate
Approach Procedure Chart titled ILS PRM Rwy XXX (Simultaneous Close Parallel).
ATC does not use the word “independent” when advertising these operations on the
Simultaneous ILS PRM 33L and ILS PRM 33R approaches in progress.
the discussion below, RNAV PRM and GLS PRM approaches may be substituted for one
or both of the ILS PRM approaches in a simultaneous close parallel operation,
or, in the case of SOIA, may be substituted for an ILS PRM and/or LDA PRM
approach. RNAV PRM or GLS PRM approaches utilize the same applicable chart
notations and the same fixes, crossing altitudes, and missed approach procedures
as the ILS PRM or LDA PRM approach it overlays. Vertical guidance for an RNAV
PRM or GLS PRM approach must be used when substituting for an ILS PRM or LDA PRM
PRM and GLS PRM approaches may be substituted for:
or both of the ILS PRM approaches in a simultaneous close parallel operation, or
ILS PRM and/or LDA PRM approach in a Simultaneous Offset Instrument Approach
pilot may request to fly the RNAV PRM or GLS PRM approach in lieu of either the
ILS PRM and LDA PRM approaches. ATIS may advertise RNAV or GLS PRM approaches to
the affected runway or runways in the event of the loss of ground based NAVAIDS.
The Attention All Users Page will address ILS PRM, LDA PRM, RNAV PRM, or GLS PRM
approaches as applicable. In the remainder of this section:
RNAV PRM or GLS PRM approaches may be substituted when reference is made to an
ILS, LOC, or SOIA offset LDA PRM approach.
RNAV PRM or GLS PRM Missed Approach Point (MAP) in SOIA operations may be
substituted when reference is made to the LDA PRM MAP.
Management System (FMS) coding of the offset RNAV PRM and GLS PRM approaches in
a SOIA operation is different than other RNAV and GLS approach coding in that it
does not match the initial procedure published on the charted IAP. In the SOIA
design of the offset approach, the lateral course terminates at the fictitious
threshold point (FTP), which is an extension of the final approach course to a
point near the runway threshold. The FTP is designated in the approach coding as
the MAP so that vertical guidance is available to the pilot to the runway
threshold, just as vertical guidance is provided by the LDA glideslope. RNAV and
GLS lateral guidance, in contrast, is discontinued at the charted MAP and
replaced by visual maneuvering to accomplish runway alignment in the same manner
as LDA course guidance is discontinued at the MAP.
As a result of this RNAV and GLS approach coding, when executing a missed
approach at and after passing the charted MAP, a heading must initially be
flown, either handflown or using autopilot “heading mode,” before engaging
LNAV. If the pilot engages LNAV immediately, the aircraft will continue to track
toward the FTP instead of commencing a turn toward the missed approach holding
fix. Notes on the charted IAP and in the AAUP make specific reference to this
Because the SOIA LDA approach is coded in the FMS in same manner as the RNAV GPS
approach, this same procedure should be utilized when conducting the LDA PRM
missed approach at or inside of the LDA MAP.
Some FMSs do not code waypoints inside of the FAF as part of the approach.
Therefore, the depicted MAP on the charted IAP may not be included in the offset
approach coding. Pilots utilizing those FMSs may identify the location of the
waypoint by noting its distance from the FTP as published on the charted IAP. In
those same FMSs, the straightin SOIA approach will not display a waypoint
inside the PFAF. The same procedures may be utilized to identify the uncoded
waypoint. In this case, the location is determined by noting its distance from
the runway waypoint as published on the charted IAP.
Because the FTP is coded as the MAP, the FMS map display will depict the initial
missed approach course as beginning at the FTP. This depiction does not match
the charted initial missed approach procedure on the IAP. Pilots are reminded
that charted IAP guidance is to be followed, not the map display. Once the
aircraft completes the initial turn when commencing a missed approach, the
remainder of the procedure coding is standard and can be utilized as with any
b. Simultaneous Offset Instrument Approach (SOIA).
is an acronym for Simultaneous Offset Instrument Approach, a procedure used to
conduct simultaneous approaches to runways spaced less than 3,000 feet, but at
least 750 feet apart. The SOIA procedure utilizes an ILS PRM approach to one
runway and an offset Localizer Type Directional Aid (LDA) PRM approach with
glide slope to the adjacent runway. In SOIA operations, aircraft are paired,
with the aircraft conducting the ILS PRM approach always positioned slightly
ahead of the aircraft conducting the LDA PRM approach.
ILS PRM approach plates used in SOIA operations are identical to other ILS PRM
approach plates, with an additional note, which provides the separation between
the two runways used for simultaneous approaches. The LDA PRM approach plate
displays the required notations for closely spaced approaches as well as
depicting the visual segment of the approach.
monitor the SOIA ILS PRM and LDA PRM approaches in exactly the same manner as is
done for ILS PRM approaches. The procedures and system requirements for SOIA ILS
PRM and LDA PRM approaches are identical with those used for simultaneous close
parallel ILS PRM approaches until near the LDA PRM approach missed approach
point (MAP) -- where visual acquisition of the ILS aircraft by the aircraft
conducting the LDA PRM approach occurs. Since the ILS PRM and LDA PRM approaches
are identical except for the visual segment in the SOIA concept, an
understanding of the procedures for conducting ILS PRM approaches is essential
before conducting a SOIA ILS PRM or LDA PRM operation.
SOIA, the approach course separation (instead of the runway separation) meets
established close parallel approach criteria. Refer to FIG
5-4-22 for the generic SOIA approach geometry. A visual segment of the LDA
PRM approach is established between the LDA MAP and the runway threshold.
Aircraft transition in visual conditions from the LDA course, beginning at the
LDA MAP, to align with the runway and can be stabilized by 500 feet above ground
level (AGL) on the extended runway centerline. Aircraft will be “paired” in SOIA
operations, with the ILS aircraft ahead of the LDA aircraft prior to the LDA
aircraft reaching the LDA MAP. A cloud ceiling for the approach is established
so that the LDA aircraft has nominally 30 seconds to acquire the leading ILS
aircraft prior to the LDA aircraft reaching the LDA MAP. If visual acquisition
is not accomplished, a missed approach must be executed at the LDA MAP.
c. Requirements and
Besides system requirements and pilot
procedures as identified in subparagraph a1 above, all pilots must have
completed special training before accepting a clearance to conduct ILS PRM or
LDA PRM Simultaneous Close Parallel Approaches.
1. Pilot Training
Requirement. Pilots must complete
special pilot training, as
outlined below, before accepting a clearance for a simultaneous close parallel
ILS PRM or LDA PRM approach.
operations under 14 CFR Parts 121, 129, and 135, pilots must comply with
FAA-approved company training as identified in their Operations Specifications.
Training, at a minimum, must require pilots to view the FAA video “ILS PRM AND
SOIA APPROACHES: INFORMATION FOR AIR CARRIER PILOTS.” Refer to
or search key words
FAA PRM for additional information and to view or
download the video.
operations under Part 91:
operating transport category
aircraft must be familiar with PRM operations as contained
in this section of the AIM. In addition, pilots
operating transport category aircraft must view the
FAA video “ILS PRM AND SOIA APPROACHES: INFORMATION FOR AIR CARRIER PILOTS.”
or search key words FAA PRM
for additional information and to view or download the video.
transport category aircraft
must be familiar with PRM and SOIA operations as contained in this section of
the AIM. The FAA strongly recommends that pilots
not involved in
transport category aircraft operations view the FAA
video, “ILS PRM AND SOIA APPROACHES: INFORMATION FOR GENERAL AVIATION PILOTS.”
or search key words FAA PRM
for additional information and to view or download the video.
Either simultaneous dependent ILS approaches, or SOIA LDA PRM and ILS PRM
approaches may be conducted depending on weather conditions and traffic volume.
Pilots should use caution so as not to confuse these operations. Use SOIA
procedures only when the ATIS advertises PRM approaches are in use. For
simultaneous (parallel) dependent approaches see paragraph
5-4-14. SFO is the only airport where both procedures are
2. ATC Directed
Breakout. An ATC directed “breakout” is defined as
a vector off the ILS or LDA approach course of a threatened aircraft in response
to another aircraft penetrating the NTZ.
3. Dual Communications.
The aircraft flying the ILS PRM or LDA PRM approach
must have the capability of enabling the pilot/s to listen to two communications
4. Radar Services.
turn on to parallel final approach, aircraft will be provided 3 miles radar
separation or a minimum or 1,000 feet vertical separation. The assigned altitude
must be maintained until intercepting the glide path, unless cleared otherwise
by ATC. Aircraft will not be vectored to intercept the final approach course at
an angle greater than thirty degrees.
final monitor controller will have the capability of overriding the tower
controller on the tower frequency.
will be instructed to contact the tower frequency prior to the point where NTZ
monitoring begins. Pilots will begin monitoring the secondary PRM frequency at
that time (see Dual VHF Communications Required below).
ensure separation is maintained, and in order to avoid an imminent situation
during simultaneous close parallel ILS PRM or SOIA ILS PRM and LDA PRM
approaches, pilots must immediately comply with PRM monitor controller
observed to overshoot the turn or to continue on a track which will penetrate
the NTZ will be instructed to return to the correct final approach course
immediately. The final monitor controller may cancel the approach clearance, and
issue missed approach or other instructions to the deviating aircraft.
“(Aircraft call sign) YOU HAVE CROSSED THE FINAL APPROACH COURSE. TURN
(left/right) IMMEDIATELY AND RETURN TO THE LOCALIZER FINAL APPROACH COURSE,”
“(aircraft call sign) TURN (left/right) AND RETURN TO THE LOCALIZER FINAL
a deviating aircraft fails to respond to such instructions or is observed
penetrating the NTZ, the aircraft on the adjacent final approach course (if
threatened) will be issued a breakout instruction.
“TRAFFIC ALERT (aircraft call sign) TURN (left/right) IMMEDIATELY HEADING
(degrees), (climb/descend) AND MAINTAIN (altitude).”
monitoring will automatically be terminated when visual separation is applied or
the aircraft reports the approach lights or runway in sight. Otherwise,
monitoring continues to at least .5 NM beyond the furthest DER. Final monitor
controllers will not
advise pilots when radar monitoring is terminated.
airports that conduct PRM operations, (ILS PRM, and the case of airports where
SOIAs are conducted, ILS PRM and LDA PRM approaches) the Attention All Users
Page (AAUP) informs pilots who are unable to participate that they will be
afforded appropriate arrival services as operational conditions permit and must
notify the controlling ARTCC as soon as practical, but at least 100 miles from
SOIA Approach Geometry
approach point is a design point along the extended centerline of the
intended landing runway on the glide slope/glide path at 500 feet above
the runway threshold elevation. It is used to verify a sufficient
distance is provided for the visual maneuver after the offset course
approach DA to permit the pilots to conform to approved, stabilized
approach criteria. The SAP is not published on the IAP.
Offset Course DA
The point along
the LDA, or other offset course, where the course separation with the
adjacent ILS, or other straightin course, reaches the minimum distance
permitted to conduct closely spaced approaches. Typically that minimum
distance will be 3,000 feet without the use of high update radar; with
high update radar, course separation of less than 3,000 ft may be used
when validated by a safety study. The altitude of the glide slope/glide
path at that point determines the offset course approach decision
altitude and is where the NTZ terminates. Maneuvering inside the DA is
done in visual conditions.
determined by the SOIA design tool, formed by the extension of the
straight segment of the calculated flight track (between the offset
course MAP/DA and the SAP) and the extended runway centerline. The size
of the angle is dependent on the aircraft approach categories (Category
D or only selected categories/speeds) that are authorized to use the
offset course approach and the spacing between the runways.
Distance from the
offset course approach DA to runway threshold in statute mile.
The aircraft on
the offset course approach must see the runwaylanding environment and,
if ATC has advised that traffic on the straightin approach is a factor,
the offset course approach aircraft must visually acquire the
straightin approach aircraft and report it in sight to ATC prior to
reaching the DA for the offset course approach.
The Clear of
Clouds point is the position on the offset final approach course where
aircraft first operate in visual meteorological conditions below the
ceiling, when the actual weather conditions are at, or near, the minimum
ceiling for SOIA operations. Ceiling is defined by the Aeronautical
d. Attention All Users Page (AAUP). Multiple PRM
approach charts at the same airport have a single AAUP associated with them that
must be referred to in preparation for conducting the approach.
Bullet points are published which summarize
the PRM procedures which apply to each approach and must be briefed before
conducting a PRM approach. The following information may be summarized in the
bullet points or published in more detail in the Expanded Procedures section of
the AAUP. Briefing on the Expanded Procedures is optional.
When the ATIS broadcast advises ILS PRM approaches are in
progress (or ILS PRM and LDA PRM approaches in the case of SOIA), pilots should
brief to fly the ILS PRM or LDA PRM approach. If later advised to expect the ILS
or LDA approach (should one be published), the ILS PRM or LDA PRM chart may be
used after completing the following briefing items. The pilot may also request
to fly the RNAV (GPS) PRM in lieu of either the ILS PRM or LDAPRM approach. In
the event of the loss of ground based NAVAIDS, the ATIS may advertise RNAV (GPS)
PRM approaches to the effected runway or runways.
and missed approach procedures are unchanged.
Monitor frequency no longer required.
may assign a lower altitude for glide slope intercept.
In the case of the LDA PRM approach, this briefing procedure only applies if an
LDADME approach is also published.
In the case of the SOIA ILS PRM and LDA PRM
procedure, the AAUP describes the weather conditions in which simultaneous
approaches are authorized:
Simultaneous approach weather minimums are
X,XXX feet (ceiling), x miles (visibility).
2. Dual VHF
Communications Required. To avoid blocked
transmissions, each runway will have two frequencies, a primary and a PRM
monitor frequency. The tower controller will transmit on both frequencies. The
monitor controller's transmissions, if needed, will override both frequencies.
Pilots will ONLY transmit on the tower controller's frequency, but will listen
to both frequencies. Select the PRM monitor frequency audio only when instructed
by ATC to contact the tower. The volume levels should be set about the same on
both radios so that the pilots will be able to hear transmissions on at least
one frequency if the other is blocked. Site specific procedures take precedence
over the general information presented in this paragraph. Refer to the AAUP for
applicable procedures at specific airports.
At SFO, pilots conducting SOIA operations select the monitor frequency audio
when communicating with the final radar controller. In this special case, the
monitor controller's transmissions, if required, override the final controller's
Breakouts differ from other types of abandoned approaches
in that they can happen anywhere and unexpectedly. Pilots directed by ATC to
break off an approach must assume that an aircraft is blundering toward them and
a breakout must be initiated immediately.
(a) Handfly breakouts.
All breakouts are to be handflown to ensure the
maneuver is accomplished in the shortest amount of time.
(b) ATC Directed
“Breakouts.” ATC directed breakouts will consist of
a turn and a climb or descent. Pilots must always initiate the breakout in
response to an air traffic controller's instruction. Controllers will give a
descending breakout only when there are no other reasonable options available,
but in no case will the descent be below the minimum vectoring altitude (MVA)
which provides at least 1,000 feet required obstruction clearance. The AAUP may
provide the MVA in the final approach segment as X,XXX feet at (Name) Airport.
“TRAFFIC ALERT.” If an aircraft enters the “NO TRANSGRESSION ZONE (NTZ),” the
controller will breakout the threatened aircraft on the adjacent approach. The
phraseology for the breakout will be:
TRAFFIC ALERT, (aircraft call sign) TURN (left/right) IMMEDIATELY, HEADING
(degrees), CLIMB/ DESCEND AND MAINTAIN (altitude).
4. ILS PRM Glideslope
Navigation. The pilot may find crossing altitudes
published along the final approach course. If the approach geometry warrants it,
the pilot is advised on the AAUP that descending on the
ILS or LDA glideslope ensures complying with any charted crossing restrictions.
5. SOIA and ILS PRM differences as noted on the AAUP.
(a) ILS PRM, LDA
Traffic (only published on the AAUP when the ILS PRM approach is used in
conjunction with an LDA PRM approach to the adjacent runway).
To provide better situational awareness, and because
traffic on the LDA may be visible on the ILS aircraft's TCAS, pilots are
reminded of the fact that aircraft will be maneuvering behind them to align with
the adjacent runway. While conducting the ILS PRM approach to Runway XXX, other
aircraft may be conducting the offset LDA PRM approach to Runway XXX. These
aircraft will approach from the (left/right) rear and will realign with Runway
XXX after making visual contact with the ILS traffic. Under normal
circumstances, these aircraft will not pass the ILS traffic.
(b) SOIA LDA PRM Items.
The AAUP section for the SOIA LDA PRM approach
contains most information found in the ILS PRM section. It replaces certain
information as seen below and provides pilots with the procedures to be used in
the visual segment of the LDA PRM approach from the LDA MAP until landing.
(c) SOIA LDA PRM
Navigation (replaces ILS PRM (4) and (a) above).
The pilot may find crossing altitudes published along the final approach course.
The pilot is advised that descending on the LDA glideslope ensures complying
with any charted crossing restrictions. Remain on the LDA course until passing
XXXXX (LDA MAP name) intersection prior to maneuvering to align with the
centerline of Runway XXX.
(d) SOIA (Name) Airport
Visual Segment (replaces ILS PRM (4) above). Pilot
procedures for navigating beyond the LDA MAP are spelled out. If ATC advises
that there is traffic on the adjacent ILS, pilots are authorized to continue
past the LDA MAP to align with runway centerline when:
ILS traffic is in sight and is expected to remain in sight,
has been advised that “traffic is in sight.” (ATC is not required to acknowledge
runway environment is in sight. Otherwise, a missed approach must be executed.
Between the LDA MAP and the runway threshold, pi lots conducting the LDA PRM
approach are responsible for separating themselves visually from traffic
conducting the ILS PRM approach to the adjacent runway, which means maneuvering
the aircraft as necessary to avoid that traffic until landing, and providing
wake turbulence avoidance, if applicable. Pilots maintaining visual separation
should advise ATC, as soon as practical, if visual contact with the aircraft
conducting the ILS PRM approach is lost and execute a missed approach unless
otherwise instructed by ATC.
e. Differences between
Simultaneous ILS and ILS PRM or LDA PRM approaches of importance to the pilot.
1. Runway Spacing.
Prior to simultaneous close parallel approaches,
most ATC directed breakouts were the result of two aircraft intrail on the same
final approach course getting too close together. Two aircraft going in the same
direction did not mandate quick reaction times. With PRM closely spaced
approaches, two aircraft could be alongside each other, navigating on courses
that are separated by less than 4,300 feet. In the unlikely event that an
aircraft “blunders” off its course and makes a worst case turn of 30 degrees
toward the adjacent final approach course, closing speeds of 135 feet per second
could occur that constitute the need for quick reaction. A blunder has to be
recognized by the monitor controller, and breakout instructions issued to the
endangered aircraft. The pilot will not have any warning that a breakout is
imminent because the blundering aircraft will be on another frequency. It is
important that, when a pilot receives breakout instructions, he/she assumes that
a blundering aircraft is about to or has penetrated the NTZ and is heading
toward his/her approach course. The pilot must initiate a breakout as soon as
safety allows. While conducting PRM approaches, pilots must maintain an
increased sense of awareness in order to immediately react to an ATC instruction
maneuver as instructed by ATC, away from a blundering aircraft.
To help in avoiding communication problems caused
by stuck microphones and two parties talking at the same time, two frequencies
for each runway will be in use during ILS PRM and LDA PRM approach operations,
the primary tower frequency and the PRM monitor frequency. The tower controller
transmits and receive in a normal fashion on the primary frequency and also
transmits on the PRM monitor frequency. The monitor controller's transmissions
override on both frequencies. The pilots flying the approach will listen to both
frequencies but only transmit on the primary tower frequency. If the PRM monitor
controller initiates a breakout and the primary frequency is blocked by another
transmission, the breakout instruction will still be heard on the PRM monitor
At some airports, the override capability may be on other than the tower
frequency (KSFO overrides the final radar controller frequency). Pilots should
carefully review the dual communications requirements on the AAUP prior to
accepting a PRM approach.
The probability is extremely low that an aircraft will
“blunder” from its assigned approach course and enter the NTZ, causing ATC to
“breakout” the aircraft approaching on the adjacent ILS or LDA course. However,
because of the close proximity of the final approach courses, it is essential
that pilots follow the ATC breakout instructions precisely and expeditiously.
The controller's “breakout” instructions provide conflict resolution for the
threatened aircraft, with the turn portion of the “breakout” being the single
most important element in achieving maximum protection. A descending breakout
will only be issued when it is the only controller option. In no case will the
controller descend an aircraft below the MVA, which will provide at least 1,000
feet clearance above obstacles. The pilot is not expected to exceed 1,000 feet
per minute rate of descent in the event a descending breakout is issued.
Breakouts. The use of the autopilot is encouraged
while flying an ILS PRM or LDA PRM approach, but the autopilot must be
disengaged in the rare event that a breakout is issued. Simulation studies of
breakouts have shown that a handflown breakout can be initiated consistently
faster than a breakout performed using the autopilot.
The ATC breakout instruction is the primary means of
conflict resolution. TCAS, if installed, provides another form of conflict
resolution in the unlikely event other separation standards would fail. TCAS is
not required to conduct a closely spaced approach.
The TCAS provides only
vertical resolution of aircraft conflicts, while the ATC breakout instruction
provides both vertical and horizontal guidance for conflict resolutions. Pilots
should always immediately follow the TCAS Resolution Advisory (RA), whenever it
is received. Should a TCAS RA be received before, during, or after an ATC
breakout instruction is issued, the pilot should follow the RA, even if it
conflicts with the climb/descent portion of the breakout maneuver. If following
an RA requires deviating from an ATC clearance, the pilot must advise ATC as
soon as practical. While following an RA, it is
extremely important that the pilot also comply with
the turn portion of the ATC breakout instruction unless the pilot determines
safety to be factor. Adhering to these procedures assures the pilot that
acceptable “breakout” separation margins will always be provided, even in the
face of a normal procedural or system failure.
Converging Instrument Approaches
may conduct instrument approaches simultaneously to converging runways; i.e.,
runways having an included angle from 15 to 100 degrees, at airports where a
program has been specifically approved to do so.
basic concept requires that dedicated, separate standard instrument approach
procedures be developed for each converging runway included. Missed Approach
Points must be at least 3 miles apart and missed approach procedures ensure that
missed approach protected airspace does not overlap.
requirements are: radar availability, nonintersecting final approach courses,
precision approach capability for each runway and, if runways intersect,
controllers must be able to apply visual separation as well as intersecting
runway separation criteria. Intersecting runways also require minimums of at
least 700 foot ceilings and 2 miles visibility. Straight in approaches and
landings must be made.
simultaneous converging approaches are in progress, aircraft will be informed by
the controller as soon as feasible after initial contact or via ATIS.
Additionally, the radar controller will have direct communications capability
with the tower controller where separation responsibility has not been delegated
to the tower.
5-4-18. RNP AR Instrument
These procedures require authorization
analogous to the special authorization required for Category II or III ILS
procedures. Authorization required (AR) procedures are to be conducted by
aircrews meeting special training requirements in aircraft that meet the
specified performance and functional requirements.
a. Unique characteristics of RNP AR Approaches
1. RNP value. Each
published line of minima has an associated RNP value. The indicated value
defines the lateral and vertical performance requirements. A minimum RNP type is
documented as part of the RNP AR authorization for each operator and may vary
depending on aircraft configuration or operational procedures (e.g., GPS
inoperative, use of flight director vice autopilot).
2. Curved path
procedures. Some RNP approaches have a curved path,
also called a radius-to-a-fix (RF) leg. Since not all aircraft have the
capability to fly these arcs, pilots are responsible for knowing if they can
conduct an RNP approach with an arc or not. Aircraft speeds, winds and bank
angles have been taken into consideration in the development of the procedures.
3. RNP required for
extraction or not. Where required, the missed
approach procedure may use RNP values less than RNP-1. The reliability of the
navigation system has to be very high in order to conduct these approaches.
Operation on these procedures generally requires redundant equipment, as no
single point of failure can cause loss of both approach and missed approach
4. Non-standard speeds
or climb gradients. RNP AR approaches are developed
based on standard approach speeds and a 200 ft/NM climb gradient in the missed
approach. Any exceptions to these standards will be indicated on the approach
procedure, and the operator should ensure they can comply with any published
restrictions before conducting the operation.
5. Temperature Limits. For
aircraft using barometric vertical navigation (without temperature compensation)
to conduct the approach, low and high-temperature limits are identified on the
procedure. Cold temperatures reduce the glidepath angle while high temperatures
increase the glidepath angle. Aircraft using baro VNAV with temperature
compensation or aircraft using an alternate means for vertical guidance (e.g.,
SBAS) may disregard the temperature restrictions. The charted temperature limits
are evaluated for the final approach segment only. Regardless of charted
temperature limits or temperature compensation by the FMS, the pilot may need to
manually compensate for cold temperature on minimum altitudes and the decision
6. Aircraft size. The
achieved minimums may be dependent on aircraft size. Large aircraft may require
higher minimums due to gear height and/or wingspan. Approach procedure charts
will be annotated with applicable aircraft size restrictions.
b. Types of RNP AR Approach Operations
1. RNP Stand-alone
Approach Operations. RNP AR procedures can provide
access to runways regardless of the ground-based NAVAID infrastructure, and can
be designed to avoid obstacles, terrain, airspace, or resolve environmental
2. RNP Parallel
Approach (RPA) Operations. RNP AR procedures can be
used for parallel approaches where the runway separation is adequate (See
FIG 5-4-23). Parallel approach procedures can be used
either simultaneously or as stand-alone operations. They may be part of either
independent or dependent operations depending on the ATC ability to provide
3. RNP Parallel
Approach Runway Transitions (RPAT) Operations. RPAT
approaches begin as a parallel IFR approach operation using simultaneous
independent or dependent procedures. (See FIG 5-4-24).
Visual separation standards are used in the final segment of the approach after
the final approach fix, to permit the RPAT aircraft to transition in visual
conditions along a predefined lateral and vertical path to align with the runway
4. RNP Converging
Runway Operations. At airports where runways
converge, but may or may not intersect, an RNP AR approach can provide a precise
curved missed approach path that conforms to aircraft separation minimums for
simultaneous operations (See FIG 5-4-25). By flying
this curved missed approach path with high accuracy and containment provided by
RNP, dual runway operations may continue to be used to lower ceiling and
visibility values than currently available. This type of operation allows
greater capacity at airports where it can be applied.
5-4-19. Side-step Maneuver
may authorize a standard instrument approach procedure which serves either one
of parallel runways that are separated by 1,200 feet or less followed by a
straight-in landing on the adjacent runway.
that will execute a side-step maneuver will be cleared for a specified approach
procedure and landing on the adjacent parallel runway. Example, “cleared ILS
runway 7 left approach, side-step to runway 7 right.” Pilots are expected to
commence the side-step maneuver as soon as possible after the runway or runway
environment is in sight. Compliance with minimum altitudes associated with
stepdown fixes is expected even after the side-step maneuver is initiated.
Side-step minima are flown to a Minimum Descent Altitude (MDA) regardless of the
minimums to the adjacent runway will be based on nonprecision criteria and
therefore higher than the precision minimums to the primary runway, but will
normally be lower than the published circling minimums.
5-4-20. Approach and Landing Minimums
a. Landing Minimums. The
rules applicable to landing minimums are contained in 14 CFR Section 91.175.
TBL 5-4-1 may be used to convert RVR to ground or flight
visibility. For converting RVR values that fall between listed values, use the
next higher RVR value; do not interpolate. For example, when converting
1800 RVR, use 2400 RVR with the resultant visibility of 1/2 mile.
b. Obstacle Clearance. Final
approach obstacle clearance is provided from the start of the final segment to
the runway or missed approach point, whichever occurs last. Side-step obstacle
protection is provided by increasing the width of the final approach obstacle
RVR Value Conversions
approach protected areas are defined by the tangential connection of arcs drawn
from each runway end (see FIG 5-4-26). Circling approach
protected areas developed prior to late 2012 used fixed radius distances,
dependent on aircraft approach category, as shown in the table on page B2 of the
U.S. TPP. The approaches using standard circling approach areas can be
identified by the absence of the “negative C" symbol on the circling line of
minima. Circling approach protected areas developed after late 2012 use the
radius distance shown in the table on page B2 of the U.S. TPP, dependent on
aircraft approach category, and the altitude of the circling MDA, which accounts
for true airspeed increase with altitude. The approaches using expanded circling
approach areas can be identified by the presence of the “negative C" symbol on
the circling line of minima (see FIG 5-4-27). Because
of obstacles near the airport, a portion of the circling area may be restricted
by a procedural note; for example, “Circling NA E of RWY 17-35.” Obstacle
clearance is provided at the published minimums (MDA) for the pilot who makes a
straight-in approach, side-steps, or circles. Once below the MDA the pilot must
see and avoid obstacles. Executing the missed approach after starting to
maneuver usually places the aircraft beyond the MAP. The aircraft is clear of
obstacles when at or above the MDA while inside the circling area, but simply
joining the missed approach ground track from the circling maneuver may not
provide vertical obstacle clearance once the aircraft exits the circling area.
Additional climb inside the circling area may be required before joining the
missed approach track. See Paragraph 5-4-21, Missed
Approach, for additional considerations when starting a missed approach at other
than the MAP.
Final Approach Obstacle Clearance
Circling approach area radii vary according to approach category and MSL
circling altitude due to TAS changes - see FIG
Standard and Expanded Circling Approach Radii in the U.S. TPP
2. Precision Obstacle Free Zone (POFZ). A volume of
airspace above an area beginning at the runway threshold, at the threshold
elevation, and centered on the extended runway centerline. The POFZ is 200 feet
(60m) long and 800 feet (240m) wide. The POFZ must be clear when an aircraft on
a vertically guided final approach is within 2 nautical miles of the runway
threshold and the reported ceiling is below 250 feet or visibility less than
statute mile (SM) (or runway visual range below 4,000 feet). If the POFZ is not
clear, the MINIMUM authorized height above touchdown (HAT) and visibility is
250 feet and 3/4
SM. The POFZ is considered clear even
if the wing of the aircraft holding on a taxiway waiting for runway clearance
penetrates the POFZ; however, neither the fuselage nor the tail may infringe on
the POFZ. The POFZ is applicable at all runway ends including displaced
Precision Obstacle Free Zone (POFZ)
c. Straight-in Minimums
are shown on the IAP when the final approach course is within 30 degrees of the
runway alignment (15 degrees for GPS IAPs) and a normal descent can be made from
the IFR altitude shown on the IAP to the runway surface. When either the normal
rate of descent or the runway alignment factor of 30 degrees (15 degrees for GPS
IAPs) is exceeded, a straight-in minimum is not published and a circling minimum
applies. The fact that a straight-in minimum is not published does not preclude
pilots from landing straight-in if they have the active runway in sight and have
sufficient time to make a normal approach for landing. Under such conditions and
when ATC has cleared them for landing on that runway, pilots are not expected to
circle even though only circling minimums are published. If they desire to
circle, they should advise ATC.
d. Side-Step Maneuver
Minimums. Landing minimums for a side-step maneuver
to the adjacent runway will normally be higher than the minimums to the primary
e. Published Approach Minimums. Approach minimums
are published for different aircraft categories and consist of a minimum
altitude (DA, DH, MDA) and required visibility. These minimums are determined by
applying the appropriate TERPS criteria. When a fix is incorporated in a
nonprecision final segment, two sets of minimums may be published: one for the
pilot that is able to identify the fix, and a second for the pilot that cannot.
Two sets of minimums may also be published when a second altimeter source is
used in the procedure. When a nonprecision procedure incorporates both a
stepdown fix in the final segment and a second altimeter source, two sets of
minimums are published to account for the stepdown fix and a note addresses
minimums for the second altimeter source.
f. Circling Minimums. In
some busy terminal areas, ATC may not allow circling and circling minimums will
not be published. Published circling minimums provide obstacle clearance when
pilots remain within the appropriate area of protection. Pilots should remain at
or above the circling altitude until the aircraft is continuously in a position
from which a descent to a landing on the intended runway can be made at a normal
rate of descent using normal maneuvers. Circling may require maneuvers at low
altitude, at low airspeed, and in marginal weather conditions. Pilots must use
sound judgment, have an indepth knowledge of their capabilities, and fully
understand the aircraft performance to determine the exact circling maneuver
since weather, unique airport design, and the aircraft position, altitude, and
airspeed must all be considered. The following basic rules apply:
the shortest path to the base or downwind leg, as appropriate, considering
existing weather conditions. There is no restriction from passing over the
airport or other runways.
should be recognized that circling maneuvers may be made while VFR or other
flying is in progress at the airport. Standard left turns or specific
instruction from the controller for maneuvering must be considered when circling
airports without a control tower, it may be desirable to fly over the airport to
observe wind and turn indicators and other traffic which may be on the runway or
flying in the vicinity of the airport.
AC 90-66A, Recommended Standards Traffic patterns for Aeronautical Operations at
Airports without Operating Control Towers.
missed approach point (MAP) varies depending upon the approach flown. For
vertically guided approaches, the MAP is at the decision altitude/decision
height. Non-vertically guided and circling procedures share the same MAP and the
pilot determines this MAP by timing from the final approach fix, by a fix, a
NAVAID, or a waypoint. Circling from a GLS, an ILS without a localizer line of
minima or an RNAV (GPS) approach without an LNAV line of minima is prohibited.
g. Instrument Approach
at a Military Field. When instrument approaches are
conducted by civil aircraft at military airports, they must be conducted in
accordance with the procedures and minimums approved by the military agency
having jurisdiction over the airport.
5-4-21. Missed Approach
a landing cannot be accomplished, advise ATC and, upon reaching the missed
approach point defined on the approach procedure chart, the pilot must comply
with the missed approach instructions for the procedure being used or with an
alternate missed approach procedure specified by ATC.
protection for missed approach is predicated on the missed approach being
initiated at the decision altitude/height (DA/H) or at the missed approach point
and not lower than minimum descent altitude (MDA). A climb gradient of at least
200 feet per nautical mile is required, (except for Copter approaches, where a
climb of at least 400 feet per nautical mile is required), unless a higher climb
gradient is published in the notes section of the approach procedure chart. When
higher than standard climb gradients are specified, the end point of the
non-standard climb will be specified at either an altitude or a fix. Pilots must
preplan to ensure that the aircraft can meet the climb gradient (expressed in
feet per nautical mile) required by the procedure in the event of a missed
approach, and be aware that flying at a higher than anticipated ground speed
increases the climb rate requirement (feet per minute). Tables for the
conversion of climb gradients (feet per nautical mile) to climb rate (feet per
minute), based on ground speed, are included on page D1 of the U.S. Terminal
Procedures booklets. Reasonable buffers are provided for normal maneuvers.
However, no consideration is given to an abnormally early turn. Therefore, when
an early missed approach is executed, pilots should, unless otherwise cleared by
ATC, fly the IAP as specified on the approach plate to the missed approach point
at or above the MDA or DH before executing a turning maneuver.
c. If visual reference is lost while
circling-to-land from an instrument approach, the missed approach specified for
that particular procedure must be followed (unless an alternate missed approach
procedure is specified by ATC). To become established on the prescribed missed
approach course, the pilot should make an initial climbing turn toward the
landing runway and continue the turn until established on the missed approach
course. Inasmuch as the circling maneuver may be accomplished in more than one
direction, different patterns will be required to become established on the
prescribed missed approach course, depending on the aircraft position at the
time visual reference is lost. Adherence to the procedure will help assure that
an aircraft will remain laterally within the circling and missed approach
obstruction clearance areas. Refer to paragraph h
concerning vertical obstruction clearance when starting a missed approach at
other than the MAP. (See FIG 5-4-29.)
locations where ATC radar service is provided, the pilot should conform to radar
vectors when provided by ATC in lieu of the published missed approach procedure.
(See FIG 5-4-30.)
locations may have a preplanned alternate missed approach procedure for use in
the event the primary NAVAID used for the missed approach procedure is
unavailable. To avoid confusion, the alternate missed approach instructions are
not published on the chart. However, the alternate missed approach holding
pattern will be depicted on the instrument approach chart for pilot situational
awareness and to assist ATC by not having to issue detailed holding
instructions. The alternate missed approach may be based on NAVAIDs not used in
the approach procedure or the primary missed approach. When the alternate missed
approach procedure is implemented by NOTAM, it becomes a mandatory part of the
procedure. The NOTAM will specify both the textual instructions and any
additional equipment requirements necessary to complete the procedure. Air
traffic may also issue instructions for the alternate missed approach when
necessary, such as when the primary missed approach NAVAID fails during the
approach. Pilots may reject an ATC clearance for an alternate missed approach
that requires equipment not necessary for the published approach procedure when
the alternate missed approach is issued after beginning the approach. However,
when the alternate missed approach is issued prior to beginning the approach the
pilot must either accept the entire procedure (including the alternate missed
approach), request a different approach procedure, or coordinate with ATC for
alternative action to be taken, i.e., proceed to an alternate airport, etc.
approach has been missed, request clearance for specific action; i.e., to
alternative airport, another approach, etc.
must ensure that they have climbed to a safe altitude prior to proceeding off
the published missed approach, especially in nonradar environments. Abandoning
the missed approach prior to reaching the published altitude may not provide
adequate terrain clearance. Additional climb may be required after reaching the
holding pattern before proceeding back to the IAF or to an alternate.
Circling and Missed Approach Obstruction Clearance Areas
clearance for an instrument approach procedure includes a clearance to fly the
published missed approach procedure, unless otherwise instructed by ATC. The
published missed approach procedure provides obstacle clearance only when the
missed approach is conducted on the missed approach segment from or above the
missed approach point, and assumes a climb rate of 200 feet/NM or higher, as
published. If the aircraft initiates a missed approach at a point other than the
missed approach point (see paragraph 5-4-5b), from below MDA or DA (H), or on a
circling approach, obstacle clearance is not necessarily provided by following
the published missed approach procedure, nor is separation assured from other
air traffic in the vicinity.
In the event a balked (rejected) landing
occurs at a position other than the published missed approach point, the pilot
should contact ATC as soon as possible to obtain an amended clearance. If unable
to contact ATC for any reason, the pilot should attempt to re-intercept a
published segment of the missed approach and comply with route and altitude
instructions. If unable to contact ATC, and in the pilot's judgment it is no
longer appropriate to fly the published missed approach procedure, then consider
either maintaining visual conditions if practicable and reattempt a landing, or
a circle-climb over the airport. Should a missed approach become necessary when
operating to an airport that is not served by an operating control tower,
continuous contact with an air traffic facility may not be possible. In this
case, the pilot should execute the appropriate go-around/missed approach
procedure without delay and contact ATC when able to do so.
Prior to initiating an instrument approach
procedure, the pilot should assess the actions to be taken in the event of a
balked (rejected) landing beyond the missed approach point or below the MDA or
DA (H) considering the anticipated weather conditions and available aircraft
performance. 14 CFR 91.175(e) authorizes the pilot to fly an appropriate missed
approach procedure that ensures obstruction clearance, but it does not
necessarily consider separation from other air traffic. The pilot must consider
other factors such as the aircraft's geographical location with respect to the
prescribed missed approach point, direction of flight, and/or minimum turning
altitudes in the prescribed missed approach procedure. The pilot must also
consider aircraft performance, visual climb restrictions, charted obstacles,
published obstacle departure procedure, takeoff visual climb requirements as
expressed by nonstandard takeoff minima, other traffic expected to be in the
vicinity, or other factors not specifically expressed by the approach
5-4-22. Use of Enhanced Flight Vision Systems (EFVS) on Instrument Approaches
An EFVS is an installed airborne system which
uses an electronic means to provide a display of the forward external scene
topography (the applicable natural or manmade features of a place or region
especially in a way to show their relative positions and elevation) through the
use of imaging sensors, such as forward looking infrared, millimeter wave
radiometry, millimeter wave radar, and/or low light level image intensifying.
The EFVS imagery is displayed along with the additional flight information and
aircraft flight symbology required by 14 CFR 91.175 (m) on a head-up display
(HUD), or an equivalent display, in the same scale and alignment as the external
view and includes the display element, sensors, computers and power supplies,
indications, and controls. The display is typically presented to the pilot by
means of an approved HUD.
a. Basic Strategy Using
EFVS. When flying an instrument approach procedure
(IAP), if the runway environment cannot be visually acquired at decision
altitude (DA) or minimum descent altitude (MDA) using natural vision, then a
pilot may use an EFVS to continue descending down to 100 feet above the
Touchdown Zone Elevation (TDZE), provided all of the visibility requirements of
14 CFR part 91.175 (l) are met. The primary reference for maneuvering the
aircraft is based on what the pilot sees through the EFVS. At 100 feet above the
TDZE, a pilot can continue to descend only when the visual reference
requirements for descent below 100 feet can be seen using natural vision
(without the aid of the EFVS). In other words, a pilot may not continue to rely
on the EFVS sensor image to identify the required visual references below 100
feet above the TDZE. Supporting information is provided by the flight path
vector (FPV), flight path angle (FPA) reference cue, onboard navigation system,
and other imagery and flight symbology displayed on the EFVS. The FPV and FPA
reference cue, along with the EFVS imagery of the Touchdown Zone (TDZ), provide
the primary vertical path reference for the pilot when vertical guidance from a
precision approach or approach with vertical guidance is not available.
Instrument Approach Procedures. An EFVS may be used
to descend below DA or MDA from any straight-in IAP, other than Category II or
Category III approaches, provided all of the requirements of 14 CFR part 91.175
(l) are met. This includes straight-in precision approaches, approaches with
vertical guidance (for example, LPV or LNAV/VNAV), and non-precision approaches
(for example, VOR, NDB, LOC, RNAV, GPS, LDA, SDF, etc.).
2. Circling Approach
Procedure. An IAP with a circle-to-land maneuver or
circle-to-land minimums does not meet criteria for straight-in landing minimums.
While the regulations do not prohibit EFVS from being used during any phase of
flight, they do prohibit it from being used for operational credit on anything
but a straight-in IAP with straight-in landing minima. EFVS must only be used
during a circle-to-land maneuver provided the visual references required
throughout the circling maneuver are distinctly visible using natural vision. An
EFVS cannot be used to satisfy the requirement that an identifiable part of the
airport be distinctly visible to the pilot during a circling maneuver at or
above MDA or while descending below MDA from a circling maneuver.
3. Enhanced Flight
Visibility. Flight visibility is determined by
using natural vision, and enhanced flight visibility (EFV) is determined by
using an EFVS. 14 CFR part 91.175 (l) requires that the EFV observed by using an
EFVS cannot be less than the visibility prescribed in the IAP to be used in
order to continue to descend below the DA or MDA.
b. EFVS Operations At
or Below DA or MDA Down to 100 Feet Above the TDZE. The
visual segment of an IAP begins at DA or MDA and continues to the runway. There
are two means of operating in the visual segment--one is by using natural vision
and the other is by using an EFVS. If the pilot determines that the EFV observed
by using the EFVS is not less than the minimum visibility prescribed in the IAP
being flown, and the pilot acquires the required visual references prescribed in
14 CFR part 91.175 (l)(3) using the EFVS, then the pilot can continue the
approach to 100 feet above the TDZE. To continue the approach, the pilot uses
the EFVS image to visually acquire the runway environment (the approach light
system (ALS), if installed, or both the runway threshold and the TDZ), confirm
lateral alignment, maneuver to the extended runway centerline earlier than would
otherwise be possible, and continue a normal descent from the DA or MDA to 100
feet above the TDZE.
1. Required Visual References. In order to descend
below DA or MDA, the following visual references (specified in 14 CFR part
91.175 (l)(3)) for the runway of intended landing must be distinctly visible and
identifiable to the pilot using the EFVS:
ALS (if installed), or
following visual references in both (b)(1) and (b)(2) below:
runway threshold, identified by at least one of the following: the beginning of
the runway landing surface, the threshold lights, or the runway end identifier
TDZ, identified by at least one of the following: the runway TDZ landing
surface, the TDZ lights, the TDZ markings, or the runway lights.
2. Comparison of Visual
Reference Requirements for EFVS and Natural Vision. The
EFVS visual reference requirements of 14 CFR part 91.175 (l)(3) comprise a more
stringent standard than the visual reference requirements prescribed under 14
CFR part 91.175 (c)(3) when using natural vision. The more stringent standard is
needed because an EFVS might not display the color of the lights used to
identify specific portions of the runway or might not be able to consistently
display the runway markings. The main differences for EFVS operations are that
the visual glide slope indicator (VGSI) lights cannot be used as a visual
reference, and specific visual references from both the threshold and TDZ must
be distinctly visible and identifiable. However, when using natural vision, only
one of the specified visual references must be visible and identifiable.
3. Visual References
and Offset Approaches. Pilots must be especially
knowledgeable of the approach conditions and approach course alignment when
considering whether to rely on EFVS during a non-precision approach with an
offset final approach course. Depending upon the combination of crosswind
correction and the lateral field of view provided by a particular EFVS, the
required visual references may or may not be within the pilot's view looking
through the EFVS display. Pilots conducting any non-precision approach must
verify lateral alignment with the runway centerline when determining when to
descend from MDA.
4. When to Go Around. Any
pilot operating an aircraft with an EFVS installed should be aware that the
requirements of 14 CFR part 91.175 (c) for using natural vision and the
requirements of 14 CFR part 91.175 (l) for using an EFVS are different. A pilot
would, therefore, first have to determine whether an approach will be commenced
using natural vision or using an EFVS. While these two sets of requirements
provide a parallel decisionmaking process, the requirements for when a missed
approach must be executed differ. Using EFVS, a missed approach must be
initiated at or below DA or MDA down to 100 feet above TDZE whenever the pilot
EFV is less than the visibility minima prescribed for the IAP being used;
required visual references for the runway of intended landing are no longer
distinctly visible and identifiable to the pilot using the EFVS imagery;
aircraft is not continuously in a position from which a descent to a landing can
be made on the intended runway, at a normal rate of descent, using normal
operations under 14 CFR parts 121 and 135, the descent rate of the aircraft
would not allow touchdown to occur within the TDZ of the runway of intended
5. Missed Approach
Considerations. It should be noted that a missed
approach after passing the DA, or beyond the missed approach point (MAP),
involves additional risk until established on the published missed approach
segment. Initiating a go-around after passing the published MAP may result in
loss of obstacle clearance. As with any approach, pilot planning should include
contingencies between the published MAP and touchdown with reference to obstacle
clearance, aircraft performance, and alternate escape plans.
c. EFVS Operations At
and Below 100 Feet Above the TDZE. At and below 100
feet above the TDZE, the regulations do not require the EFVS to be turned off or
the display to be stowed in order to continue to a landing. A pilot may continue
the approach below this altitude using an EFVS as long as the required visual
references can be seen through the display using natural vision. An operator may
not continue to descend beyond this point by relying solely on the sensor image
displayed on the EFVS.
1. Required Visual References. In order to descend
below 100 feet above the TDZE, the flight visibility--assessed using natural
vision--must be sufficient for the following visual references to be distinctly
visible and identifiable to the pilot without reliance on the EFVS to continue
to a landing:
lights or markings of the threshold, or
lights or markings of the TDZ.
It is important to note that from 100 feet
above the TDZE and below, the flight visibility does not have to be equal to or
greater than the visibility prescribed for the IAP in order to continue
descending. It only has to be sufficient for the visual references required by
14 CFR part 91.175 (l)(4) to be distinctly visible and identifiable to the pilot
without reliance on the EFVS.
2. Comparison of Visual
Reference Requirements for EFVS and Natural Vision. Again,
the visual reference requirements for EFVS in 14 CFR part 91.175 (l)(4) are more
stringent than those required for natural vision in 14 CFR part 91.175 (c)(3).
The main differences for EFVS operations are that the ALS and red terminating
bars or red side row bars, the REIL, and the VASI cannot be used as visual
references. Only very specific visual references from the threshold or the TDZ
can be used (that is, the lights or markings of the threshold or the lights or
markings of the TDZ).
3. When to Go Around. A
missed approach must be initiated when the pilot determines that:
flight visibility is no longer sufficient to distinctly see and identify the
required visual references listed in 14 CFR part 91.175 (l)(4) using natural
aircraft is not continuously in a position from which a descent to a landing can
be made on the intended runway, at a normal rate of descent, using normal
operations under 14 CFR parts 121 and 135, the descent rate of the aircraft
would not allow touchdown to occur within the TDZ of the runway of intended
While touchdown within the TDZ is not
specifically addressed in the regulations for operators other than 14 CFR parts
121 and 135 operators, continued operations below DA or MDA where touchdown in
the TDZ is not assured, where a high sink rate occurs, or where the decision to
conduct a missed approach procedure is not executed in a timely manner, all
create a significant risk to the operation.
4. Missed Approach
Considerations. As noted earlier, a missed approach
initiated after the DA or MAP involves additional risk. At 100 feet or less
above the runway, it is likely that an aircraft is significantly below the TERPS
missed approach obstacle clearance surface. Prior planning is recommended and
should include contingencies between the published MAP and touchdown with
reference to obstacle clearance, aircraft performance, and alternate escape
d. Light Emitting Diode
(LED) Airport Lighting Impact on EFVS Operations. The
FAA has recently begun to replace incandescent lamps with LEDs at some airports
in threshold lights, taxiway edge lights, taxiway centerline lights, low
intensity runway edge lights, windcone lights, beacons, and some obstruction
lighting. Pilots should be aware that LED lights cannot be sensed by current
5-4-23. Visual Approach
visual approach is conducted on an IFR flight plan and authorizes a pilot to
proceed visually and clear of clouds to the airport. The pilot must have either
the airport or the preceding identified aircraft in sight. This approach must be
authorized and controlled by the appropriate air traffic control facility.
Reported weather at the airport must have a ceiling at or above 1,000 feet and
visibility 3 miles or greater. ATC may authorize this type approach when it will
be operationally beneficial. Visual approaches are an IFR procedure conducted
under IFR in visual meteorological conditions. Cloud clearance requirements of
14 CFR Section 91.155 are not applicable, unless required by operation
b. Operating to an
Airport Without Weather Reporting Service. ATC will
advise the pilot when weather is not available at the destination airport. ATC
may initiate a visual approach provided there is a reasonable assurance that
weather at the airport is a ceiling at or above 1,000 feet and visibility 3
miles or greater (e.g., area weather reports, PIREPs, etc.).
c. Operating to an Airport With an Operating Control Tower. Aircraft
may be authorized to conduct a visual approach to one runway while other
aircraft are conducting IFR or VFR approaches to another parallel, intersecting,
or converging runway. When operating to airports with parallel runways separated
by less than 2,500 feet, the succeeding aircraft must report sighting the
preceding aircraft unless standard separation is being provided by ATC. When
operating to parallel runways separated by at least 2,500 feet but less than
4,300 feet, controllers will clear/vector aircraft to the final at an angle not
greater than 30 degrees unless radar, vertical, or visual separation is provided
during the turn-on. The purpose of the 30 degree intercept angle is to reduce
the potential for overshoots of the final and to preclude side-by-side
operations with one or both aircraft in a belly-up configuration during the
turn-on. Once the aircraft are established within 30 degrees of final, or on the
final, these operations may be conducted simultaneously. When the parallel
runways are separated by 4,300 feet or more, or intersecting/converging runways
are in use, ATC may authorize a visual approach after advising all aircraft
involved that other aircraft are conducting operations to the other runway. This
may be accomplished through use of the ATIS.
Responsibilities. If the pilot has the airport in
sight but cannot see the aircraft to be followed, ATC may clear the aircraft for
a visual approach; however, ATC retains both separation and wake vortex
separation responsibility. When visually following a preceding aircraft,
acceptance of the visual approach clearance constitutes acceptance of pilot
responsibility for maintaining a safe approach interval and adequate wake
visual approach is not an IAP and therefore has no missed approach segment. If a
go around is necessary for any reason, aircraft operating at controlled airports
will be issued an appropriate advisory/clearance/instruction by the tower. At
uncontrolled airports, aircraft are expected to remain clear of clouds and
complete a landing as soon as possible. If a landing cannot be accomplished, the
aircraft is expected to remain clear of clouds and contact ATC as soon as
possible for further clearance. Separation from other IFR aircraft will be
maintained under these circumstances.
approaches reduce pilot/controller workload and expedite traffic by shortening
flight paths to the airport. It is the pilot's responsibility to advise ATC as
soon as possible if a visual approach is not desired.
to conduct a visual approach is an IFR authorization and does not alter IFR
flight plan cancellation responsibility.
AIM, Canceling IFR Flight Plan, Paragraph
service is automatically terminated, without advising the pilot, when the
aircraft is instructed to change to advisory frequency.
5-4-24. Charted Visual
Flight Procedure (CVFP)
are charted visual approaches established for environmental/noise
considerations, and/or when necessary for the safety and efficiency of air
traffic operations. The approach charts depict prominent landmarks, courses, and
recommended altitudes to specific runways. CVFPs are designed to be used
primarily for turbojet aircraft.
procedures will be used only at airports with an operating control tower.
approach charts will depict some NAVAID information which is for supplemental
navigational guidance only.
indicating a Class B airspace floor, all depicted altitudes are for noise
abatement purposes and are recommended only. Pilots are not prohibited from
flying other than recommended altitudes if operational requirements dictate.
landmarks used for navigation are not visible at night, the approach will be
annotated “PROCEDURE NOT AUTHORIZED AT NIGHT.”
usually begin within 20 flying miles from the airport.
weather minimums for CVFPs are based on minimum vectoring altitudes rather than
the recommended altitudes depicted on charts.
are not instrument approaches and do not have missed approach segments.
will not issue clearances for CVFPs when the weather is less than the published
j. ATC will clear aircraft for a CVFP after the
pilot reports siting a charted landmark or a preceding aircraft. If instructed
to follow a preceding aircraft, pilots are responsible for maintaining a safe
approach interval and wake turbulence separation.
should advise ATC if at any point they are unable to continue an approach or
lose sight of a preceding aircraft. Missed approaches will be handled as a
5-4-25. Contact Approach
operating in accordance with an IFR flight plan, provided they are clear of
clouds and have at least 1 mile flight visibility and can reasonably expect to
continue to the destination airport in those conditions, may request ATC
authorization for a contact approach.
may authorize a contact approach provided:
contact approach is specifically requested by the pilot. ATC cannot initiate
Request contact approach.
reported ground visibility at the destination airport is at least 1 statute
contact approach will be made to an airport having a standard or special
instrument approach procedure.
separation is applied between aircraft so cleared and between these aircraft and
other IFR or special VFR aircraft.
Cleared contact approach (and, if required) at or below (altitude) (routing) if
not possible (alternative procedures) and advise.
contact approach is an approach procedure that may be used by a pilot (with
prior authorization from ATC) in lieu of conducting a standard or special IAP to
an airport. It is not intended for use by a pilot on an IFR flight clearance to
operate to an airport not having a published and functioning IAP. Nor is it
intended for an aircraft to conduct an instrument approach to one airport and
then, when “in the clear,” discontinue that approach and proceed to another
airport. In the execution of a contact approach, the pilot assumes the
responsibility for obstruction clearance. If radar service is being received, it
will automatically terminate when the pilot is instructed to change to advisory
5-4-26. Landing Priority
A clearance for a specific type of approach
(ILS, RNAV, GLS, ADF, VOR or Visual Approach) to an aircraft operating on an IFR
flight plan does not mean that landing priority will be given over other
traffic. ATCTs handle all aircraft, regardless of the type of flight plan, on a
“first-come, first-served” basis. Therefore, because of local traffic or runway
in use, it may be necessary for the controller in the interest of safety, to
provide a different landing sequence. In any case, a landing sequence will be
issued to each aircraft as soon as possible to enable the pilot to properly
adjust the aircraft's flight path.
5-4-27. Overhead Approach
operating in accordance with an IFR flight plan in Visual Meteorological
Conditions (VMC) may request ATC authorization for an overhead maneuver. An
overhead maneuver is not an instrument approach procedure. Overhead maneuver
patterns are developed at airports where aircraft have an operational need to
conduct the maneuver. An aircraft conducting an overhead maneuver is considered
to be VFR and the IFR flight plan is cancelled when the aircraft reaches the
initial point on the initial approach portion of the maneuver. (See
FIG 5-4-31.) The existence of a standard overhead
maneuver pattern does not eliminate the possible requirement for an aircraft to
conform to conventional rectangular patterns if an overhead maneuver cannot be
approved. Aircraft operating to an airport without a functioning control tower
must initiate cancellation of an IFR flight plan prior to executing the overhead
maneuver. Cancellation of the IFR flight plan must be accomplished after
crossing the landing threshold on the initial portion of the maneuver or after
landing. Controllers may authorize an overhead maneuver and issue the following
to arriving aircraft:
altitude and direction of traffic. This information may be omitted if either is
PATTERN ALTITUDE (altitude). RIGHT TURNS.
2. Request for a report on initial approach.
information and a request for the pilot to report. The “Break Point” will be
specified if nonstandard. Pilots may be requested to report “break” if required
for traffic or other reasons.
BREAK AT (specified point).