Originally Posted by
drpixie
Love it - I'm doing tup-pence and thrip-pence approaches from now - but only with old guys who know what a pence is.
For those seeing it for the first time - 2D equates precisely to
non-precision approach; has only indirect vertical guidance (using time or distance), and has an MDA. 3D equates to a
precision approach; vertical guidance (glideslope) shown on the instrument
and has DA. If it doesn't have a DA or if you're not seeing a GS, then it's a 2D.
And as a postscript, L/VNAV with vertical guidance from your baro-aided GPS needs specific approval - you can't (legally) just do it because your fancy glass cockpit can do it; it's not included in the strange list of approaches you're deemed capable of by virtue of having a GPS. (You didn't think it would be that easy!)
That is not the way the world works any more, with IAN (Boeing) and FLS (Airbus) approaches that are becoming the new standard of flying a
CDFA NPA, the presentation to the pilot is essentially exactly the same flying a VOR, ILS, LOC, GLS. FLS for example makes flying technique for the VOR the same as the ILS (you can even fly glideslope from above procedure onto the F-G/S). The modes flying an ILS would be G/S LOC, flying a VOR F-G/S, F-LOC. Single diamonds on the ILS, double diamonds on the FLS.
Read more
https://safetyfirst.airbus.com/safel...nt-approaches/ and
https://airbus-win.com/guidance-modes/
While 2D/3D approaches are defined by ICAO, needing specific endorsements on your licence is something more unique to Australia. Outside Australia, if your type rated, you can fly whatever that type is limited to (limited by the operators approvals). Flying those approaches on the type is handled more at the aircraft rating level (as the manufacturers outlines how these are to be performed), than a licence level.