Originally Posted by
alphacentauri
Garmin 430W is not a BaroVNAV capable system
Well that'd do it then
Seems crazy that an approach chart that says "LNAV/VNAV" doesn't work on a GPS who's manual says for "L/VNAV - Lateral Navigation and Vertical Navigation (LNAV/VNAV) Approach. Fly to LNAV/VNAV minimums". But who am I to say....
Just went and did some more reading! Based on the policy website, that states:
The introduction of Approach to Landing Procedures with Vertical Guidance (APV) has been identified by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) as an internationally significant measure to reducing accidents involving Controlled Flight into Terrain (CFIT) for all ICAO States.
One of the means of achieving APV is through the implementation of Barometric Vertical Navigation (Baro-VNAV) approach procedures.
I then have to wonder how many aircraft in Australia will be BaroVNAV capable and how many of those have suffered a propensity to CFIT over the years.
Stretching the memory, only CFIT on an aircraft of any size would have been Lockhard River - and it had a 155XL on board if I recall. Some discussion on other threads of the RFDS King Air (?) at YMTG - Collins Proline (I assume) wouldn't have been capable.
Who else is likely to get benefit? REX/QLink for YMTG, YMIA etc - all sounds reasonable but doesn't fit the policy description of reducing CFITs. Does fit a policy of reducing landing MDA - but if that's the case - who should be paying?
UTR