I think your may be confused by your previous post
Are 3 different things...

You can fly a CDFA (using the DA/H) technique with or without vertical guidance.

If you choose not fly the cdfa (I'd suggest not to use charts with cdfa only profiles then), I guess you can always use the DA as MDA.

Take a look to this side by side charts:
http://www.terps.com/EHAM/EHAM%20Side%20by%20Side.pdf

Regards
Aser

Aser

Thanks for that - I think I've got it now!

Simples

Aser,

Thats useful - the DA and the MDA are shown as the same for the 2 styles of approach. Hopefully what I have been teaching has been correct as luck would have it! Unfortunately at the airport where we practise most IFR approaches in simulator training, there are only CDFA approaches to go on, yet some operators want to use the traditional style.

PC Plod
 

IMHO the best solution when teaching how to manage the FMS you have to take account of the CUSTOMERS own day-to-day operations. This teaching process is very context sensitive. The way you use the FMS/AP/FD to manage the altitude will be different according to the requirements of the CUSTOMER'S jurisdiction and you don't have much time to get more than one solution across given the parlous IFR skill levels we encounter.

If it's possible to do the IFR section at the customer's local airport then this option should be considered if the outcome would be more favourable. The problem with this solution is that the simulator and it's software are so flakey that 50% of the time moving away from the tried and tested Rome runways ends in a disastrous capitulation to the Lord of the Windows (thank you Bill!!!)

Irrelevant training is almost a total waste of time - even though it may facilitate the ticking of a box - so the more relevant we can make a lesson the greater value it creates. If the customer works in an environment where 'dive and drive' is 'de rigour' there seems little point in teaching him an alien procedure he may never use. Notice that I used the word 'teach' rather than 'deliver'. There's a little too much 'delivering' going on out there and not enough 'teaching. I think you will agree that teaching requires the SFI to be able to recognise, understand and deal with the customer's faults and shortcomings rather than just tick-boxing your way through a list of manoeuvres.

G.

Did you check the national charts?

Transport Canada has just published this document:

Advisory Circular (AC) No. 700-023 - Transport Canada

Have a look at the note in 4.3 (2)