5-4-1. Standard Terminal Arrival
(STAR), Area Navigation (RNAV) STAR, and Flight Management System Procedures (FMSP)
a. A STAR is an
ATC coded IFR arrival route established for application to arriving IFR aircraft
destined for certain airports. RNAV STAR/FMSP procedures for arrivals serve the
same purpose but are only used by aircraft equipped with FMS or GPS. The purpose
of both is to simplify clearance delivery procedures and facilitate transition
between en route and instrument approach procedures.
1. STAR/RNAV STAR/FMSP
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.” “Expect” altitudes/speeds are not
considered STAR/RNAV STAR/FMSP procedures crossing restrictions unless verbally
issued by ATC.
The “expect” altitudes/speeds are published so that pilots may have the
information for planning purposes. These altitudes/speeds shall 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/RNAV STAR/FMSP procedures shall maintain last assigned
altitude until receiving authorization to descend so as to comply with all
published/issued restrictions. This authorization will contain the phraseology
(a) Clearance to
“descend via” authorizes pilots to:
(1) Vertically and
laterally navigate on a STAR/RNAV STAR/FMSP.
(2) When cleared
to a waypoint depicted on a STAR/RNAV STAR/FMSP, to descend from a previously
assigned altitude at pilot's discretion to the altitude depicted for that
waypoint, and once established on the depicted arrival, to navigate laterally
and vertically to meet all published restrictions.
1. Air traffic is responsible for obstacle clearance when issuing
a “descend via” instruction to the pilot. The descend via is used in conjunction
with STARs/RNAV STARs/FMSPs to reduce phraseology by not requiring the
controller to restate the altitude at the next waypoint/fix to which the pilot
has been cleared.
2. Air 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/RNAV STAR/FMSP.
3. Minimum en
route altitudes (MEA) are not considered restrictions; however, pilots are
expected to remain above MEAs.
1. Lateral/routing clearance only.
“Cleared Hadly One arrival.”
2. Routing with
“Cleared Hadly One arrival, descend and maintain Flight Level two
“Cleared Hadly One arrival, descend at pilot's discretion, maintain Flight Level
two four zero.”
and vertical navigation clearance.
“Descend via the Civit One arrival.”
“Descend via the Civit One arrival, except, cross Arnes at or above one one
and vertical navigation clearance when assigning altitude not published on
“Descend via the Haris One arrival, except after Bruno, maintain one
“Descend via the Haris One arrival, except cross Bruno at one three thousand
then maintain one zero thousand.”
5. Direct routing to
intercept a STAR/RNAV STAR/FMSP and vertical navigation clearance.
“Proceed direct Mahem, descend via Mahem One arrival.”
“Proceed direct Luxor, cross Luxor at or above flight level two zero zero, then
descend via the Ksino One Arrival.”
1. In Example 2, pilots are expected to descend to FL 240 as
directed, and maintain FL 240 until cleared for further vertical navigation with
a newly assigned altitude or a “descend via” clearance.
2. In Example 4,
the aircraft should track laterally and vertically on the Haris One arrival and
should descend so as to comply with all speed and altitude restrictions until
reaching Bruno and then maintain 10,000. Upon reaching 10,000, aircraft should
maintain 10,000 until cleared by ATC to continue to descend.
(b) Pilots cleared for vertical navigation using the phraseology “descend
via” shall inform ATC upon initial contact with a new frequency.
“Delta One Twenty One leaving FL 240, descending via the Civit One arrival.”
b. Pilots 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.
c. Use 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.
d. STAR charts are
published in the Terminal Procedures Publications (TPP) and are available on
subscription from the National Aeronautical Charting Office.
e. RNAV STAR.
1. All 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 require the aircraft's total system error remain bounded by +1
NM for 95% of the total flight time.
2. For 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
5-4-2. Local Flow Traffic
a. This 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.
b. A 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 mile.
c. When 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
Radar Approach Control.
1. Where 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, MLS, 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
(b) After release
to approach control, aircraft are vectored to the final approach course (ILS,
MLS, 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 controller.
(c) 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.
(d) In 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, MLS, 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.
(e) After 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.
2. ARTCCs 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.
5-4-4. Advance Information on Instrument
a. When 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.
b. The 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
Aircraft destined to uncontrolled airports, which have automated weather
data with broadcast capability, should monitor the ASOS/AWOS frequency to
ascertain the current weather for the airport. The pilot shall advise ATC when
he/she has received the broadcast weather and state his/her intentions.
1. ASOS/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.
d. When 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
5-4-5. Instrument Approach
a. 14 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.
1. IAPs (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
2. Not 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.
3. The 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
(c) The 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.
(d) Many 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.
(e) The 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.
(f) RNAV (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.
A 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.
6. IAPs 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
7. TERPS 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.
(b) Approach 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.
b. The 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 above.
2. The 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
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
d. Terminal Arrival Area (TAA)
1. The objective
of the TAA is to provide a seamless transition from the en route structure to
the terminal environment for arriving aircraft equipped with Flight Management
System (FMS) and/or Global Positioning System (GPS) navigational equipment. The
underlying instrument approach procedure is an area navigation (RNAV) procedure
described in this section. The TAA provides the pilot and air traffic controller
with a very efficient method for routing traffic into the terminal environment
with little required air traffic control interface, and with minimum altitudes
depicted that provide standard obstacle clearance compatible with the instrument
procedure associated with it. The TAA will not be found on all RNAV procedures,
particularly in areas of heavy concentration of air traffic. When the TAA is
published, it replaces the MSA for that approach procedure. See
FIG 5-4-9 for a depiction of a RNAV approach chart
with a TAA.
2. The RNAV
procedure underlying the TAA will be the “T” design (also called the “Basic T”),
or a modification of the “T.” The “T” design incorporates from one to three IAFs;
an intermediate fix (IF) that serves as a dual purpose IF (IAF); a final
approach fix (FAF), and a missed approach point (MAP) usually located at the
runway threshold. The three IAFs are normally aligned in a straight line
perpendicular to the intermediate course, which is an extension of the final
course leading to the runway, forming a “T.” The initial segment is normally
from 3-6 NM in length; the intermediate 5-7 NM, and the final segment 5 NM.
Specific segment length may be varied to accommodate specific aircraft
categories for which the procedure is designed. However, the published segment
lengths will reflect the highest category of aircraft normally expected to use
(a) A standard
racetrack holding pattern may be provided at the center IAF, and if present may
be necessary for course reversal and for altitude adjustment for entry into the
procedure. In the latter case, the pattern provides an extended distance for the
descent required by the procedure. Depiction of this pattern in U.S. Government
publications will utilize the “hold-in-lieu-of-PT” holding pattern symbol.
(b) The published
procedure will be annotated to indicate when the course reversal is not
necessary when flying within a particular TAA area; e.g., “NoPT.” 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 inform air traffic control and
receive clearance to do so. (See FIG 5-4-1,
FIG 5-4-2, FIG 5-4-9, and
paragraph 5-4-9, Procedure Turn and Hold-in-lieu of
3. The “T” design
may be modified by the procedure designers where required by terrain or air
traffic control considerations. For instance, the “T” design may appear more
like a regularly or irregularly shaped “Y”, or may even have one or both
outboard IAFs eliminated resulting in an upside down “L” or an “I”
configuration. (See FIG 5-4-3 and
FIG 5-4-10). Further, the leg lengths associated
with the outboard IAFs may differ. (See FIG 5-4-5
and FIG 5-4-6).
modification of the “T” design may be found at airports with parallel runway
configurations. Each parallel runway may be served by its own “T” IAF, IF (IAF),
and FAF combination, resulting in parallel final approach courses. (See
FIG 5-4-4). Common IAFs may serve both runways;
however, only the intermediate and final approach segments for the landing
runway will be shown on the approach chart. (See FIG
5-4-5 and FIG 5-4-6).
Modified Basic "T"
Modified "T" Approach to Parallel Runways
"T" Approach with Common IAFs to Parallel Runways
"T" Approach with Common IAFs to Parallel Runways
5. The standard
TAA consists of three areas defined by the extension of the IAF legs and the
intermediate segment course. These areas are called the straight-in, left-base,
and right-base areas. (See FIG 5-4-7). 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 (DME or ATD) from the
IF (IAF). The right/left-base areas can only be subdivided using arcs based on
RNAV distances from the IAFs for those areas. Minimum MSL altitudes are charted
within each of these defined areas/subdivisions that provide at least 1,000 feet
of obstacle clearance, or more as necessary in mountainous areas.
(a) Prior to
arriving at the TAA boundary, the pilot can determine which area of the TAA the
aircraft will enter by selecting the IF (IAF) to determine the magnetic bearing
TO the center IF (IAF). That bearing should then be compared with the published
bearings that define the lateral boundaries of the TAA areas. Using the end IAFs
may give a false indication of which area the aircraft will enter. This is
critical when approaching the TAA near the extended boundary between the left
and right-base areas, especially where these areas contain different minimum
entering the TAA and cleared by air traffic control, are expected to proceed
directly to the IAF associated with that area of the TAA at the altitude
depicted, unless otherwise cleared by air traffic control. Cleared direct to an
Initial Approach Fix (IAF) without a clearance for the procedure 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. If a
pilot is not sure of what they are authorized or expected to do by air traffic,
they should ask air traffic 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
Sectored TAA Areas
c) Depiction of
the TAA on U.S. Government charts will be through the use of icons located in
the plan view outside the depiction of the actual approach procedure. (See
FIG 5-4-9). 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 for that
area. 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. Examples here are shown with the TAA
around the approach to aid pilots in visualizing how the TAA corresponds to the
approach and should not be confused with the actual approach chart depiction.
(d) Each waypoint
on the “T”, except the missed approach waypoint, is assigned a pronounceable
5-character name used in air traffic control communications, and which is found
in the RNAV databases for the procedure. The missed approach waypoint is
assigned a pronounceable name when it is not located at the runway threshold.
6. Once cleared to
fly the TAA, pilots are expected to obey minimum altitudes depicted within the
TAA icons, unless instructed otherwise by air traffic control. In
FIG 5-4-8, 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 reaching the IF (IAF).
RNAV (GPS) Approach Chart
This chart has been modified to depict new concepts and may not reflect actual approach minima.
TAA with Left and Right Base Areas Eliminated
7. Just as the
underlying “T” approach procedure may be modified in shape, the TAA may contain
modifications to the defined area shapes and sizes. Some areas may even be
eliminated, with other areas expanded as needed. FIG
5-4-10 is an example of a design limitation where a course reversal is
necessary when approaching the IF (IAF) from certain directions due to the
amount of turn required at the IF (IAF). Design criteria require a course
reversal whenever this turn exceeds 120 degrees. In this generalized example,
pilots approaching on a bearing TO the IF (IAF) from 300° clockwise through 060°
are expected to execute a course reversal. The term “NoPT” will be annotated on
the boundary of the TAA icon for the other portion of the TAA.
TAA with Right Base Eliminated
FIG 5-4-11 depicts another TAA modification that
pilots may encounter. In this generalized example, the right-base area has been
eliminated. Pilots operating within the TAA between 360°clockwise to 060°
bearing TO the IF (IAF) are expected to execute the course reversal in order to
properly align the aircraft for entry onto the intermediate segment. Aircraft
operating in all other areas from 060° clockwise to 360° bearing TO the IF (IAF)
need not perform the course reversal, and the term “NoPT” will be annotated on
the TAA boundary of the icon in these areas. TAAs are no longer being produced
with sections removed; however, some may still exist on previously published
Examples of a TAA with Feeders from an Airway
9. When an airway
does not cross the lateral TAA boundaries, a feeder route will be established 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 by air traffic control. (See
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 5-4-13.)
1. The 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.
2. Because 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.
f. 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: V.
1. VDPs 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 visual reference.
2. Pilots not
equipped to receive the VDP should fly the approach procedure as though no VDP
had been provided.
g. 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.
1. In 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
2. Since 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
h. 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).
i. 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
2. Additional 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
3. Pilots 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.
4. Since 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.
5. In 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 5-4-5j.
j. 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 descent.
1. Pilots 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
2. Visual 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)).
k. 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 5-4-9). 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
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. Current plans call for LAAS based
procedures to be published on a separate chart and for the GLS minima line to be
used only for LAAS. ATC clearance for the RNAV procedure authorizes a properly
certified pilot to utilize any minimums for which the aircraft is certified:
e.g. a WAAS equipped aircraft utilize 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
1. The minima
(a) GLS. “GLS” is the acronym for Ground
Based Augmentation System (GBAS) Landing
System. GBAS is the ICAO term for Local Area
Augmentation System (LAAS). 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 LAAS
and WAAS procedure publication have evolved, GLS
will now be used only for LAAS 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.
(b) LPV. “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 WAAS equipment.
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 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.
(d) LP. “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 (reference
section 9.b for further information on advisory
vertical guidance). 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 C-145B and TSO C-146B.
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 approach types.
(e) LNAV. 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. Existing GPS approaches continue to be
converted to the RNAV (GPS) format as they are revised or reviewed.
GPS receivers approved for approach operations in accordance with: AC 20-138,
Airworthiness Approval of Global Positioning System (GPS) Navigation Equipment
for Use as a VFR and IFR Supplemental Navigation System, for stand-alone
Technical Standard Order (TSO) TSO-C129 Class A(1) systems; or AC 20-130A,
Airworthiness Approval of Navigation or Flight Management Systems Integrating
Multiple Navigation Sensors, for GPS as part of a multi-sensor system, 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 20-138A, Airworthiness Approval of Global Navigation
Satellite System (GNSS) Equipment.
2. Other 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 shall include the waypoints, altitudes, and vertical data for the
procedure to be flown. The system shall also be able to extract the procedure in
its entirety, not just as a manually entered series of waypoints.
3. ILS or RNAV (GPS)
(a) Some 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
(b) Charting. There are charting differences
between ILS, RNAV (GPS), and GLS approaches.
(1) The LAAS procedure is titled “GLS
RWY XX” on the approach chart.
(2) The VDB provides information to the
airborne receiver where the guidance is synthesized.
(3) The 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.
(4) The RPI is charted.
(5) Most RNAV(GPS) approach charts
have had the GLS (NA) minima line replaced by an
LPV line of minima.
(6) Since 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 Performance (RNP)
(a) Pilots 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.
(b) Some 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 approach procedures.
5. Chart Terminology
(a) Decision 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.
(b) Minimum Descent Altitude (MDA) has
been in use for many years, and will continue to be
used for the LNAV only and circling procedures.
(c) Threshold 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.
(a) Each 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 provided.
(b) The minima
title box indicates the nature of the minimum altitude for the IAP. For example:
(1) DA will
be published next to the minima line title for minimums supporting vertical
guidance such as for GLS, LPV or LNAV/VNAV.
(2) MDA will be
published where the minima line was designed to support aircraft with only
lateral guidance available, such as LNAV or LP. Descent below the MDA, including
during the missed approach, is not authorized unless the visual conditions
stated in 14 CFR Section 91.175 exist.
(3) Where two or
more systems, such as LPV and LNAV/VNAV, share the same minima, each line of
minima will be displayed separately.
7. Chart 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.
(1) It 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
(2) The 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 LNAV/VNAV
(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.
(e) TAAs 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 5-4-9). 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
(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 pilot briefing.
(h) At 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
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.
5-4-6. Approach Clearance
a. An 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.
c. If 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.
d. The 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.
e. The following
applies to aircraft on radar vectors and/or cleared “direct to” in conjunction
with an approach clearance:
1. Maintain 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.
2. Continue on the
vector heading until intercepting the next published ground track applicable to
the approach clearance.
3. Once reaching
the final approach fix via the published segments, the pilot may continue on
approach to a landing.
4. If 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 the approach.
5. If cleared to
an IAF/IF via a NoPT route, or no procedure turn/holdinlieu of PT is
published, continue with the published approach.
6. In addition to
the above, RNAV aircraft may be issued a clearance direct to an Intermediate Fix
followed by a straightin approach clearance.
Refer to 14 CFR 91.175 (i).
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 weight.
b. When operating
on an unpublished route or while being radar vectored, the pilot, when an
approach clearance is received, shall, 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 shall not be considered a segment of that IAP until the aircraft
reaches the initial fix or navigation facility upon which the procedure turn is
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.
c. Several 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
d. The 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.
e. Except 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 shall 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.
f. Pilots 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.
g. Pilots 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
h. If 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
i. ATC may clear
aircraft that have filed an Advanced RNAV equipment suffix to the intermediate
fix when clearing aircraft for an instrument approach procedure. ATC will take
the following actions when clearing Advanced RNAV aircraft to the intermediate
1. Provide radar monitoring to the intermediate fix.
2. Advise the
pilot to expect clearance direct to the intermediate fix at least 5 miles from
This is to allow the pilot to program the RNAV equipment to allow the aircraft
to fly to the intermediate fix when cleared by ATC.
3. Assign an
altitude to maintain until the intermediate fix.
4. Insure the
aircraft is on a course that will intercept the intermediate segment at an angle
not greater than 90 degrees and is at an altitude that will permit normal
descent from the intermediate fix to the final approach fix.
5-4-8. Special Instrument
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
5-4-9. Procedure Turn
and Hold-in-lieu of Procedure Turn
a. A 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
1. On 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.
2. Descent 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.
3. When 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.
4. A 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 shall 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 G1 for both examples.)
6. A 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
1. In 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 procedure turn.
2. When a teardrop
procedure turn is depicted and a course reversal is required, this type turn
must be executed.
3. When 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
4. The 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:
1. A 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.
3. If more than
one missed approach procedure is available, none require a course reversal.
4. If only one
missed approach procedure is available, the following conditions are met:
reversal is not required; and,
ceiling and visibility are equal to or greater than the highest prescribed
circling minimums for the IAP.
5. When cleared
for the approach, pilots shall not execute a procedure turn. (14 CFR
b. Although 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 insure the appropriate time sequence between
the final approach fix/outer marker or fix used in lieu of the outer marker and
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
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
a. The 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).
b. A 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.
c. PAR 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
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
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
a. PAR 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.
b. Prior 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:
1. Passing 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 or MLS. 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. At locations where the MLS glidepath and PAR glidepath are not
coincidental, only azimuth monitoring will be provided.
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.
d. Radar service
is automatically terminated upon completion of the approach.
Approaches to Parallel Runways
a. ATC procedures
permit ILS instrument approach operations to dual or triple parallel runway
configurations. ILS/MLS approaches to parallel runways are grouped into three
classes: Parallel (dependent) ILS/MLS Approaches; Simultaneous Parallel
(independent) ILS/MLS Approaches; and Simultaneous Close Parallel (independent)
ILS Precision Runway Monitor (PRM) Approaches. (See FIG
5-4-18.) 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. Offset
localizer configurations result in loss of Category II capabilities and an
increase in decision 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, decision height, missed approach instructions, special
notes/procedures, and the assigned runway location/proximity to adjacent
runways. Pilots will be advised that simultaneous ILS/MLS or simultaneous close
parallel ILS PRM approaches are in use. This information may be provided through
c. The close
proximity of adjacent aircraft conducting simultaneous parallel ILS/MLS and
simultaneous close parallel ILS 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 ILS/MLS approaches require
pilot knowledge of procedures necessary to comply with ATC instructions.
Simultaneous parallel ILS/MLS and simultaneous close parallel ILS PRM approaches
necessitate precise localizer 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 navigation systems.
d. Strict radio
discipline is mandatory during parallel ILS/MLS 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 by the final monitor
controller during simultaneous parallel ILS/MLS and simultaneous close parallel
ILS PRM approaches.
Section 2, Radio Communications Phraseology and Techniques, gives additional
e. Use 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.
Parallel ILS Approaches
5-4-14. Parallel ILS/MLS Approaches (Dependent)
Staggered ILS Approaches
approaches are an ATC procedure permitting parallel ILS/MLS approaches to
airports having parallel runways separated by at least 2,500 feet between
centerlines. Integral parts of a total system are ILS/MLS, radar,
communications, ATC procedures, and required airborne equipment.
b. A parallel
(dependent) approach differs from a simultaneous (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 localizer/azimuth course is required.
c. Aircraft are
afforded a minimum of 1.5 miles radar separation diagonally between successive
aircraft on the adjacent localizer/azimuth 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 miles
diagonal radar separation is provided. Aircraft on the same localizer/azimuth
course within 10 miles of the runway end are provided a minimum of 2.5 miles
radar separation. 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 ILS/MLS approaches are in progress, pilots are informed that approaches
to both runways are in use. 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.
5-4-15. Simultaneous Parallel ILS/MLS Approaches (Independent)
Simultaneous Parallel ILS Approaches
a. System. An
approach system permitting simultaneous ILS/MLS approaches to parallel runways
with centerlines separated by 4,300 to 9,000 feet, and equipped with final
monitor controllers. Simultaneous parallel ILS/MLS approaches require 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
localizer course. Staggered radar separation procedures are not utilized.
Integral parts of a total system are ILS/MLS, radar, communications, ATC
procedures, and required airborne equipment. The Approach Procedure Chart
permitting simultaneous parallel ILS/MLS approaches will contain the note
“simultaneous approaches authorized RWYS 14L and 14R,” identifying the
appropriate runways as the case may be. When advised that simultaneous parallel
ILS/MLS approaches are in progress, pilots shall advise approach control
immediately of malfunctioning or inoperative receivers, or if a simultaneous
parallel ILS/MLS approach is not desired.
b. Radar Monitoring.
This service is provided for each simultaneous parallel ILS/MLS approach to
ensure aircraft do not deviate from the final approach course. Radar monitoring
includes instructions if an aircraft nears or penetrates the prescribed NTZ (an
area 2,000 feet wide located equidistant between parallel final approach
courses). This service will be provided as follows:
1. During 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.
2. The final
monitor controller will have the capability of overriding the tower controller
on the tower frequency.
3. Pilots will be
instructed to monitor the tower frequency to receive advisories and
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 also issue missed approach or
breakout instructions to the deviating aircraft.
“(Aircraft call sign) YOU HAVE CROSSED THE FINAL APPROACH COURSE. TURN
(left/right) IMMEDIATELY AND RETURN TO THE LOCALIZER/AZIMUTH COURSE,”
“(aircraft call sign) TURN (left/right) AND RETURN TO THE LOCALIZER/AZIMUTH
5. If a deviating
aircraft fails to respond to such instructions or is observed penetrating the
NTZ, the aircraft on the adjacent final approach course may be instructed to
“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 (for runway centerlines spaced 4,300
feet or greater). Final monitor controllers will not advise pilots when
radar monitoring is terminated.
5-4-16. Simultaneous Close Parallel ILS PRM Approaches (Independent) and
Simultaneous Offset Instrument Approaches (SOIA) (See
ILS PRM Approaches
(Simultaneous Close Parallel)
1. ILS/PRM is an
acronym for Instrument Landing System/Precision Runway Monitor.
(a) An approach
system that permits simultaneous ILS/PRM approaches to dual runways with
centerlines separated by less than 4,300 feet but at least 3,400 feet for
parallel approach courses, and at least 3,000 feet if one ILS if offset by 2.5
to 3.0 degrees. The airspace between the final approach courses contains a No
Transgression Zone (NTZ) with surveillance provided by two PRM monitor
controllers, one for each approach course. To qualify for reduced lateral runway
separation, monitor controllers must be equipped with high update radar and high
resolution ATC radar displays, collectively called a PRM system. The PRM system
displays almost instantaneous radar information. Automated tracking software
provides PRM monitor controllers with aircraft identification, position, speed
and a ten-second projected position, as well as visual and aural controller
alerts. The PRM system is a supplemental requirement for simultaneous close
parallel approaches in addition to the system requirements for simultaneous
parallel ILS/MLS approaches described in paragraph 5-4-15,
Simultaneous Parallel ILS/MLS Approaches (Independent).
(b) Simultaneous close parallel ILS/PRM approaches are depicted on a
separate Approach Procedure Chart titled ILS/PRM Rwy XXX (Simultaneous Close
2. 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
(a) The 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, and a note that provides the separation between
the two runways used for simultaneous operations.
monitor the SOIA ILS/PRM and LDA/PRM approaches with a PRM system using high
update radar and high-resolution ATC radar displays 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 LDA aircraft must be accomplished. 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.
(c) In 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.
requirements as identified in subpara a 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
(a) For 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 http://www.faa.gov
for additional information and to view or download the video.
(b) For operations
under Part 91:
operating transport category aircraft must be familiar with PRM
operations as contained in this section of the Aeronautical Information Manual
(AIM). In addition, pilots operating transport category aircraft must
view the FAA video “ILS PRM AND SOIA APPROACHES: INFORMATION FOR AIR CARRIER
PILOTS.” Refer to http://www.faa.gov for additional information and to
view or download the video.
SOIA Approach Geometry
The SAP is a design point along the extended centerline of the intended landing runway on the
glide slope at 500 feet above the landing threshold. It is used to verify a sufficient distance is
provided for the visual maneuver after the missed approach point (MAP) to permit the pilots to
conform to approved, stabilized approach criteria.
The point along the LDA where the course separation with the adjacent ILS reaches 3,000 feet.
The altitude of the glide slope at that point determines the approach minimum descent altitude
and is where the NTZ terminates. Maneuvering inside the MAP is done in visual conditions.
Angle formed at the intersection of the extended LDA runway centerline and a line drawn between
the LDA MAP and the SAP. The size of the angle is determined by the FAA SOIA computer design
program, and is dependent on whether Heavy aircraft use the LDA and the spacing between the
Distance from MAP to runway threshold in statute miles (light credit applies).
LDA aircraft must see the runway landing environment and, if less than standard radar
separation exists between the aircraft on the adjacent ILS course, the LDA aircraft must visually
acquire the ILS aircraft and report it in sight to ATC prior to the LDA MAP.
(2) Pilots not
operating 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.” Refer to http://www.faa.gov for additional information
and to view or download the video.
2. ATC Directed
Breakout. An ATC directed “breakout” is defined as a vector off the ILS or
LDA approach course in response to another aircraft penetrating the NTZ, the
2,000 foot wide area located equidistance between the two approach courses that
is monitored by the PRM monitor controllers.
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
c. Radar Monitoring. Simultaneous close parallel ILS/PRM and LDA/PRM
approaches require that final monitor controllers utilize the PRM system to
ensure prescribed separation standards are met. Procedures and communications
phraseology are also described in paragraph 5-4-15,
Simultaneous Parallel ILS/MLS Approaches (Independent). A minimum of 3 miles
radar separation or 1,000 feet vertical separation will be provided during the
turn-on to close parallel final approach courses. To 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 instructions. In the event of a
missed approach, radar monitoring is provided to one-half mile beyond the most
distant of the two runway departure ends for ILS/RPM approaches. In SOIA, PRM
radar monitoring terminates at the LDA MAP. Final monitor controllers will
not notify pilots when radar monitoring is terminated.
d. Attention All Users
Page (AAUP). ILS/PRM and LDA/PRM approach charts have an AAUP associated
with them that must be referred to in preparation for conducting the approach.
This page contains the following instructions that must be followed if the pilot
is unable to accept an ILS/PRM or LDA/PRM approach.
1. At airports
that conduct PRM operations, (ILS/PRM or, in the case of airports where SOIAs
are conducted, ILS/PRM and LDA/PRM approaches) pilots not qualified to except
PRM approaches must contact the FAA Command Center prior to departure
(1-800-333-4286) to obtain an arrival reservation (see FAA Advisory Circular
90-98, Simultaneous Closely Spaced Parallel Operations at Airports Using
Precision Runway Monitor (PRM) Systems). Arriving flights that are unable to
participate in ILS/PRM or LDA/PRM approaches and have not received an arrival
reservation are subject to diversion to another airport or delays. Pilots en
route to a PRM airport designated as an alternate, unable to reach their filed
destination, and who are not qualified to participate in ILS/PRM or LDA/PRM
approaches must advise ATC as soon as practical that they are unable to
participate. Pilots who are qualified to participate but experience an en route
equipment failure that would preclude participation in PRM approaches should
notify ATC as soon as practical.
2. The AAUP covers
the following operational topics:
(a) ATIS. 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:
(1) Minimums and
missed approach procedures are unchanged.
(2) PRM Monitor
frequency no longer required.
(3) ATC may assign
a lower altitude for glide slope intercept.
In the case of the LDA/PRM approach, this briefing procedure only applies if an
LDA 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:
weather minimums are X,XXX feet (ceiling), x miles (visibility).
(b) Dual VHF
Communications Required. To avoid blocked transmissions, each runway will
have two frequencies, a primary and a 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. Begin to monitor
the PRM monitor controller 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
(c) Breakouts. 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.
breakouts. All breakouts are to be hand-flown to ensure the maneuver is
accomplished in the shortest amount of time.
(2) 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 provides 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).
(d) ILS/PRM Navigation. The
pilot may find crossing altitudes along the final approach course. The pilot is
advised that descending on the ILS glideslope ensures complying with any charted
SOIA AAUP differences
from ILS PRM AAUP
(e) ILS/PRM LDA Traffic (only
published on ILS/PRM AAUP when the ILS PRM approach is used in conjunctions 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.
SOIA LDA/PRM AAUP
Items. The AAUP for the SOIA LDA/PRM approach contains most information
found on ILS/PRM AAUPs. 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 time the ILS aircraft is visually acquired until landing.
(f) SOIA LDA/PRM
Navigation (replaces ILS/PRM (d) and
(e) above). The pilot may find crossing
altitudes 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.
(g) SOIA (Name)
Airport Visual Segment (replaces ILS/PRM (e)
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:
(1) the ILS
traffic is in sight and is expected to remain in sight,
(2) ATC has been
advised that “traffic is in sight.”
(3) the runway
environment is in sight.
Otherwise, a missed
approach must be executed. Between the LDA MAP and the runway threshold, pilots
of the LDA aircraft are responsible for separating themselves visually from
traffic on the ILS approach, which means maneuvering the aircraft as necessary
to avoid the ILS traffic until landing, and providing wake turbulence avoidance,
if applicable. Pilots should advise ATC, as soon as practical, if visual contact
with the ILS traffic is lost and execute a missed approach unless otherwise
instructed by ATC.
e. SOIA LDA Approach
Wake Turbulence. Pilots are responsible for wake turbulence avoidance when
maneuvering between the LDA missed approach point and the runway threshold.
f. Differences between ILS and ILS/PRM approaches of importance to the pilot.
1. Runway Spacing.
Prior to ILS/PRM and LDA/PRM approaches, most ATC directed breakouts were the
result of two aircraft in-trail 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 approaches, two aircraft could be along side 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 (breakout) and 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 receives 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 frequency.
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 hand-flown
breakout can be initiated consistently faster than a breakout performed using
4. TCAS. 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
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 shall 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.
5. Breakouts. 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 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.
5-4-17. Simultaneous Converging Instrument Approaches
a. ATC 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.
b. The 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 (ILS/MLS) approach systems on 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 SAAAR
Instrument Approach Procedures
These procedures require
authorization analogous to the special authorization required for Category II or
III ILS procedures. Special aircraft and aircrew authorization required (SAAAR)
procedures are to be conducted by aircrews meeting special training requirements
in aircraft that meet the specified performance and functional requirements.
characteristics of RNP SAAAR 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 SAAAR 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 navigation.
4. Non-standard speeds
or climb gradients. RNP SAAAR 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 altitude.
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 SAAAR Approach Operations
1. RNP Stand-alone
Approach Operations. RNP SAAAR 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 constraints.
2. RNP Parallel
Approach (RPA) Operations. RNP SAAAR 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 radar monitoring.
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 centerline.
4. RNP Converging
Runway Operations. At airports where runways converge, but may or may not
intersect, an RNP SAAAR 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
ATC 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.
b. Aircraft 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.
RVR Value Conversions
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 clearance area.
approach protected areas are defined by the tangential connection of arcs drawn
from each runway end. The arc radii distance differs by aircraft approach
category (see FIG 5-4-26). Because of obstacles near
the airport, a portion of the circling area may be restricted by a procedural
note: e.g., “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
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 3/4
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 thresholds.
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 runway.
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:
1. Maneuver 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
2. It 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 to land.
3. At 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.
4. The 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 shall be conducted in accordance with the
procedures and minimums approved by the military agency having jurisdiction over
5-4-21. Missed Approach
a. When 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
d. At 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 5-4-29.)
e. Some 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.
f. When approach
has been missed, request clearance for specific action; i.e., to alternative
airport, another approach, etc.
g. Pilots 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
h. A 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
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 procedures.
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.
1. Straight-In 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 shall 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
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:
(a) The ALS (if installed), or
(b) The following visual references in both
(b)(1) and (b)(2) below:
(1) The 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 lights (REIL).
(2) The 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 determines that:
(a) The EFV is less than the visibility minima
prescribed for the IAP being used;
(b) The required visual references for the runway of intended landing are no longer distinctly
visible and identifiable to the pilot using the EFVS
(c) The 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 maneuvers; or
(d) For 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 landing.
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:
(a) The lights or markings of the threshold, or
(b) The 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
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:
(a) The 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
(b) The 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 maneuvers; or
(c) For 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 landing.
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 plans.
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 EFVS systems.
5-4-23. Visual Approach
a. A 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.
d. Separation 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 turbulence separation.
e. A 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
h. Radar 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)
a. CVFPs 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
procedures will be used only at airports with an operating control tower.
c. Most 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.
e. When landmarks
used for navigation are not visible at night, the approach will be annotated “PROCEDURE
NOT AUTHORIZED AT NIGHT.”
f. CVFPs 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.
h. CVFPs are not
instrument approaches and do not have missed approach segments.
i. ATC will not
issue clearances for CVFPs when the weather is less than the published minimum.
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
k. Pilots 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 go‐around.
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.
b. Controllers may
authorize a contact approach provided:
1. The contact
approach is specifically requested by the pilot. ATC cannot initiate this
Request contact approach.
2. The reported
ground visibility at the destination airport is at least 1 statute mile.
3. The contact
approach will be made to an airport having a standard or special instrument
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.
c. A 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, MLS, ADF, VOR or Straight‐in 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 5-4-30.) 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.
3. “Break” 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).