FromNonprecisionApproachestoPrecision-Like.PDF

froM NoNPrecisioN aPProaches to P recisioN-liKe aPProaches: Methods and operational Procedures BY CAPT. ETIENNE TARNOWSKI Introduction the risk of controlled flight into terrain (CFIT) during final approach. he methods and operational procedures that This evolution and rationalization have been have been defined by airframe manufactur- achieved schematically in three steps since 1970: ers, airlines and other operators for pilots tto fly non-ILS (instrument landing system) • First step, 1970s — NPAs; approaches have evolved over the past 35 years. • Second step, 1980s — constant descent The evolution of these procedures has been angle/stabilized NPAs; and, dictated by the following factors: • Third step, 1990s onward — precision-like • The way nonprecision approaches (NPAs) approaches. or precision-like approaches are defined; Main Factors Involved in NPAs • The navigation sensors used aboard the airplane; and, Any type of instrument approach procedure (IAP) to a runway is a lateral and vertical trajec- • The on-board instruments provided to fly tory defined so as to be flown by airplanes in the approach and monitor the approach. instrument meteorological conditions (IMC) down to the applicable minimums, where visual The combin