Wanted to check my understanding on RNAV / LNAV

Just to clarify, LOC provides lateral guidance only, from a ground based aid. If flying a LOC only approach, without any glideslope, using the APR mode of the autopilot will not descend the aircraft at all. You could also use NAV mode and achieve the same result.

Now the sometimes confusing part, is that many modern GPS/FMS units provide/calculate verticle guidance to non precision (no verticle guidance) approaches by creating a verticle path between waypoints, with altitudes assigned to each. This is ‘nice to have’ stuff and is not required to fly the approach (ignoring LVP approaches). Indeed, all the tolerances and weather minima are based on calculating the verticle part manually. How you fly it is up to you. AP off completely and hand flown, or on autopilot.

When using the AP and GPS/FMS derived vertical guidance, the AP modes to use actually depends on the aircraft equipment and installation. In GA aircraft, the only vertical guidance mode of most autopilots is APR, so the GPS actually creates a signal that is seen as a glideslope by the autopilot in order for this mode to work correctly, hence APR is used. On newer larger aircraft with VNAV, this function is used instead as the autopilot is capable of interpreting the verticle commands sent directly from the GPS/FMS unit.

The key is to know how it works in you specific aircraft, as everyone could be different.

2 Likes

Thanks everyone. I can’t tell you how much I truly appreciate all of the feedback and guidance.

So, now I understand. Basically in aviation there are two ways for the plane to automatically descend down. Either with the ILS system, or with the VNAV (gps) system.

I can’t wait for the VNAV to start working in MSFS. I think that will be great and will take a ton of load off when trying to come in and land in some on these really tricky places. ILOW is another place that is hard to fly into, lol.

I did want to ask a followup… (back to the KASE) diagram. I see that there are NO direct approaches listed on the plate and it is listed as only circle. Does this mean that you CANT come in straight, and you MUST circle?

Also, in terms of circle. Does this mean that you need to circle in terms of flying around the airfield? (upwind, crosswind, downwind, base, final?) or does this mean that you need to pull a tight circle to burn ALT at some point before the runway?

Lastly, just to confirm that the “pattern” is a standard operation, (1000’ AGL) with the legs that I listed above. So, this means that I would take the airfield elevation and keep an eye on the elevation when going into the pattern to stay 1000’ feet above. The question then comes, which side of the airfield can I fly when coming in to a given runway? I noticed that turning one way vs the other from a base into the runway 15 at KASE makes a BIG difference. So, if I fly the upwind on the left of the field and then end up with a right turn into final it is very hard to then get re aligned with the runway because of terrain. BUT, if I were to fly the upwind on the right and then end up with a left turn from base to final its far better.

Or maybe this pattern is not needed, and pilots are allowed to go straight in as they want.

A circling approach simply means an approach that is aligned greater than 30° from the runway. Nothing more.

Unless the chart specifically states any restrictions on circling such as “circling not approved west of runway” than you’re free to maneuver however you like, within a certain distance. Standard circuits legs, such as downwind, base, etc are no longer required. Turn left or right, your choice (maybe a heavy shower is on one side of the runway only?). Also 1000’ agl is not required, and may not be possible in some cases. I can’t remember the actual altitude requirement but it’s along the lines of a minimum 300’ obstacle clearance along your flight path (day only, night is slightly different).

Legally, feel free to dive bomb it in and go strait to final from 2nm and 3000’ if you like. Obviously common sense would dictate otherwise. In reality, the closer you can keep things to standard circuits, with familiar runway spacing, speeds, descent rates and configurations, the safer and easier the whole circling procedure becomes.

This all assumes weather is near to minimums. If you fly the approach and break visual 5nm away, than you are free to maneuver however you like, no need to wait till the last waypoint/MAP to start (ATC dependent of course).

1 Like

Lnav can just take care of your lateral navigation. Imagine a 3d map spread out before you and you’re a toy airplane. The Lnav can get you anywhere on that map but you have to manually control the climb and descent to land safely, otherwise the autopilot flies you straight into a mountain. Add Vnav to that and it gets you safely over all obstacles if you programmed the altitudes into the waypoints and also determines the best climb/descent profile based on the selected waypoint altitude, (respecting restrictions, noise abatement procedures etc) and glideslope degree which usually is 3 (correct if wrong). Basically you can say that Vnav adds a whole dimension. Lnav = 2D, Lnav + Vnav = 3d navigation. Often times the Vnav mode can also just act as a guidance, when the plane lacks the full automation.

2 Likes

Thank you. Yes, I see now LNAV is just another name for GPS. It appears different planes call it different things depending on the air frame.

1 Like

Just clarifying for anyone else that reads.

LNAV is a lateral navigation mode in an aircraft’s flight director/autopilot system, that allows tracking of routes defined by means other than raw ground based radio aids. This could be from a LORAN system, an INS/IRS system, a GPS system, or a combination of many combined into a FMS. Most of these systems are capable of Area Navigation (RNAV) by calculating legs from any two points in space, using Lat/Long.

GPS is simply a type of navigation system utilising spaces based satellites for accurate position fixing, as we all know.

1 Like

Thanks so much. yes, I think the confusion for me (and likely others) is because some of this kinda means the same thing… and the big “ah ha” moment for me was understanding there is “method” and then there is “system”. So, while there are labeled “systems” in the plane, it can apply to different “methods” as depicted in the aviation world. So, once some of this becomes overlaid with a specific jet / plane and situation it all becomes a bit more clear. For example, the CJ4 says “LNAV” in the PDF when you press “NAV” on the FD panel, and this is simply “GPS” heading mode in simple terms. Everything else is up to me. Speed, vertical, rate, etc. Another plane may display that as “GPS” in the PDF, or even just “NAV” etc.

It’s also clear that some of this / terms are from when things like GPS was not as common as it is today, and as more and more newer planes are being “updated” the labeling is changing a bit it seems.

But, I appreciate the in depth explanation on what this all technically means on paper. All very interesting stuff. The thing I have walked away with, is that in practical application in the sim / even real world… there is no difference between “RNAV” , or “LNAV” or “GPS” as it relates to getting the plane to point A to B. RNAV, and LNAV are just definitions of what GPS in fact does, but by large most people would simply use GPS in a modern plane to fly the fixes, and this would be considered all of the above. The ONLY difference here is when we talk about VNAV. As this obviously deals with ascending / descending etc.

As I understand it they are synonyms as he said but the way they came about is important to. They are all remainders essentially from the evolution of GPS. As technology
evolved we incorporated all these things one at a time (i.e. LNAV to RNAV to VNAV, etc) I am not exactly sure which chicken came before which egg but I beleive that answers all the questions, including why some planes have dedicated buttons. Because they where built in different eras.

Edit. Looks like you got here already should have read on…

Probably, everything was said already but not by everyone. So, here is my turn: =)

For the sake of completeness, we should clarify what we are talking about. I try to put it short and comprehensive, so please forgive inaccuracies.

Firstly, we are talking about RNAV (Area Navigation) which is satellite based navigation (GNSS, for example GPS, GLONASS etc), nowadays mostly improved by corrective information provided by ground stations, satellites or the like (GPS: ABAS, GBAS or SBAS) in contrast to conventional “raw-data” navigation using ground stations. The term “RNP” (Required Navigation Performance) is also used in this context and describes the requirement of the on-board avionics to meet a certain degree of precision in order to be allowed to fly certain procedures. The degree of performance required might, for example, be 0.3 (RNP 0.3), which means that the on-board avionics must be within 0.3 NM from the actual position for at least 95 % of the time. In real life, there is the ANP (Actual Navigation Performance) indicated on most avionics. This piece of information basically tells the pilot whether he is allowed to fly certain approaches or not.

As to LNAV and VNAV: Again, it is important to know what we are talking about. LNAV and VNAV are mostly (with the exception of RNP approaches, see below) associated with autopilot modes. LNAV means that the AP/FD follows the flight plan left/right), VNAV means that the AP/FD considers the altitudes/flight levels provided in the flightplan.

VNAV mode does not necessarily mean that altitude information is derived from satellites! VNAV mode basically is only a method how the autopilot calculates the required climb/descent rate for meeting a defined altitude/flight level at a specified waypoint.

For the sake of completeness, LNAV/VNAV might also relate to RNAV (RNP) approaches:

As stated above, RNAV/RNP always relies on (lateral) positioning derived from signals coming from satellites and interpreted by on-board avionics, improved (augmented) by correction signals coming from ground stations, geostationary satellites or the like. When it comes to approaches, it is obvious that there is a very high degree of precision required in order to provide safe instrument approaches, in particular with regard to the vertical guidance. This is, where the terms “LNAV”, “LNAV/VNAV” and “LPV” come in - with regard to approaches.

To put it short:

“LNAV” approaches have about the same precision and minima as VOR approaches: No vertical guidance (from the FAF onwards) at all but only check altitudes on the approach plate to monitor whether you are above or below the intended glide path.

“LNAV/VNAV” approaches are similar to ILS Cat I approaches when it comes to precision and minima. There are both vertical and lateral guidance, however, the vertical guidance can take the information from the barometric altimeter into consideration (similar to ILS Cat I). Therefore, the minimum is quite high.

As someone else already stated, “LPV” means “Localizer Performance with Vertical guidance” and is the most precise approach available when it comes to RNP. If I recall correctly, vertical information in this case is indeed taken from satellite based information. Minima can be below Cat I minima.

For example, the RNP approach into RWY 28R in LOWK provides for different OCAs (Obstacle Clearance Altitudes), which are the basis for the Decision Altitudes, whether your aircraft is capable of LNAV, LNAV/VNAV or LPV: (see LOWK RNP 28R)

Again, please note that this is only a question of the avionics’ capabilities and has absolutely nothing to do with autopilot modes!

2 Likes