IFR three approach interpretation

[midlifeflyer]

→→→→→whee! This is fun!

I use that one all the time. There are also ones for left arrow, up arrow, down arrow, and even a two-headed arrow ↔

 

[IK04]

The use of approaches based on three different naviads isn't what's required. Whats required is that you do three different types of approaches which each use navigation systems.

Roger that, but an ILS and a LOC approach are similar, according to them, perhaps. Now, if it said "three approaches, including at least a one precision and one non-precision approach," that would be different...

 

[dtuuri]

Whats required is that you do three different types of approaches...

Not to pick nits, but it says "kinds" not "types". To me, the FAA uses "type" when it wants to drill down to more specific characteristics, like type of airplane or type of certificate. It uses "kind" more broadly, like in "kind of operations, VFR or IFR; day or night". So, following the history of the rule, I have to disagree with you. They went from ADF, VOR and ILS approaches, which are based on different "kinds" of navaids, to language that includes even more different kinds of navaids, including not yet invented ones. IMO.