New ACS May 31, 2024

midlifeflyer

midlifeflyer

Touchdown! Greaser!
PoA Supporter
Joined
May 25, 2006
Messages
22,002
Location
KTTA, North Carolina
Display Name
Who you kiddin?
Home Airfield
KTTA
Amendments to the FAR making the ACS regulatory go into effect May 24 along with new ACS. I have not reviewed all the changes. Most are expected to be minor, but the new Instrument ACS has the big one many have discussed - the removal of the requirement to use at least one land-based nonprecision approach for the checkrides and IPC. This will be important in those areas where a realistic VOR or LOC approach is difficult to find and especially for those who chose to remove VLOC receivers from their aircraft.

See Appendix 3 of the new Instrument ACS for details.
 
The aircraft with only a GPS navigator aside, it will be such a welcome change for an IPC to stop pretending that an airplane without DME has DME or that there is a "Glideslope Unreliable" NOTAM for the local ILS or LOC (which may well be DME required too!). It will be refreshing to choose approaches, the pilot may actually fly in the real world.
 
midlifeflyer said:
It will be refreshing to choose approaches, the pilot may actually fly in the real world.
Click to expand...

I had to go back and read the current ACS, because this confused me. I don’t require pilots to use ground-based aids on IPCs today, as long as the approaches they want meet the performance standards to count for a precision approach (DA <300’).

That doesn’t immediately seem like it’s changing in either version of ACS, and I specifically like making an IPC model the type of flying a pilot does, unless they are trying to do something else.

I still haven’t had a student take me up on flying the last available SDF approach in the country…

I also like that the new ACS explicitly allows the advisory glidepath on non-precision approaches.
 
cailloux said:
I had to go back and read the current ACS, because this confused me. I don’t require pilots to use ground-based aids on IPCs today, as long as the approaches they want meet the performance standards to count for a precision approach (DA <300’).
Click to expand...
Read Appendix 7 in the current ACS.

Task A. Nonprecision Approach The evaluator will select nonprecision approaches representative of the type that the applicant is likely to use. The choices must use at least two different types of navigational aids.​
 
midlifeflyer said:
Read Appendix 7 in the current ACS.

Task A. Nonprecision Approach The evaluator will select nonprecision approaches representative of the type that the applicant is likely to use. The choices must use at least two different types of navigational aids.​
Click to expand...

Oh, that’s what you mean. Yes, that makes sense. I’m glad that I have a checklist for these things that don’t rely on my memory, because I end up throwing a LOC into the mix.
 
midlifeflyer said:
Amendments to the FAR making the ACS regulatory go into effect May 24 along with new ACS. I have not reviewed all the changes. Most are expected to be minor, but the new Instrument ACS has the big one many have discussed - the removal of the requirement to use at least one land-based nonprecision approach for the checkrides and IPC. This will be important in those areas where a realistic VOR or LOC approach is difficult to find and especially for those who chose to remove VLOC receivers from their aircraft.

See Appendix 3 of the new Instrument ACS for details.
Click to expand...

were you involved in the rewrites?
 
Old ACS specifies "two different types of navigational aids."

New ACS says "two different non-precision approaches"

New ACS says "A non-precision approach is a standard instrument approach procedure to a published minimum descent altitude without
approved vertical guidance."

So an LPV or LNAV/VNAV approach cannot be flown as a Non precision approach, because those approaches have approved vertical guidance.

How could a GPS only equipped aircraft comply with the requirement to do "two different non-precision approaches"?
 
tonycondon said:
Old ACS specifies "two different types of navigational aids."

New ACS says "two different non-precision approaches"

New ACS says "A non-precision approach is a standard instrument approach procedure to a published minimum descent altitude without
approved vertical guidance."

So an LPV or LNAV/VNAV approach cannot be flown as a Non precision approach, because those approaches have approved vertical guidance.

How could a GPS only equipped aircraft comply with the requirement to do "two different non-precision approaches"?
Click to expand...
I wonder if LNAV RWY 19 and LNAV RWY 01 are two different non-precision approaches? They're the same type of navigational aid, but that blurb has been removed.
 
tonycondon said:
Old ACS specifies "two different types of navigational aids."

New ACS says "two different non-precision approaches"

New ACS says "A non-precision approach is a standard instrument approach procedure to a published minimum descent altitude without
approved vertical guidance."

So an LPV or LNAV/VNAV approach cannot be flown as a Non precision approach, because those approaches have approved vertical guidance.

How could a GPS only equipped aircraft comply with the requirement to do "two different non-precision approaches"?
Click to expand...
Two different runways.
Two different airports.
One LNAV. One LP.
One circling, one straight in.
One has straight ahead missed, one has a turning missed.
[Add yours here]

Don’t overthink it. Just like what they did when the fixed the IFR cross country problem, the key is the removal of the requirement for “at least two different types of navigational aids.” Your concern sounds like it assumes that language is still there. “Two different approaches” is not the same as “two different types of nav aids.”

Plus, consider the other requirements. Within those two nonprecision approaches, at least one has to be a full approach (not vectors to final), at least one has to be sans autopilot, and at least one has to be partial panel. Don’t worry, even if your airplane is old school and you do two different VOR approaches, there will be different skills tested.

Beats the heck out of pretending there’s a “GS Unreliable” NOTAM so you can pretend to fly a LOC approach or pretend to have DME when you don’t (ad sometimes both!).
 
Last edited:
Are there any NDB approaches left in the lower 48? Of course, not many airplanes have the proper receivers for NDB approaches.
 
Sluggo63 said:
I wonder if LNAV RWY 19 and LNAV RWY 01 are two different non-precision approaches? They're the same type of navigational aid, but that blurb has been removed.
Click to expand...
I don't wonder whether two different nonprecision approaches are two different nonprecision approaches.
 
Do these changes now mean that an LPV approach is now defined as a precision approach?
 
Kristin said:
Do these changes now mean that an LPV approach is now defined as a precision approach?
Click to expand...
As @MauleSkinner said, only for the ACS. LPV approaches have been usable for the precision approach ACS task since 2018. The new ACS definition removes the over/under 300 AGL DA differential and effectively adds a LNAV/VNAV.
1711968352349.png
Let’s keep in mind what the ACS is. It’s a list of tasks to evaluate certain skills on a test. It does not set standards for or regulates anything else. The precision approach task is designed to test skills associated with certain types of approaches - flying official vertical guidance to a decision altitude. That’s all it does.
 
midlifeflyer said:
As @MauleSkinner said, only for the ACS. LPV approaches have been usable for the precision approach ACS task since 2018. The new ACS definition removes the over/under 300 AGL DA differential and effectively adds a LNAV/VNAV.
View attachment 127317
Let’s keep in mind what the ACS is. It’s a list of tasks to evaluate certain skills on a test. It does not set standards for or regulates anything else. The precision approach task is designed to test skills associated with certain types of approaches - flying official vertical guidance to a decision altitude. That’s all it does.
Click to expand...
LPVs were usable for ACS (PTS) purposes as precision approaches way before 2018. The PTS I flew my checkride under in 2014 was the 2010 version (with the less than or equal 300 AGL HAT DA verbiage) and I flew an LPV for my precision approach.
 
tsts4 said:
LPVs were usable for ACS (PTS) purposes as precision approaches way before 2018. The PTS I flew my checkride under in 2014 was the 2010 version (with the less than or equal 300 AGL HAT DA verbiage) and I flew an LPV for my precision approach.
Click to expand...
You are correct. I thought so too and was looking for the PTS immediately before the ACS. I finally found it. Looks like March, 2010.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top