# Descent Rates and Glidepaths for Nonprecision Approaches

## Maximum Acceptable Descent Rates

Operational experience and research have shown that a descent rate of greater than approximately 1,000 fpm is unacceptable during the final stages of an approach (below 1,000 feet AGL). This is due to a human perceptual limitation that is independent of the type of airplane or helicopter. Therefore, the operational practices and techniques must ensure that descent rates greater than 1,000 fpm are not permitted in either the instrument or visual portions of an approach and landing operation.

For short runways, arriving at the MDA at the MAP when the MAP is located at the threshold may require a missed approach for some aircraft. For non-precision approaches, a descent rate should be used that ensures the aircraft reaches the MDA at a distance from the threshold that allows landing in the TDZ. On many IAPs, this distance is annotated by a VDP. If no VDP is annotated, calculate a normal descent point to the TDZ. To determine the required rate of descent, subtract the TDZE from the FAF altitude and divide this by the time inbound. For example, if the FAF altitude is 2,000 feet MSL, the TDZE is 400 feet MSL and the time inbound is two minutes, an 800 fpm rate of descent should be used.

To verify the aircraft is on an approximate three degree glidepath, use a calculation of 300 feet to 1 NM. The glidepath height above TDZE is calculated by multiplying the NM distance from the threshold by 300. For example, at 10 NM the aircraft should be 3,000 feet above the TDZE, at 5 NM the aircraft should be 1,500 feet above the TDZE, at 2 NM the aircraft should be 600 feet above the TDZE, and at 1.5 NM the aircraft should be 450 feet above the TDZE until a safe landing can be made. Using the example in the previous text, the aircraft should arrive at the MDA (800 feet MSL) approximately 1.3 NM from the threshold and in a position to land within the TDZ. Techniques for deriving a 300-to-1 glide path include using DME, distance advisories provided by radar-equipped control towers, RNAV, GPS, dead reckoning, and pilotage when familiar features on the approach course are visible. The runway threshold should be crossed at a nominal height of 50 feet above the TDZE.

## Transition to a Visual Approach

The transition from instrument flight to visual flight during an instrument approach can be very challenging, especially during low visibility operations. Aircrews should use caution when transitioning to a visual approach at times of shallow fog. Adequate visibility may not exist to allow flaring of the aircraft. Aircrews must always be prepared to execute a missed approach/go-around. Additionally, single-pilot operations make the transition even more challenging. Approaches with vertical guidance add to the safety of the transition to visual because the approach is already stabilized upon visually acquiring the required references for the runway. 100 to 200 feet prior to reaching the DA, DH, or MDA, most of the PM’s attention should be outside of the aircraft in order to visually acquire at least one visual reference for the runway, as required by the regulations. The PF should stay focused on the instruments until the PM calls out any visual aids that can be seen, or states “runway in sight. ”The PF should then begin the transition to visual flight. It is common practice for the PM to call out the V/S during the transition to confirm to the PF that the instruments are being monitored, thus allowing more of the PF’s attention to be focused on the visual portion of the approach and landing. Any deviations from the stabilized approach criteria should also be announced by the PM.

Single-pilot operations can be much more challenging because the pilot must continue to fly by the instruments while attempting to acquire a visual reference for the runway. While it is important for both pilots of a two-pilot aircraft to divide their attention between the instruments and visual references, it is even more critical for the single- pilot operation. The flight visibility must also be at least the visibility minimum stated on the instrument approach chart, or as required by regulations. CAT II and III approaches have specific requirements that may differ from CAT I precision or non-precision approach requirements regarding transition to visual and landing. This information can be found in the operator’s OpSpecs or FOM.

The visibility published on an approach chart is dependent on many variables, including the height above touchdown for straight-in approaches or height above airport elevation for circling approaches. Other factors include the approach light system coverage, and type of approach procedure, such as precision, non-precision, circling or straight-in. Another factor determining the minimum visibility is the penetration of the 34:1 and 20:1 surfaces. These surfaces are inclined planes that begin 200 feet out from the runway and extend outward to the DA point (for approaches with vertical guidance), the VDP location (for non-precision approaches) and 10,000 feet for an evaluation to a circling runway. If there is a penetration of the 34:1 surface, the published visibility can be no lower than three-fourths SM. If there is penetration of the 20:1 surface, the published visibility can be no lower than 1 SM with a note prohibiting approaches to the affected runway at night (both straight-in and circling). [Figure 1 ] Circling may be permitted at night if penetrating obstacles are marked and lighted. If the penetrating obstacles are not marked and lighted, a note is published that night circling is “Not Authorized.” Pilots should be aware of these penetrating obstacles when entering the visual and/or circling segments of an approach and take adequate precautions to avoid them. For RNAV approaches only, the presence of a grey shaded line from the MDA to the runway symbol in the profile view is an indication that the visual segment below the MDA is clear of obstructions on the 34:1 slope. Absence of the gray shaded area indicates the 34:1 OCS is not free of obstructions. [Figure 2]

 Figure 1. Determination of visibility minimums

 Figure 2. RNAV approach Fort Campbell, Kentucky

## Missed Approach

Many reasons exist for executing a missed approach. The primary reasons, of course, are that the required flight visibility prescribed in the IAP being used does not exist when natural vision is used under 14 CFR Part 91, § 91.175c, the required enhanced flight visibility is less than that prescribed in the IAP when an EFVS is used under 14 CFR Part 91, § 91.176, or the required visual references for the runway cannot be seen upon arrival at the DA, DH, or MAP. In addition, according to 14 CFR Part 91, the aircraft must continuously be 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, and for operations conducted under Part 121 or 135, unless that descent rate allows touchdown to occur within the TDZ of the runway of intended landing. CAT II and III approaches call for different visibility requirements as prescribed by the FAA Administrator.

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 the 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.

A clearance for an instrument approach procedure includes a clearance to fly the published missed approach procedure, unless otherwise instructed by ATC. Once descent below the DA, DH, or MDA is begun, a missed approach must be executed if the required visibility is lost or the runway environment is no longer visible, unless the loss of sight of the runway is a result of normal banking of the aircraft during a circling approach. A MAP is also required upon the execution of a rejected landing for any reason, such as men and equipment or animals on the runway, or if the approach becomes unstabilized and a normal landing cannot be performed. After the MAP in the visual segment of a non-precision approach, there may be hazards when executing a missed approach below the MDA. 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 ft/NM or higher, as published. If the aircraft initiates a missed approach at a point other than the missed approach point, from below MDA or DA (H), or on a circling approach, obstacle clearance is not provided by following the published missed approach procedure, nor is separation assured from other air traffic in the vicinity.

The missed approach climb is normally executed at the MAP. If such a climb is initiated at a higher altitude prior to the MAP, pilots must be aware of any published climb-altitude limitations, which must be accounted for when commencing an early climb. Figure 3 gives an example of an altitude restriction that would prevent a climb between the FAF and MAP. In this situation, the Orlando Executive ILS or LOC RWY 7 approach altitude is restricted at the BUVAY 3 DME fix to prevent aircraft from penetrating the overlying protected airspace for approach routes into Orlando International Airport. If a missed approach is initiated before reaching BUVAY, a pilot may be required to continue descent to 1,200 feet before proceeding to the MAP and executing the missed approach climb instructions. In addition to the missed approach notes on the chart, the Pilot Briefing Information icons in the profile view indicate the initial vertical and lateral missed approach guidance.

 Figure 3. Orlando Executive Airport, Orlando, Florida, ILS RWY 7

The missed approach course begins at the MAP and continues until the aircraft has reached the designated fix and a holding pattern has been entered. [Figure 4] In these circumstances, ATC normally issues further instructions before the aircraft reaches the final fix of the missed approach course. It is also common for the designated fix to be an IAF so that another approach attempt can be made without having to fly from the holding fix to an IAF.

 Figure 4 Missed approach procedures for Dallas-Fort Worth International (DFW)4

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 possible) 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.

As shown in Figure 5 , there are many different ways that the MAP can be depicted, depending on the type of approach. On all approach charts, it is depicted in the profile and plan views by the end of the solid course line and the beginning of the dotted missed approach course line for the top-line/ lowest published minima. For a precision approach, the MAP is the point at which the aircraft reaches the DA or DH while on the glideslope/ glidepath. MAPs on non-precision approaches can be determined in many different ways. If the primary NAVAID is on the airport, and either a VOR or NDB approach is being executed, the MAP is normally the point at which the aircraft passes the NAVAID.

 Figure 5. Missed approach point depiction and steeper than standard climb gradient requirements

On some non-precision approaches, the MAP is given as a fixed distance with an associated time from the FAF to the MAP based on the groundspeed of the aircraft. A table on the lower right or left hand side of the approach chart shows the distance in NM from the FAF to the MAP and the time it takes at specific groundspeeds, given in 30 knot increments. Pilots must determine the approximate groundspeed and time based on the approach speed and true airspeed of their aircraft and the current winds along the final approach course. A clock or stopwatch should be started at the FAF of an approach requiring this method. Many non-precision approaches designate a specific fix as the MAP. These can be identified by a course (LOC or VOR) and DME, a cross radial from a VOR, or an RNAV (GPS) waypoint.

Obstacles or terrain in the missed approach segment may require a steeper climb gradient than the standard 200 ft/NM. If a steeper climb gradient is required, a note is published on the approach chart plan view with the penetration description and examples of the required FPM rate of climb for a given groundspeed (future charting uses climb gradient). An alternative is normally charted that allows using the standard climb gradient. [Figure 5] In this example, if the missed approach climb requirements cannot be met for the Burbank ILS RWY 8 chart, the alternative is to use the LOC RWY 8 that is charted separately. The LOC RWY 8, S-8 procedure has a MDA that is 400 feet higher than the ILS RWY 8, S-LOC 8 MDA and meets the standard climb gradient requirement over the terrain. For some approaches a new charting standard is requiring two sets of minimums to be published when a climb gradient greater than 200 ft/NM is required. The first set of minimums is the lower of the two, requiring a climb gradient greater than 200 ft/NM. The second set of minimums is higher, but doesn’t require a climb gradient. Shown in Figure 6, Barstow-Daggett (KDAG) RNAV (GPS) RWY 26 is an example where there are two LPV lines of minimums.

 Figure 6. Two sets of minimums required when a climb gradient greater than 200 ft/NM is required

## Example Approach Briefing

During an instrument approach briefing, the name of the airport and the specific approach procedure should be identified to allow other crewmembers the opportunity to cross-reference the chart being used for the brief. This ensures that pilots intending to conduct an instrument approach have collectively reviewed and verified the information pertinent to the approach. Figure 7 gives an example of the items to be briefed and their sequence. Although the following example is based on multi-crew aircraft, the process is also applicable to single-pilot operations. A complete instrument approach and operational briefing example follows.

 Figure 7. Example of approach chart briefing sequence

The approach briefing begins with a general discussion of the ATIS information, weather, terrain, NOTAMs, approaches in use, runway conditions, performance considerations, expected route to the final approach course, and the traffic situation. As the discussion progresses, the items and format of the briefing become more specific. The briefing can also be used as a checklist to ensure that all items have been set up correctly. Most pilots verbally brief the specific MAP so that it is fresh in their minds and there is no confusion as to who is doing what during a missed approach. Also, it is a very good idea to brief the published missed approach even if the tower is most likely to give you alternate instructions in the event of a missed approach. A typical approach briefing might sound like the following example for a flight inbound to the Monroe Regional Airport (KMLU):

ATIS: “Monroe Regional Airport Information Bravo, time 2253 Zulu, wind 360 at 10, visibility 1 mile, mist, ceiling 300 overcast, temperature 4, dew point 3, altimeter 29.73, ILS Runway 4 approach in use, landing and departing Runway 4, advise on initial contact that you have information Bravo.”

PF: “We’re planning an ILS approach to Runway 4 at Monroe Regional Airport, page 270, effective date 22 Sep 11 to 20 Oct 11. Localizer frequency is 109.5, SABAR Locator Outer Marker is 392, Monroe VOR is 117.2, final approach course is 042º. We’ll cross SABAR at 1,483 feet barometric, decision altitude is 278 feet barometric, touchdown zone elevation is 78 feet with an airport elevation of 79 feet. MAP is climb to 2,000 feet, then climbing right turn to 3,000 feet direct Monroe VOR and hold. The MSA is 2,200 feet to the north and along our missed approach course, and 3,100 feet to the south along the final approach course. ADF or DME is required for the approach and the airport has pilot controlled lighting when the tower is closed, which does not apply to this approach. The runway has a medium intensity approach lighting system with runway alignment indicator lights and a precision approach path indicator (PAPI). We need a half- mile visibility so with one mile we should be fine. Runway length is 7,507 feet. I’m planning a flaps 30 approach, auto- brakes 2, left turn on Alpha or Charlie 1 then Alpha, Golf to the ramp. With a left crosswind, the runway should be slightly to the right. I’ll use the autopilot until we break out and, after landing, I’ll slow the aircraft straight ahead until you say you have control and I’ll contact ground once we are clear of the runway. In the case of a missed approach, I’ll press TOGA (Take-off/Go-Around button used on some turbojets), call ‘go-around thrust, flaps 15, positive climb, gear up, set me up,’ climb straight ahead to 2,000 feet then climbing right turn to 3,000 feet toward Monroe or we’ll follow the tower’s instructions. Any questions?”

PM: “I’ll back up the auto-speedbrakes. Other than that, I don’t have any questions.”

## Instrument Approach Procedure Segments

An instrument approach may be divided into as many as four approach segments: initial, intermediate, final, and missed approach. Additionally, feeder routes provide a transition from the en route structure to the IAF. FAA Order 8260.3 criteria provides obstacle clearance for each segment of an approach procedure as shown in Figure 8.

 Figure 8. Approach segments and obstacle clearance

## Feeder Routes

By definition, a feeder route is a route depicted on IAP charts to designate routes for aircraft to proceed from the en route structure to the IAF. [Figure 9 ] Feeder routes, also referred to as approach transitions, technically are not considered approach segments but are an integral part of many IAPs. Although an approach procedure may have several feeder routes, pilots normally choose the one closest to the en route arrival point. When the IAF is part of the en route structure, there may be no need to designate additional routes for aircraft to proceed to the IAF.

 Figure 9. Feeder routes

When a feeder route is designated, the chart provides the course or bearing to be flown, the distance, and the minimum altitude. En route airway obstacle clearance criteria apply to feeder routes, providing 1,000 feet of obstacle clearance (2,000 feet in mountainous areas).

## Terminal Routes

In cases where the IAF is part of the en route structure and feeder routes are not required, a transition or terminal route is still needed for aircraft to proceed from the IAF to the intermediate fix (IF). These routes are initial approach segments because they begin at the IAF. Like feeder routes, they are depicted with course, minimum altitude, and distance to the IF. Essentially, these routes accomplish the same thing as feeder routes but they originate at an IAF, whereas feeder routes terminate at an IAF. [Figure 10 ]

 Figure 10. Terminal routes

## DME Arcs

DME arcs also provide transitions to the approach course, but DME arcs are actually approach segments while feeder routes, by definition, are not. When established on a DME arc, the aircraft has departed the en route phase and has begun the approach and is maneuvering to enter an intermediate or final segment of the approach. DME arcs may also be used as an intermediate or a final segment, although they are extremely rare as final approach segments.

An arc may join a course at or before the IF. When joining a course at or before the IF, the angle of intersection of the arc and the course is designed so it does not exceed 120°. When the angle exceeds 90°, a radial that provides at least 2 NM of lead will be identified to assist in leading the turn on to the intermediate course. DME arcs are predicated on DME collocated with a facility providing omnidirectional course information, such as a VOR. A DME arc cannot be based on an ILS or LOC DME source because omnidirectional course information is not provided.

The ROC along the arc depends on the approach segment. For an initial approach segment, a ROC of 1,000 feet is required in the primary area, which extends to 4 NM on either side of the arc. For an intermediate segment primary area, the ROC is 500 feet. The initial and intermediate segment secondary areas extend 2 NM from the primary boundary area edge. The ROC starts at the primary area boundary edge at 500 feet and tapers to zero feet at the secondary area outer edge. [Figure 11 ]

 Figure 11. DME arc obstruction clearance

## Course Reversal

Some approach procedures do not permit straight-in approaches unless pilots are being radar vectored. In these situations, pilots are required to complete a procedure turn (PT) or other course reversal, generally within 10 NM of the PT fix, to establish the aircraft inbound on the intermediate or final approach segment.

If Category E airplanes are using the PT or there is a descent gradient problem, the PT distance available can be as much as 15 NM. During a procedure turn, a maximum speed of 200 knots indicated airspeed (KIAS) should be observed from first crossing the course reversal IAF through the procedure turn maneuver to ensure containment within the obstruction clearance area. Unless a holding pattern or teardrop procedure is published, the point where pilots begin the turn and the type and rate of turn are optional. If above the procedure turn minimum altitude, pilots may begin descent as soon as they cross the IAF outbound.

A procedure turn is the maneuver prescribed to perform a course reversal to establish the aircraft inbound on an intermediate or final approach course. The procedure turn or hold-in-lieu-of procedure turn is a required maneuver when it is depicted on the approach chart. However, the procedure turn or the hold-in-lieu-of PT is not permitted when the symbol “No PT” is depicted on the initial segment being flown, 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. This distance is usually 10 miles. This may be reduced to five miles where only Category A or helicopter aircraft are operated. This distance may be increased to as much as 15 miles to accommodate high performance aircraft.

The pilot may elect to use the procedure turn or hold-inlieu-of PT when it is not required by the procedure, but must first receive an amended clearance from ATC. When ATC is radar vectoring to the final approach course, or to the intermediate fix as may occur with RNAV standard instrument approach procedures, ATC may specify in the approach clearance “CLEARED STRAIGHT-IN (type) APPROACH” to ensure that the pilot understands that the procedure turn or hold-in-lieu-of PT is not to be flown. If the pilot is uncertain whether ATC intends for a procedure turn or a straight-in approach to be flown, the pilot will immediately request clarification from ATC.

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° 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° procedure turn, the racetrack pattern, the teardrop procedure turn, or the 80° procedure turn, or the 80° <--> 260° 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. These requirements are necessary to stay within the protected airspace and maintain adequate obstacle clearance. [Figure 4-32] A minimum of 1,000 feet of obstacle clearance is provided in the procedure turn primary area. [Figure 4-33] In the secondary area, 500 feet of obstacle clearance is provided at the inner edge, tapering uniformly to 0 feet at the outer edge.

 Figure 12. Course reversal methods

 Figure 13. Procedure turn obstacle clearance

The primary and secondary areas determine obstacle clearance in both the entry and maneuvering zones. The use of entry and maneuvering zones provides further relief from obstacles. The entry zone is established to control the obstacle clearance prior to proceeding outbound from the procedure turn fix. The maneuvering zone is established to control obstacle clearance after proceeding outbound from the procedure turn fix.

Descent to the 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.” Newer procedures simply depict an “at or above” altitude at the PT fix without a chart note. Both are there to ensure required obstacle clearance is provided in the procedure turn entry zone. 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.

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 FAF. 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. Refer to the AIM section 5-4-9 for additional information on holding procedures.

## Initial Approach Segment

The purposes of the initial approach segment are to provide a method for aligning the aircraft with the intermediate or final approach segment and to permit descent during the alignment. This is accomplished by using a DME arc, a course reversal, such as a procedure turn or holding pattern, or by following a terminal route that intersects the final approach course. The initial approach segment begins at an IAF and usually ends where it joins the intermediate approach segment or at an IF. The letters IAF on an approach chart indicate the location of an IAF and more than one may be available. Course, distance, and minimum altitudes are also provided for initial approach segments. A given procedure may have several initial approach segments. When more than one exists, each joins a common intermediate segment, although not necessarily at the same location.

Many RNAV approaches make use of a dual-purpose IF/ IAF associated with a hold-in-lieu-of PT (HILO) anchored at the Intermediate Fix. The HILO forms the Initial Approach Segment when course reversal is required.

When the PT is required, it is only necessary to enter the holding pattern to reverse course. The dual purpose fix functions as an IAF in that case. Once the aircraft has entered the hold and is returning to the fix on the inbound course, the dual-purpose fix becomes an IF, marking the beginning of the intermediate segment.

ATC may provide a vector to an IF at an angle of 90 degrees or less and specify “Cleared Straight-in (type) Approach”. In those cases, the radar vector is providing the initial approach segment and the pilot should not fly the PT without a clearance from ATC.

Occasionally, a chart may depict an IAF, although there is no initial approach segment for the procedure. This usually occurs at a point located within the en route structure where the intermediate segment begins. In this situation, the IAF signals the beginning of the intermediate segment.

## Intermediate Approach Segment

The intermediate segment is designed primarily to position the aircraft for the final descent to the airport. Like the feeder route and initial approach segment, the chart depiction of the intermediate segment provides course, distance, and minimum altitude information.

The intermediate segment, normally aligned within 30° of the final approach course, begins at the IF, or intermediate point, and ends at the beginning of the final approach segment. In some cases, an IF is not shown on an approach chart. In this situation, the intermediate segment begins at a point where you are proceeding inbound to the FAF, are properly aligned with the final approach course, and are located within the prescribed distance prior to the FAF. An instrument approach that incorporates a procedure turn is the most common example of an approach that may not have a charted IF. The intermediate segment in this example begins when you intercept the inbound course after completing the procedure turn. [Figure 14]

 Figure 14. Approach without a designated IF

## Final Approach Segment

The final approach segment for an approach with vertical guidance or a precision approach begins where the glideslope/glidepath intercepts the minimum glideslope/ glidepath intercept altitude shown on the approach chart. If ATC authorizes a lower intercept altitude, the final approach segment begins upon glideslope/glidepath interception at that altitude. For a non-precision approach, the final approach segment begins either at a designated FAF, which is depicted as a cross on the profile view, or at the point where the aircraft is established inbound on the final approach course. When a FAF is not designated, such as on an approach that incorporates an on-airport VOR or NDB, this point is typically where the procedure turn intersects the final approach course inbound. This point is referred to as the final approach point (FAP). The final approach segment ends at either the designated MAP or upon landing.

There are three types of procedures based on the final approach course guidance:
• Precision approach (PA)—an instrument approach based on a navigation system that provides course and glidepath deviation information meeting precision standards of ICAO Annex 10. For example, PAR, ILS, and GLS are precision approaches.
• 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.
• Non-precision approach (NPA)—an instrument approach based on a navigation system that provides course deviation information but no glidepath deviation information. For example, VOR, TACAN, LNAV, NDB, LOC, and ASR approaches are examples of NPA procedures.

## Missed Approach Segment

The missed approach segment begins at the MAP and ends at a point or fix where an initial or en route segment begins. The actual location of the MAP depends upon the type of approach you are flying. For example, during a precision or an APV approach, the MAP occurs at the DA or DH on the glideslope/glidepath. For non-precision approaches, the MAP is either a fix, NAVAID, or after a specified period of time has elapsed after crossing the FAF.

## Approach Clearance

According to FAA Order 7110.65, ATC clearances authorizing instrument approaches are issued on the basis that if visual contact with the ground is made before the approach is completed, the entire approach procedure is followed unless the pilot receives approval for a contact approach, is cleared for a visual approach, or cancels the IFR flight plan.

Approach clearances are issued based on known traffic. The receipt of an approach clearance does not relieve the pilot of his or her responsibility to comply with applicable parts of the CFRs and notations on instrument approach charts, which impose on the pilot the responsibility to comply with or act on an instruction, such as “procedure not authorized at night.” The name of the approach, as published, is used to identify the approach. Approach name items within parentheses are not included in approach clearance phraseology.

## Vectors To Final Approach Course

The approach gate is an imaginary point used within ATC as a basis for vectoring aircraft to the final approach course. The gate is established along the final approach course one mile from the FAF on the side away from the airport and is no closer than 5 NM from the landing threshold. Controllers are also required to ensure the assigned altitude conforms to the following:
• For a precision approach, at an altitude not above the glideslope/glidepath or below the minimum glideslope/glidepath intercept altitude specified on the approach procedure chart.
• For a non-precision approach, at an altitude that allows descent in accordance with the published procedure. Further, controllers must assign headings that intercept the final approach course no closer than the following table:

A typical vector to the final approach course and associated approach clearance is as follows:

“…four miles from LIMAA, turn right heading three four zero, maintain two thousand until established on the localizer, cleared ILS runway three six approach.”

Other clearance formats may be used to fit individual circumstances, but the controller should always assign an altitude to maintain until the aircraft is established on a segment of a published route or IAP. The altitude assigned must guarantee IFR obstruction clearance from the point at which the approach clearance is issued until the aircraft is established on a published route. 14 CFR Part 91, § 91.175 (j) prohibits a pilot from making a procedure turn when vectored to a FAF or course, when conducting a timed approach, or when the procedure specifies “NO PT.”

When vectoring aircraft to the final approach course, controllers are required to ensure the intercept is at least 2 NM outside the approach gate. Exceptions include the following situations, but do not apply to RNAV aircraft being vectored for a GPS or RNAV approach:
• When the reported ceiling is at least 500 feet above the MVA/MIA and the visibility is at least 3 SM (maybe a pilot report (PIREP) if no weather is reported for the airport), aircraft may be vectored to intercept the final approach course closer than 2 NM outside the approach gate but no closer than the approach gate.
•  If specifically requested by the pilot, aircraft maybe vectored to intercept the final approach course inside the approach gate but no closer than the FAF.

In the absence of radar vectors, an instrument approach begins at an IAF. An aircraft that has been cleared to a holding fix that, prior to reaching that fix, is issued a clearance for an approach, but not issued a revised routing, such as, “proceed direct to…” is expected to proceed via the last assigned route, a feeder route if one is published on the approach chart, and then to commence the approach as published. If, by following the route of flight to the holding fix, the aircraft would overfly an IAF or the fix associated with the beginning of a feeder route to be used, the aircraft is expected to commence the approach using the published feeder route to the IAF or from the IAF as appropriate. The aircraft would not be expected to overfly and return to the IAF or feeder route.

For aircraft operating on unpublished routes, an altitude is assigned to maintain until the aircraft is established on a segment of a published route or IAP. (Example: “Maintain 2,000 until established on the final approach course outbound, cleared VOR/DME runway 12.”) The FAA definition of established on course requires the aircraft to be established on the route centerline. Generally, the controller assigns an altitude compatible with glideslope/ glidepath intercept prior to being cleared for the approach.