Thanks.

"J Haggerty" wrote in message
news:fjBhd.93062$tU4.67667@okepread06...
For a while, LNAV procedures with a stepdown were not allowed to be
combined with a LNAV/VNAV. If you wanted a stepdown to get lower LNAV MDA,
you had to create a separate procedure. That rule has since been
rescinded, so you'll see future combined LNAV/VNAV and LNAV with a
stepdown if appropriate. In the meantime, the "X" and "Y" procedures will
remain as they are until amended, but amending them is not a priority.

JPH

Stan Prevost wrote:
"Roy Smith" wrote in message
...


Our local "big" airport has four ILS's to 200 ft DH, and various VOR,
GPS, and NDB approaches. There are four new RNAV(GPS) approaches: for
each runway (36L and 36R), there are two of these approaches (Y and Z).
In each case, Z has LNAV and LNAV/VNAV minima, and Y has LNAV only. The
Y and Z approaches have the same IAFs, IF, FAFs, and MAPs. The Z LNAV
MDA is 545 ATDZE, the Z LNAV/VNAV MDA is 325 ATDZE, a 220 ft advantage.
But on the Y approach, the LNAV MDA is 325 ATDZE. The only difference
between the approaches is that Y has a stepdown fix after the FAF, which
is apparently avoided by VNAV. Heck, with a 325 ft ATDZE MDA with LNAV
alone, I sure don't need VNAV, if it just gets me to the same DA. And
325 is pretty darn good.

It's curious to me that two approach plates were published for Y & Z,
rather then combining them and noting the stepdown fix as applicable to
LNAV only. Maybe it made for too much chart clutter.

I hope we get the corresponding approaches for 18L and 18R.