"Sam Spade" wrote in message
...
Last first: LPV IAPs are indeed precision IAPs.

And, let me add, my entire professional life has been with Jeppesen
charts.

But, I work with TERPS and the FAA a lot. NACO charts are the FAA's
method of charting IAP source. So, if they were wrong, they need to be
called on it. But, if is an issue of style, and Collins feels strongly
enough about it, he is welcome to attend the semi-annual FAA/Industry
Aeronautical Charting Forum, even submitting an issue paper in advance.
(His attendance has been mentioned to him before).

I've always wondered how much NACO would be able to copy Jeppesen (i.e. the
Briefing Strip) and not get sued for copyright infringement

At CRQ let's say I am flying the terminal routing from OCN. I would not
receive an LPV G/S on a Garmin 400/500W series navigator until crossing
KANAC at 3800. the LPV G/S would be a full fly-up because the G/S at
KANEC would be just over 5100. (So, there is no cross-check info for that
provided by either Jepp or NACO, nor should there be.) I can choose to
maintain 3800 until G/s intercept (just over 2 miles prior to JABEL, or
descend to 3100 to intercept at JABAL. Will the G/S be precisely 3100 at
JABEL? That depends on altimeter error, just like with an ILS.

If you'll be at 5,100 feet at KANEC, then (again in my opinion) the visual
depiction of a "glideslope" intersecting the waypoint at 3,800 feet is
misleading. I realize the G/S intersect at JABEL will be subject to
altimeter error which is why I made sure to qualify it with "or close to
it."

Marco