Greg Esres wrote:
Sam Spade wrote:

FAA considers LPV IAPs to be precision IAP

The FAA that writes the AIM says differently:

===================
1-1-20.
...

A new type of APV approach procedure, in addition to LNAV/VNAV, is
being implemented to take advantage of the lateral precision provided
by WAAS. This angular lateral precision, combined with an electronic
glidepath allows the use of TERPS approach criteria very similar to
that used for present precision approaches, with adjustments for the
larger vertical containment limit. The resulting approach procedure
minima, titled LPV (localizer performance
with vertical guidance)...
================

But, if WAAS LPV is available when arriving at the alternate you may
use the LPV *precision* line of minima.

Yes, that's obvious, but it still underlines that the FAA doesn't not
consider the LPV approach to be a precision approach as far as the
user is concerned.

The FAA is covering its butt with ICAO. Technically, there are now
three types of IAPs.

1. Precision

2. APV

3. Non-precision

1 and 2 are flown identically when the APV is an RNAV IAP with LPV or
VNAV minimums. They both have DAs.

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck.....

When you fly an LPV (or teach it) do you teach precision or
non-precision procedures and flap settings, etc, for the final approach
segment?