It says so in the documents and I've seen it that way. I myself always control it manually, including the activation of the approach, since I fly a lot with vectors to the final anyway. In your case I made a quick flight from CYRQ to CYQB today. I could understand the shortcomings with the interrupted VNAV Descend to BIVTI, we have now mentioned the reasons several times. The final approach also worked, but what I didn't like was the fluctuating VS due to the additional waypoint KISIK despite the stabilized approach. The GPA is given as 3.10 °, but I noticed that ULBOM, unlike in the charts with 2700 ft, is behind in the dash, in the charts with 2500 ft. In addition, a GPA of 2.09° is on the NAV page visible between IKDEB and ULMOB, from TOD to ULMOB 5.94° although from 4.5 NM in front of ULMOB there is a 3.10° GPA planned. Obviously, this point does not play a role, nor is it stored as a navigation point in the approach plan. The VNAV Descend seems to be based on the programming of the VNAV Page. For me it was a VS of -1700 ft from TOD in the direction of ULMOB. Only from ULMOB, although it happened 200 ft too high, the VS then more suited to a 3.10 ° GPA
Comments
But you programmed VNAV separately and indicated the Rwy (244 ft) as a reference waypoint, right? The TOD that can be seen indicates this.
No I did VTO to PIKVO
Have I never done what program do you do it with?
thank you.
question from how many NM of IKDEB i must to begin get down flaps and gear down ?
The enclosed is for NPA, usually NDB but it would give you a good idea how to work flaps and gear.
Supposed arm itself from 30 nm of the airport.
Each time I must to arm myself.
And where is the problem? You do other things too, if you arm the approach as described in detail in this thread.
Rgds
Reinhard
It says so in the documents and I've seen it that way. I myself always control it manually, including the activation of the approach, since I fly a lot with vectors to the final anyway. In your case I made a quick flight from CYRQ to CYQB today. I could understand the shortcomings with the interrupted VNAV Descend to BIVTI, we have now mentioned the reasons several times. The final approach also worked, but what I didn't like was the fluctuating VS due to the additional waypoint KISIK despite the stabilized approach. The GPA is given as 3.10 °, but I noticed that ULBOM, unlike in the charts with 2700 ft, is behind in the dash, in the charts with 2500 ft. In addition, a GPA of 2.09° is on the NAV page visible between IKDEB and ULMOB, from TOD to ULMOB 5.94° although from 4.5 NM in front of ULMOB there is a 3.10° GPA planned. Obviously, this point does not play a role, nor is it stored as a navigation point in the approach plan. The VNAV Descend seems to be based on the programming of the VNAV Page. For me it was a VS of -1700 ft from TOD in the direction of ULMOB. Only from ULMOB, although it happened 200 ft too high, the VS then more suited to a 3.10 ° GPA