RNAV AND NONPRECISION APPROACHES NEED THEIR OWN VERTICAL PLAN
Begin with the approach actually cleared and its applicable aircraft capability. RNAV describes navigation based on the required position solution and procedure; it is not a guarantee that every published procedure or minimum is supported by the selected simulator equipment. Verify database currency and procedure identity, compare the coded path with the chart, and establish the intended lateral and vertical methods. The supplied FM guide and FCTM describe their equipment standards. They do not provide a blanket approval for every later RNP or FLS function present in another configuration. [21, PDF pp. 163–168] [128, RNAV/GPS approach: preparation and navigation checks] [66, PDF pp. 199–209]
For a managed final approach, establish the correct flight-plan sequence and the required navigation accuracy, then monitor the coded path and its actual use. A sensible drawn line is insufficient if a relevant leg is not active or the navigation information does not support the intended method. Use the procedure-specific checks and minima. The FM section develops the programming; the operational task is to confirm that the guidance method remains appropriate after vectors, a direct clearance or an interrupted sequence. Reassess rather than assuming that prior arming preserves the intended path through every revision. [21, PDF pp. 163–167] [129, Managed NPA: route, modes and monitoring]
Selected FPA provides a flight-path-angle target and requires the relevant position and height-versus-distance monitoring. Its angle and activation point belong to the actual chart and procedure. A constant angle is not the same as a constant vertical rate: changing groundspeed changes the rate required to maintain that angle. Monitor raw navigation information where the method calls for it, together with altitude and distance. For a localizer-only procedure, lateral beam tracking does not supply an authorised glideslope. Keep its selected vertical method and clearance distinct from an ILS APPR sequence. [21, PDF pp. 167–168] [130, Selected NPA: FPA and raw-data monitoring]
Fenix documents an FLS equipment option. Option availability establishes a configuration choice, while the supplied 2004 Thales guide does not establish a current Fenix FLS-specific button or mode sequence. This edition therefore does not relabel FINAL APP instructions as an FLS procedure. Use a verified applicable implementation reference before a detailed FLS exercise. The same discipline applies to navigation-performance indications: a displayed estimated accuracy or an equipment checkbox is not an independent approval for a particular approach authorisation or minimum. [70, fnx_fls_enabled and lateral-deviation options] [66, Edition 03, December 2004; source applicability] [21, PDF pp. 163–168]
Set the correct charted minima and brief the required visual reference and missed-approach response before final descent. Distinguish decision-based continuation from any level segment or step-down structure in the actual procedure; use its method rather than carrying a familiar ILS habit into it. In practice, compare one managed and one selected method from the same stable starting state only when both are appropriate to the exercise. The outcome to explain is how position, vertical guidance, mode annunciation and the decision reference supported the approach. [21, PDF pp. 163–168] [129, Managed NPA] [130, Selected NPA]