7
$\begingroup$

If you have TSO-C129/TSO-C196 GPS gear (vs TSO-C145/146 WAAS/SBAS gear), you either have to have a non-GPS approach at your destination, or a non-GPS approach at your alternate. If your choices are either conventional approaches or GPS-only approaches, this is simple to understand.

However, some approaches have arisen that are hybrid approaches -- combining GPS intermediate guidance with a ground based navaid (usually an ILS) for the final approach course guidance. An example of this can be found at Jackson Hole, WY, where the KJAC ILS Z or LOC/DME RWY 19 approach is listed as "GPS REQUIRED" on the approach plate due to the use of GPS to set up a curved feeder leg onto the ILS final, bypassing some terrain to the north of the airport and allowing much lower minimums as a result.

Are these "hybrid" approaches considered the same as a GPS-only approach for alternate planning if you are TSO-C129/TSO-C196 equipped? Or are they considered as conventional approaches for alternate planning purposes?

$\endgroup$
2
$\begingroup$

This is an excellent question.

However, since the approach you reference, KJAC ILS Z or LOC/DME Rwy 19, "requires" GPS, I would interpret it the same as a GPS-only approach for planning purposes and subject to the appropriate restrictions. Those are: either the destination or alternate, but not both can be a GPS-only approach airport for TSO-C129/TSO-C196 [GPS-no WAAS] equipped aircraft. Both destination and alternate can be a GPS-only approach airport if the aircraft is equipped per TSO-C145/146 [WAAS].

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.