VGSI Not Coincident | VASI Glidepath vs RNAV and ILS Glidepath
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 26 авг 2024
- What's the difference between the glidepath you follow on an ILS or RNAV approach, and the one created by the VASI or PAPI lights you see off the side of the runway? Some instrument approaches have different enough glidepaths, that it's called out on the approach plates. Here's what to do about it.
Check out IFR ground school at flight-insight...
![PAPI versus Glide Slope! Which one should I follow? [English]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/oPvdwSpSTWI/mqdefault.jpg)
How is each video better than the last when they’re all perfect?! Truly an incredible educator.
You know, that was one idiosyncratic points of the instrument flying environment that I totally forgot about. Good work sir!
I would not switch to the VASI guidance if I'm already stable on the rnav. That means power and pitch changes and a steeper angle of descent versus the rnav. The rnav provides the obstacle clearance just the same.
Because it won’t keep you safe below MDA, that’s why there’s a such a thing as VDP. Below MDA, you transition to the visual glide path indication.
Excellent video...best visual explanation I have seen of this concept!
Thank you now all makes sense
Well said!
Thank you from Algeria !
My problem is a lot of the VASI's seemed to be designed for a 172. In a corporate jet at a lot of airports, if you stay right on the VASI you'll land halfway down the runway making stopping difficult.
Awesome stuff as always, thank you
Great presentation. Thanks
Always fallowed your videos for flight simmulator. I always thought this was due to the sim. Thanks for explaining.
That was brilliant 👏🏾👏🏾
Really useful, thanks
Since the RNAV glidepath will keep you safe, why switch to the VASI glidepath?
Because it won’t keep you safe below MDA, that’s why there’s a such a thing as VDP. Below MDA, you transition to the visual glide path indication.
Love
I wonder why they do this. Why not just make them always the same (coincident)?
Flying an approach to minimums is already a high stress activity for many of us. Why add an additional element.
Me too! There must be a purpose. I wonder why it has to be done this way.
If it were easy, anyone could do it.
@@scottfranco1962 It's not really that hard but the consequences of even a small error (or more likely several small errors stacked on top of each other) can be fatal.
The goal in the interests of safety would be to make it so easy that anyone could do it.
Flying will eventually become so automated that everyone will be doing it.
Already happening in the freight sector.
But this really doesn't address my question.
I heard that part 135 requires VASI to be used always but not under part 91. Just like circling is not authorized under parts other than 91. Which is true?
Doesn't really answer the fundamental question: Why are the visual and rnav glideslopes different?
Good question. I would have thought that the RNAV could have been designed to match the VASI path.