Suppose We Really Do Have Only GPS Approaches

Richard Kaplan wrote:

> Suppose the FAA truly does plan to decommission all navaids except GPS.
>
> How long do you think it would take to design, test, and publish replacement
> WAAS GPS approaches to replace every ILS, LOC, or other approach in
> existence today which does not meet the criteria for a straight GPS overlay
> approach?
>
> As food for thought, one of the advantages of even non-WAAS GPS is supposed
> to be the ability to publish approaches to any airport in the U.S. Well,
> years after the introduction of GPS my own home airport (KWAY) still does
> not have an instrument approach of any type at all; a request is pending,
> but I have been told it could be a long wait.
>
> So any guess how long it would take to convert all current approaches to
> either GPS overlay or GPS WAAS so that we could decommission all the other
> navaids?

The ILS will be around for a long time to come because of international
agreements for one, and the fact the airlines are broke and have already spent a
bundle for ILS autoland for much of the fleet.

As to your airport not having a GPS approach, the FAA staffing for approach
design is wholly inadequate to achieve the goals of the headline grabbers. And,
where an airport does not already have at least one IAP the environmental hoops
those designers have to jump through are almost a show-stopper. The EPA is a
big factor in that one, and they aren't in love with airplanes at that agency.

"Richard Kaplan" <rkaplan@flyimc.com> wrote in
news:5WRRa.7851$0F4.885@nwrdny02.gnilink.net:

> Well, you may well be right about that one. Of course, it does put
> perspective on the apparent "advantages" we were originally "sold"
> about GPS approaches -- I recall reading as far back as 10 years ago
> about how we would have "approaches to every airport" and "ILS-type
> minimums to even small airports." Well, it seems to be that the
> reality is that adding a first approach is very difficult for airports
> which have none, whereas for airports with existing approaches the
> reduction in minimums with a GPS approach will be minimal if any over
> the curent portfolio of approaches. The strongest argument seems to be
> simply the cost reduction to the government if they can decommission
> navaids.

If you want an approach, the airport management has to push to get it.
Approaches don't just happen, they have to be actively supported. We've
been trying to get a GPS approach from the south at my home airport, but
since that's over the Gulf, nobody else cares, so it's not happening, even
though we've been pushing the airport manager. If he does nothing, the FAA
does nothing. We drew up the approach, and all the FAA has to do is fly &
approve it, but nothing has happened in over 3 years. Nothing happens
quickly in the FAA's world except for violations.

--
Regards,

Stan