LPV vs. LNAV/VNAV (and LP, LNAV): Lateral Scaling, Where the Glidepath Comes From, Who the Temperature Limit Applies To, and the Annunciation Rule
On many RNAV (GPS) approach plates you’ll see several lines of minima stacked together — LPV, LNAV/VNAV, sometimes LP, and LNAV, plus circling. LPV and LNAV/VNAV both provide approved vertical guidance and are both flown to a Decision Altitude, so it’s easy to assume they’re basically the same thing. They’re not. The differences show up in how the lateral needle scales, where the vertical path comes from, whether a charted temperature limit applies to you at all (it depends on your equipment, not just the chart), what minima you’re allowed to use based on what your navigator annunciates, and what happens when the service downgrades after the FAF.
This post sorts the whole RNAV (GPS) minima family — LPV, LNAV/VNAV, LP, LNAV — into a practical framework: what each line is, how each one flies, which annunciation unlocks which minima, where the glidepath comes from and why that decides the temperature question, the “+V” advisory trap, downgrades, WAAS NOTAMs, cold-temperature airports, briefing flow, and the checkride questions.
Study this full length lesson (video, podcast, flashcards, and quiz) here: Full Length Lesson >
The Four Lines of Minima
What each one is, in one breath each.
LPV — Localizer Performance with Vertical guidance:
WAAS-based lateral and vertical guidance designed to be ILS-like
Lateral scaling is angular (tightens toward the runway, like a localizer); vertical is a geometric glidepath
Flown to a DA; minimums can be as low as 200 feet HAT and ½ SM (the “LPV-200” category)
An approach with vertical guidance (APV) — NOT a precision approach, even though it flies like one
LNAV/VNAV — Lateral Navigation with Vertical Navigation:
Lateral guidance with linear scaling (±0.3 NM full-scale in the final segment); approved vertical guidance to a DA
The vertical path comes from either WAAS (geometric) or baro-VNAV (computed from air data), depending on your equipment
Also an APV
Typically higher DA than LPV on the same runway
LP — Localizer Performance:
WAAS-based lateral guidance with angular (localizer-like) scaling, but NO vertical guidance
Flown to an MDA
Published only where obstacles or terrain prevent an LPV glidepath — you won’t see LP and LPV on the same plate
The lateral precision of LPV without the vertical
LNAV — Lateral Navigation:
Basic GPS lateral guidance, linear ±0.3 NM in the final segment; no approved vertical guidance
Flown to an MDA
Available to any IFR-approved GPS (WAAS or not)
The floor of the family — and the fallback when everything else downgrades
Why the stack:
Each line is a different level of service, and your navigator decides which one it can provide on the day
The plate publishes everything the procedure supports; you fly the line your box annunciates
More capability → lower minima
The whole system is “fly what you’re annunciated”
Lateral Scaling: Angular vs. Linear
The first thing you feel on the needle.
LPV and LP — angular:
At about 2 NM before the FAF, lateral scaling steps from ±1 NM (terminal) to ±0.3 NM and the final level of service is annunciated; at the FAF, on LPV and LP, scaling becomes angular and narrows continuously toward the runway, comparable to a localizer (about ±350 feet full-scale at the threshold on most units)
The closer you get, the more a given lateral error deflects the needle
This is why LPV “feels like an ILS” on short final — the needle gets twitchy exactly where a localizer does
Small corrections, no chasing, same as a localizer
LNAV/VNAV and LNAV — linear:
Full-scale deflection in the final approach segment is ±0.3 NM, and it stays ±0.3 NM to the runway
The needle doesn’t tighten as you close in
A half-scale deflection at the threshold is about 900 feet off centerline — far more than a half-scale LPV deflection
Easier to keep centered, but “centered” means less
The transitions you’ll see:
En route: ±2 NM (±5 NM on some older units); terminal: ±1 NM; about 2 NM before the FAF: ±0.3 NM for all levels of service; at the FAF: angular on LPV/LP, still ±0.3 NM on LNAV and LNAV/VNAV
The navigator steps down the scaling automatically as you approach the FAF
Watch for the approach-mode annunciation and scaling change before the FAF
If the scaling doesn’t change, something’s wrong — don’t continue past the FAF without approach mode
Pilot takeaway:
LPV: fly the lateral needle like a localizer — anticipate the tightening
LNAV/VNAV: fly it like a GPS final — keep it centered, but don’t be lulled by the fact that it’s easy
On both, the autopilot (if approved) handles the lateral well
Know which scaling you’re on so you know what a deflection means
Where the Vertical Path Comes From
The difference that decides the temperature question.
LPV — WAAS geometric glidepath:
WAAS (the U.S. SBAS) corrects the GPS position solution and monitors its integrity, giving a position accurate and trustworthy enough to generate a geometric glidepath in space
The glidepath is defined by angle and threshold crossing height, like an ILS glideslope, but computed from position rather than radiated from the ground
No barometric input is involved in creating the path
Immune to temperature-induced altimeter error (the path is geometric), with no false glideslopes
LNAV/VNAV — two possible sources:
WAAS vertical: on a WAAS navigator (GTN, GNS-W, WAAS-equipped G1000/G3000, and similar), the LNAV/VNAV glidepath is a geometric WAAS path — the same engine as LPV, just paired with linear lateral scaling. This is the common GA case
Baro-VNAV: on aircraft with an FMS and baro-VNAV capability (many turbine aircraft, especially those without WAAS), the vertical path is computed from barometric altitude — air data, altimeter setting, and the published angle
Which one you have is a function of your avionics, not the chart
The chart publishes one LNAV/VNAV line; your equipment determines how you fly it
Why baro-VNAV is temperature-sensitive:
A barometric altimeter reads high in cold air (the atmosphere is denser; true altitude is lower than indicated) and low in hot air
A vertical path built on barometric altitude therefore sits lower than designed in cold temperatures — potentially below the obstacle-clearance surface — and higher in hot temperatures
The procedure designer evaluates the baro-VNAV path over a temperature range and publishes limits outside which the path isn’t guaranteed to clear obstacles
Hence the charted note
The chart note, read carefully:
It reads “Baro-VNAV NA below -XX°C” (sometimes with an upper limit too), or “uncompensated Baro-VNAV NA below -XX°C”
The word “Baro-VNAV” is doing specific work: the note applies to aircraft using barometric vertical guidance
It does not say “LNAV/VNAV NA”
Read what it says
The Temperature Limit: Who It Applies To
The correction to the common teaching.
If you’re flying LNAV/VNAV with WAAS vertical guidance:
The baro-VNAV temperature limitation does NOT apply to you
Your glidepath is geometric, not barometric; cold air doesn’t move it
You may fly the LNAV/VNAV DA at any temperature (subject to the cold-temperature-airport altitude corrections below, which are a separate thing)
This is the AIM’s position and the typical GA case
If you’re flying LNAV/VNAV with baro-VNAV:
The charted temperature limits are hard limits unless your system has an approved temperature-compensation function and you’re authorized to use it
Outside the limits, LNAV/VNAV is not available to you — fall back to LNAV (or LPV if you also have WAAS and it’s annunciated)
“Uncompensated Baro-VNAV NA” means a compensated system may proceed
Know what your FMS does and what your ops specs or AFM say
LPV and temperature:
No charted temperature limits — the glidepath is geometric
But you still read the DA on a barometric altimeter, and you still fly the intermediate-segment and missed-approach altitudes on it
At cold-temperature-restricted airports (the snowflake symbol on the plate), AIM 7-2-3 requires cold-temperature altitude corrections to the segments listed in the NOTAM/charted note — intermediate, final (the DA itself on some), and/or missed — when the temperature is at or below the published value
Advise ATC of the corrected intermediate-segment and missed-approach altitudes; the final-segment correction to the DA/MDA is yours and doesn’t need to be reported
LPV’s path is immune; your altimeter isn’t
The decision tree for a cold day:
Is the airport a cold-temperature-restricted airport (snowflake) and is it at or below the charted temperature? → apply the required altitude corrections to the listed segments, whatever line of minima you fly; advise ATC of corrected intermediate and missed-approach altitudes
Does the plate carry a “Baro-VNAV NA below …” note? → if your vertical is baro-VNAV, LNAV/VNAV is out (unless compensated); if your vertical is WAAS, ignore the note
Fly the lowest minima your navigator annunciates
Brief all of this before the IAF
Why LPV Minimums Are Usually Lowest
And the exception.
The usual order:
LPV DA (lowest) < LNAV/VNAV DA < LNAV MDA < circling MDA
LPV’s angular lateral scaling and geometric glidepath are evaluated against ILS-like obstacle surfaces, which support the lowest minimums the runway environment allows
LNAV/VNAV is evaluated against a more conservative vertical surface
LNAV has no vertical surface at all — a level MDA with step-downs
The exception:
On some plates, the LNAV/VNAV DA is HIGHER than the LNAV MDA
The baro-VNAV obstacle evaluation is conservative enough that, at some airports with close-in obstacles, the level MDA clears them lower than the sloping DA surface does
It looks backwards; it’s a real published situation
Brief the numbers, not the assumption
Pilot takeaway:
If your navigator gives you LPV, LPV is nearly always the line to fly — lowest DA, most precise, most ILS-like
Brief LNAV/VNAV as the backup and LNAV as the final fallback, with their actual numbers
Don’t assume LNAV/VNAV beats LNAV until you’ve read the plate
Numbers, not patterns
The Annunciation Rule
Where pilots get caught.
The rule:
You may use only the minima that match the level of service your navigator annunciates in the final approach segment
Annunciated LPV → LPV DA
Annunciated L/VNAV (LNAV/VNAV) → LNAV/VNAV DA
Annunciated LNAV → LNAV MDA; annunciated LP → LP MDA
Why the box might not give you what the chart publishes:
WAAS integrity: the horizontal and vertical protection levels (HPL/VPL) computed by the receiver must be within the limits for the level of service; if the VPL is too large at that moment, LPV isn’t available
WAAS service outages or degraded coverage (check WAAS NOTAMs)
Satellite geometry
Receiver configuration or limitations (a non-WAAS GPS will never annunciate LPV, LP, or L/VNAV)
When to check:
The navigator settles on its final-approach level of service as you approach the FAF — annunciated at about 2 NM prior
Verify the annunciation BEFORE the FAF, and brief what you’ll do if it’s not what you planned
Confirm the DA or MDA you’ve set matches the annunciation
Don’t discover it at 500 feet
Downgrade after the FAF:
If LPV or L/VNAV service is lost after the FAF, the navigator removes the vertical guidance and reverts to LNAV lateral guidance
You may continue the approach using the LNAV minima (an MDA), provided LNAV is annunciated and you’re able to transition to the LNAV altitudes and step-downs
If you can’t make that transition safely — you’re already below an LNAV step-down altitude, or you’re not set up for it — go missed
Decide in the briefing: “if we downgrade inside the FAF, we continue to LNAV MDA of ___ / we go missed”
Loss of integrity (LOI) or no approach mode:
If the navigator flags loss of integrity or fails to enter approach mode, the approach is not available — go missed (or don’t start it)
WAAS receivers don’t need a RAIM prediction, but they do need WAAS integrity in the moment
Check WAAS NOTAMs in preflight for the destination
Non-WAAS: RAIM prediction required for LNAV
“+V” Is Not LNAV/VNAV
The most common confusion on the panel.
What “+V” is:
An advisory vertical guidance display on an LNAV (or LP) approach — “LNAV+V” or “LP+V”
The navigator draws a glidepath to help you fly a stabilized constant descent to the MDA
It has no obstacle-clearance guarantee, no approval, and no effect on the minima
A descent aid, nothing more
What it is NOT:
Not approved vertical guidance
Not LNAV/VNAV — the annunciation is “LNAV+V,” not “L/VNAV”
Not a DA — you’re still flying to an MDA
Not permission to descend below a step-down fix or the MDA
How to use it:
Fly the “+V” path for a stabilized descent, but cross-check every step-down fix altitude and level at the MDA
If the “+V” path would take you below a step-down, the step-down wins
At the MDA, level off and continue to the MAP unless the runway environment is in sight per 91.175(c)
Treat the glidepath needle as a suggestion on a “+V” approach and as guidance on an LPV or L/VNAV approach
Reading the annunciator:
“LPV” — approved vertical, DA
“L/VNAV” — approved vertical, DA
“LNAV+V” — advisory vertical, MDA
“LP+V” — advisory vertical, MDA
“LNAV” / “LP” — no vertical, MDA
The suffix decides the minima
How They Fly: Workload and Technique
LPV:
Fly it like an ILS: intercept the glidepath from below at the published intercept altitude, configure before the FAF, pitch and power for the descent, small lateral corrections that get smaller as the needle tightens
No false glidepaths, no reverse sensing, no ground-station sensitivity to vehicles crossing the critical area — the path is in the database
Autopilot approach mode (if approved for LPV) couples both axes
At DA: runway environment per 91.175(c) or go missed — no leveling off, no MDA logic
LNAV/VNAV:
Same vertical technique — it’s a DA with a glidepath
Lateral is the easy linear ±0.3 NM — keep it centered but recognize the needle won’t warn you as aggressively near the runway
If baro-VNAV: altimeter setting discipline is everything; a wrong setting moves the path; cross-check the published altitude at the FAF against your indicated altitude on the path
If WAAS vertical: same as LPV for the vertical
LP and LNAV:
Nonprecision: step-downs, MDA, MAP, VDP
“+V” as an aid if displayed, with the altitudes governing
Dive-and-drive or CDFA — both acceptable, step-downs respected
Plan the missed from the MAP, not from the MDA
Common to all:
The approach must be loaded from the database by name; the FAF and MAP are database waypoints, not something you build
Approach mode must be active before the FAF
The missed approach is a GPS procedure too — the navigator sequences it after the MAP, usually on pilot action (unsuspend / activate missed)
Brief the annunciation, the minima, and the downgrade plan
LPV Is an APV, Not a Precision Approach
A category point that shows up in orals and in alternate planning.
The categories:
Precision approach (PA): ILS, PAR, GLS — lateral and vertical guidance meeting the ICAO precision standard
Approach with vertical guidance (APV): LPV and LNAV/VNAV — approved vertical guidance, flown to a DA, but not classified as precision
Nonprecision approach (NPA): LP, LNAV, VOR, LOC, NDB — no approved vertical guidance, flown to an MDA
LPV flies like a precision approach and can have the same 200-foot DA, but it’s an APV
Why it matters:
Alternate airport planning (91.169): you may not plan the alternate on LPV or LNAV/VNAV minima; plan on the LNAV or circling minima, with the standard nonprecision alternate minimums of 800-2 (or the published nonstandard ones), plus the GPS/WAAS alternate rules
The instrument ACS lists LPV under “approach with vertical guidance” tasks
Some operators’ SOPs and training categorize LPV separately from ILS
On the oral: “Is LPV a precision approach?” — “No, it’s an APV”
What it doesn’t change:
You fly it to a DA with ILS technique
You use 91.175(c) at the DA exactly as on an ILS
The precision/APV distinction is about procedure design classification, not about how you fly it
Fly it like an ILS; classify it as an APV
Briefing Flow
When LPV and LNAV/VNAV minima both exist.
1. Equipment and NOTAMs:
WAAS navigator, approach loaded by name from the database, correct runway and transition
WAAS NOTAMs checked; no LOI
Which vertical source you have for LNAV/VNAV (WAAS or baro-VNAV)
Autopilot approved for the approach types you’ll use
2. Primary and backups, with numbers:
“Primary: LPV, DA ___”
“Backup: LNAV/VNAV, DA ___” (and whether the temperature note applies to you)
“Fallback: LNAV, MDA ___, step-downs ___, MAP ___”
“Downgrade inside the FAF: continue to LNAV MDA / go missed”
3. Temperature:
Snowflake airport? Current temperature vs. the charted limit; corrections applied to the required segments; ATC advised of corrected intermediate and missed-approach altitudes
“Baro-VNAV NA below …” note? Applies only if your vertical is baro-VNAV
Brief it either way so it’s not a surprise
Twenty seconds
4. Annunciation check before the FAF:
Approach mode active, scaling changed, level of service displayed
“LPV annunciated — LPV DA ___ set”
If not LPV: switch to the briefed backup and its minima
Commit to the minima that match the box
5. Fly it:
Configured and stable before the FAF; glidepath intercept from below
Small corrections; anticipate LPV’s tightening
DA or MDA discipline per the line you’re on
Missed approach armed
Worked Scenario
The setup:
RNAV (GPS) RWY 17; LPV DA 1,420 (250 HAT); LNAV/VNAV DA 1,580; LNAV MDA 1,640; note “Baro-VNAV NA below -15°C”; snowflake symbol with “-10°C.” Temperature is -18°C. WAAS GTN navigator; autopilot approved for LPV. WAAS NOTAMs clear
The brief:
It’s a cold-temperature-restricted airport and we’re below -10°C → apply the required corrections to the listed segments (say, intermediate and missed); advise ATC of those corrected altitudes
The Baro-VNAV note doesn’t apply — our LNAV/VNAV vertical is WAAS
Primary LPV DA 1,420 (corrected if the final segment is listed); backup L/VNAV DA 1,580; fallback LNAV MDA 1,640
Downgrade inside the FAF: continue to LNAV MDA if annunciated and above the step-downs; otherwise missed
Flying it:
Approaching the FAF: approach mode active, scaling angular at the FAF, “LPV” annunciated. DA confirmed. Glidepath intercepted from below at the FAF altitude
Inside the FAF the lateral needle tightens; small corrections; autopilot coupled
At 1,420: runway environment in sight; land. Or not: missed approach, activated, flown as published with the corrected missed altitude
The variation:
Same approach, but 1 NM inside the FAF the annunciation drops to “LNAV” and the glidepath disappears. We’re at 2,100; the next LNAV step-down is 1,900 → above it; continue to LNAV MDA 1,640, level, continue to the MAP. If we’d been below a step-down at the downgrade: missed
Common Pilot Mistakes
Applying the “Baro-VNAV NA” temperature note to a WAAS-vertical LNAV/VNAV and giving up a usable DA
Ignoring the cold-temperature-airport (snowflake) corrections on an LPV because “the glidepath is geometric” (the altimeter isn’t)
Flying LPV minima without “LPV” annunciated
Treating “LNAV+V” as approved vertical guidance and descending through step-downs or below the MDA on it
Assuming LNAV/VNAV minima are always lower than LNAV
Not briefing the downgrade plan, then improvising when the glidepath vanishes inside the FAF
Building the approach manually or starting it without approach mode active
Chasing the LPV needle on short final
Calling LPV a precision approach on the oral, or planning an alternate on LPV minima
Not checking WAAS NOTAMs
Checkride Questions — With Answers
“What’s the difference between LPV and LNAV/VNAV?”
Both are APVs flown to a DA. LPV uses WAAS for angular (localizer-like) lateral guidance and a geometric glidepath, with the lowest minima. LNAV/VNAV uses linear ±0.3 NM lateral scaling and a vertical path from either WAAS (geometric) or baro-VNAV (barometric), with typically higher minima.
“Is LPV a precision approach?”
No — it’s an approach with vertical guidance (APV). It flies like an ILS and can have a 200-foot DA, but it’s classified separately. For alternate planning you can’t use LPV or LNAV/VNAV minima — plan on LNAV or circling with the nonprecision alternate minimums.
“The chart says ‘Baro-VNAV NA below -15°C’ and it’s -20°C. Can you fly LNAV/VNAV?”
Depends on your vertical source. With WAAS vertical guidance, yes — the note applies to baro-VNAV only. With baro-VNAV, no, unless the system is temperature-compensated and you’re authorized to use it.
“What is LP?”
Localizer Performance — WAAS angular lateral guidance with no vertical guidance, flown to an MDA. Published where terrain or obstacles prevent an LPV glidepath; never on the same plate as LPV.
“What minima can you use?”
Only the line matching the level of service annunciated in the final approach segment: LPV → LPV DA; L/VNAV → LNAV/VNAV DA; LNAV or LP → their MDAs.
“What does ‘LNAV+V’ mean?”
Advisory vertical guidance on an LNAV approach — a descent aid only. The minima are still the LNAV MDA, and the step-down fixes still apply.
“You lose LPV inside the FAF. What now?”
The navigator reverts to LNAV. Continue to the LNAV MDA if LNAV is annunciated and you can safely transition to its altitudes and step-downs; otherwise, go missed.
“Does an LPV need a RAIM check?”
No — WAAS provides integrity in real time. Check WAAS NOTAMs. A non-WAAS GPS needs a RAIM prediction for LNAV.
Final Thoughts
LPV and LNAV/VNAV look like neighbors on the plate, but they’re built differently and they fail differently. LPV is WAAS lateral and vertical, angular and geometric, ILS-like all the way down, with the lowest minima and no temperature limits on its path. LNAV/VNAV is linear laterally and takes its glidepath from whichever vertical source your airplane has — and that source, not the chart, decides whether a cold-temperature note applies to you. LP and LNAV round out the family as the nonprecision fallbacks, with “+V” as a helpful but non-binding descent aid.
The operating rule that ties it all together: fly the minima your navigator annunciates, verify that annunciation before the FAF, and have the downgrade plan briefed before you need it. Add the cold-temperature-airport corrections whenever the snowflake and the thermometer say so, remember that LPV is an APV when you plan an alternate, and the RNAV (GPS) approach becomes the most predictable approach in the book.
On the Written Test and Checkride
RNAV (GPS) minima appear throughout instrument writtens and orals. The most commonly tested topics:
LPV vs. LNAV/VNAV vs. LP vs. LNAV — what each is, DA vs. MDA
Angular vs. linear lateral scaling (±0.3 NM)
WAAS geometric vs. baro-VNAV vertical sources; the temperature note applies to baro-VNAV only
Cold-temperature-airport corrections (snowflake) apply regardless of approach type
The annunciation rule; downgrade after the FAF
“+V” is advisory
LPV is an APV — alternate planning implications
WAAS NOTAMs; no RAIM check needed with WAAS
Quick Reference
The Family:
Line | Lateral | Vertical | Minimum | Category |
LPV | WAAS, angular from the FAF (localizer-like, ~±350 ft at threshold) | WAAS geometric glidepath | DA (as low as 200 HAT) | APV |
LNAV/VNAV | Linear ±0.3 NM | WAAS geometric OR baro-VNAV (equipment-dependent) | DA | APV |
LP | WAAS, angular from the FAF | None (+V advisory possible) | MDA | NPA |
LNAV | Linear ±0.3 NM | None (+V advisory possible) | MDA | NPA |
LP and LPV are never on the same plate
Usual order: LPV DA < L/VNAV DA < LNAV MDA — but L/VNAV DA can be higher than LNAV MDA on some plates; read the numbers
Scaling Sequence:
En route ±2 NM → terminal ±1 NM → ~2 NM before FAF: ±0.3 NM + level of service annunciated → at FAF: angular (LPV/LP) or still ±0.3 NM (LNAV, L/VNAV)
Annunciation Rule:
Fly only the minima matching the final-segment annunciation: LPV / L/VNAV / LP / LNAV
Verify before the FAF (~2 NM prior); approach mode active, scaling changed
“LNAV+V” / “LP+V” = advisory vertical → still an MDA; step-downs govern
Non-WAAS GPS: LNAV only, RAIM prediction required; WAAS: no RAIM check, but check WAAS NOTAMs
Downgrade / Failure:
LPV or L/VNAV lost inside the FAF → reverts to LNAV; continue to LNAV MDA if annunciated and you can transition to its altitudes; else go missed
LOI or no approach mode → not available; missed
Brief the downgrade plan before the FAF
Temperature — Who It Applies To:
Chart note “Baro-VNAV NA below -XX°C” (or “uncompensated Baro-VNAV NA”) → applies to baro-VNAV vertical only
WAAS vertical (LPV, and L/VNAV on a WAAS navigator): not subject to that note
Baro-VNAV: hard limit unless temperature-compensated and authorized
Cold-temperature-restricted airport (snowflake): at/below the charted temp, apply altitude corrections to the listed segments regardless of approach type — the DA/altitudes are barometric even when the path is geometric (AIM 7-2-3); advise ATC of corrected intermediate and missed-approach altitudes (the DA/MDA correction is yours)
Flying It:
LPV: ILS technique — intercept from below, configure before FAF, anticipate lateral tightening, DA per 91.175(c)
L/VNAV: DA technique; linear lateral; if baro-VNAV, altimeter-setting discipline and FAF altitude cross-check
LP / LNAV: nonprecision — step-downs, MDA, MAP, VDP; +V as an aid only
Load by name from the database; approach mode before the FAF; missed sequenced after the MAP
LPV Is an APV:
Not a precision approach; alternate planning: can’t use LPV or L/VNAV minima — plan on LNAV or circling (800-2 standard or published nonstandard) plus the GPS/WAAS alternate rules
Flown exactly like an ILS; classified differently
Briefing (both lines published):
Equipment, NOTAMs, vertical source, autopilot approval
Primary LPV DA / backup L/VNAV DA / fallback LNAV MDA + step-downs + MAP / downgrade plan
Temperature: snowflake corrections (ATC advised for intermediate/missed); Baro-VNAV note applicability
Annunciation check before the FAF; set the matching DA/MDA
Fly it; missed armed
Key Principle:
LPV is WAAS lateral and vertical, angular and geometric, flown like an ILS to the lowest DA — an APV, not a precision approach. LNAV/VNAV is linear laterally with a glidepath from WAAS or baro-VNAV, and the charted temperature limit applies only to baro-VNAV. Fly the minima your box annunciates, verify before the FAF, keep “+V” advisory, apply cold-temperature-airport corrections whatever line you’re on, and brief the downgrade before you need it.
Study Full Aviation Courses:
wifiCFI's full suite of aviation courses has everything you need to go from brand new to flight instructor and airline pilot! Check out any of the courses below for free:
Study Courses:
Checkride Lesson Plans:
Teaching Courses:
Author: Nathan Hodell
CFI, CFII, MEI, ATP, Creator and CEO
Nathan is an aviation enthusiast with thousands of hours of flying and dual instruction over the past 15+ years. Through his aviation career he has been able to earn his ATP, fly as an airline pilot, own/operate flight schools, and create and host wifiCFI.