The Visual Descent Point (VDP): What It Is, Why You Don't Descend Before It, VDP vs. MAP, Computing Your Own (and When Not to Trust It), and Flying Nonprecision Approaches Without the Late Dive
Every instrument pilot has had the moment: you break out a little high, a little late, runway in sight, and you feel the quiet pressure to make it work. The Visual Descent Point exists for exactly that moment. It’s a small “V” on the profile view of a nonprecision approach, and it answers one question cleanly: from here, can I make a normal descent from the MDA to the touchdown zone? Before it, no — you’re too far out, and the AIM says not to descend before it. After it, every mile you spend level at the MDA makes the descent steeper and the landing longer, until the honest answer is a missed approach.
This post covers what a VDP is by the book (the P/CG definition and its specific visual references), where it appears on VOR, LOC, and RNAV plates and how you identify it, the AIM’s don’t-descend-before-it rule, VDP versus MAP, why it’s only on straight-in approaches and only for the lowest MDA, how to compute your own when none is published — and why an unpublished VDP may be a warning rather than an omission — the “normal descent” standard from 91.175(c), how the VDP fits a CDFA, the common mistakes, and the checkride questions.
Study this full length lesson (video, podcast, flashcards, and quiz) here: Full Length Lesson >
What a VDP Is (Pilot/Controller Glossary)
The definition, with its conditions.
The P/CG:
A defined point on the final approach course of a nonprecision straight-in approach procedure from which a normal descent from the MDA to the runway touchdown point may be commenced — provided the approach threshold of that runway, or the approach lights, or other markings identifiable with the approach end of that runway are clearly visible to the pilot
Every clause matters: nonprecision, straight-in, from the MDA, to the touchdown point, with specific visual references
It’s a point on the final approach course, not an altitude
The “V” on the profile view
What “normal descent” means:
A descent on roughly a 3° path (about 300 feet per nautical mile) from the MDA to the touchdown zone, using a normal rate of descent and normal maneuvers
That phrasing comes from 91.175(c)(1), which requires that you be in a position from which a descent to a landing on the intended runway can be made at a normal rate of descent using normal maneuvers before you descend below the MDA
The VDP is the charted expression of “a position from which a normal descent can be made”
At the VDP on a 3° path, the geometry works; well past it, it doesn’t
What it isn’t:
Not a fix you must cross, not a mandatory go-around point, not a change in the minimums
Not the MAP — the MAP is usually farther along, often at the threshold
Not authorization to descend by itself — you still need the 91.175(c) references and visibility
A planning and decision point, with the AIM’s one rule attached (below)
Where It Appears and How You Identify It (AIM 5-4-5)
On the plate:
The profile view shows a “V” at the VDP’s position along the final approach course, with the distance to identify it
Only on nonprecision straight-in procedures; a circling-only approach never has a VDP
Based on the lowest published straight-in MDA (below)
Not every nonprecision approach has one
On VOR and LOC approaches:
The VDP is normally identified by DME from the reference facility — “VDP 1.2 DME” or a DME value at the “V”
If the approach has no DME fix capability, there’s usually no published VDP
A suitable RNAV system may substitute for DME to identify the VDP (it’s a DME fix)
Brief the distance and how you’ll see it
On RNAV (GPS) approaches:
The VDP is identified by along-track distance to the next waypoint — the missed approach waypoint (MAWP), usually at the threshold
Your navigator shows distance to the active waypoint; the VDP is at that distance
Typically published with LNAV (and LP) minima; LPV and LNAV/VNAV have a glidepath and don’t need one
The distance is to the MAWP, not from the FAF
If you can’t identify it:
AIM 5-4-5: pilots not equipped to receive the VDP should fly the approach as though no VDP had been provided
That means the MDA to the MAP, with your own judgment about a normal descent
You can compute an estimate (below)
The published VDP is a convenience for those who can see it, not a requirement
The One Rule: Don’t Descend Below the MDA Before the VDP
The AIM’s guidance, and the reason.
What the AIM says:
No special technique is required to fly a procedure with a VDP
The pilot should not descend below the MDA prior to reaching the VDP
Fly the approach to the MDA, continue level, and at the VDP — with the required visual references — begin the normal descent
At or after the VDP, never before
Why not before:
Before the VDP you’re farther from the runway than a 3° path from the MDA would put you; descending early means a shallow, dragged-in approach at low altitude over whatever lies in the visual segment
The visual-segment obstacle evaluation that supports the VDP begins at the VDP; the ground before it, below the MDA, was not evaluated for a descent
The MDA is the obstacle clearance floor until the point where the designed descent begins
“Runway in sight” at 4 miles is not a reason to leave the MDA
Why not long after:
Every mile you continue level at the MDA past the VDP, the required descent gets steeper
A mile past the VDP on a 300-foot-per-mile path means you now need roughly twice the descent rate to reach the same touchdown point — or you land long
The approach stops being “normal” and becomes a dive, with the airspeed, configuration, and float problems that follow
The VDP is where the clock starts running on a stable landing
The decision at the VDP:
Required visual references in sight, flight visibility at or above minimums, in a position for a normal descent → leave the MDA and fly the 3° path to the touchdown zone
References not in sight → remain at the MDA and continue toward the MAP, knowing that the odds of a normal landing drop with every second
References appear well past the VDP → an honest evaluation: can you descend at a normal rate to a normal touchdown point? If it will take a steep descent or a long landing, go missed
The rule is “not before”; the judgment is “how far after is too far”
VDP vs. MAP
Two points on final that pilots conflate.
VDP | MAP | |
What it is | Where a normal descent from the MDA to the touchdown zone may begin | Where the missed approach must begin if the visual references aren’t in sight |
Legal status | Guidance: don’t descend before it; after it, judgment | Mandatory: at the MAP without references, go missed |
Where | On final, inside the FAF, typically a mile or so before the threshold | At or near the threshold (or earlier on some procedures) |
Identified by | DME, or along-track distance to the MAWP | Fix, DME, timing, waypoint, or station passage |
Published on | Straight-in nonprecision approaches only | Every approach |
The question it answers | “Can I land normally from here?” | “May I continue legally from here?” |
The relationship:
The VDP comes first; the MAP is the last point
Between them is the zone where you may legally continue at the MDA but where a normal landing becomes progressively less realistic
Reaching the MAP without references: missed, no judgment involved
Reaching the VDP without references: continue legally, but plan the missed
The trap between them:
“I’m legal to the MAP” becomes “I’ll keep looking,” which becomes “there it is — dive”
The VDP is the chart telling you where the stable landing was still possible
Past it, the stable landing is gone even though the approach is still legal
Legal and safe diverge after the VDP; brief the VDP so they don’t
Only Straight-In, Only the Lowest MDA
Two design facts that change how you use it.
Straight-in only:
A VDP is published only on straight-in nonprecision procedures (VOR RWY XX, LOC RWY XX, LNAV, LP)
Circling-only procedures (VOR-A, etc.) never have one — you’re maneuvering to a runway, not descending on a straight path to a touchdown zone
If you circle from a straight-in approach, the VDP doesn’t apply to your circling maneuver; the circling MDA and the circling area do
Straight-in geometry only
The lowest MDA:
The charted VDP is computed from the lowest published straight-in MDA on the plate — the “with DME” or lowest-category line
If you’re using a higher MDA (the “without DME” line, or a higher category’s visibility-adjusted MDA, or your own higher personal minimums), the charted VDP is too close in for you — a normal descent from a higher MDA has to begin farther out
Compute your own VDP for the MDA you’re actually using (below)
The “V” is right for one altitude
What that means in practice:
Brief which MDA you’re flying to, then brief the VDP that goes with it
A higher MDA → an earlier VDP → less time between the VDP and the MAP to see the runway
Higher minimums make the VDP decision come sooner, not later
Don’t assume the printed VDP fits every line of minima
Computing Your Own VDP
When none is published, or your MDA is higher than the one it was built for.
The distance method:
Height above touchdown at your MDA (the HAT — your MDA minus the touchdown zone elevation) divided by 300 gives the distance in nautical miles from the touchdown zone at which a 3° path reaches your MDA
900 feet HAT → 3 NM; 600 feet → 2 NM; 450 feet → 1.5 NM
Measure the distance to the runway threshold or the MAWP: on an RNAV approach, the along-track distance to the MAWP; on a VOR/LOC approach, DME adjusted for where the DME is relative to the threshold (read the plate)
Most navigators show distance to the runway waypoint; that’s your reference
The timing method (when you’re timing from the FAF):
Subtract from the FAF-to-MAP time the time it takes to descend the HAT at a normal rate — about 10 seconds per 100 feet of HAT at typical light-aircraft groundspeeds of around 120 knots (less at slower speeds)
Example: FAF-to-MAP 4:00, HAT 600 feet → descend for about 60 seconds → VDP at roughly 3:00 on the clock
Rough, groundspeed-sensitive, and better than nothing
Use distance when you have it
When the FAA didn’t publish one — a warning, not just an omission:
A VDP is withheld when an obstacle penetrates the visual-area obstacle surface in the visual segment, when the computed VDP would fall at or beyond the MAP (common when the MAP is located before the runway threshold), or when there’s no DME or along-track means to identify it
The obstacle case is the one that matters: the FAA evaluated a 3° visual descent from the MDA and found it did not clear obstacles — that’s why there’s no “V”
Your computed VDP on such an approach is a planning number, not an obstacle-evaluated path; look for a “visual segment — obstacles” note, a VGSI, and at night, see the obstacles before you descend on them
An absent VDP is a reason to brief the visual segment harder, not a reason to improvise one with confidence
The VGSI note:
Many plates carry “VGSI and descent angles not coincident” with the angles — the PAPI/VASI at the airport is set at a different angle or TCH than the procedure’s computed descent
When you leave the MDA at the VDP, the VGSI may show you above or below its path until the two converge near the runway
Fly the VGSI once it’s the better reference; brief the note so it doesn’t surprise you
Both are “normal” descents; they’re just not the same line
Why the VDP Matters in Real IFR Flying
It prevents the late dive:
Leveling at the MDA and pushing over when the runway appears well inside the VDP produces high descent rates, airspeed gain, rushed configuration, a long float, and runway overruns — the nonprecision accident signature
The VDP draws the line: a normal descent from here, or no deal
Pilots who brief and use it stop bargaining with themselves on short final
It’s the chart’s stabilized-approach helper
It sharpens the marginal-weather decision:
Breaking out in rain, haze, blowing snow, or patchy fog, the runway may be visible but not usable — you can’t judge sink rate or alignment, or the references come and go
The P/CG’s “clearly visible” standard and the VDP’s position together answer “is this landable?” before the airplane answers it for you
References that appear after the VDP in marginal visibility are the classic setup for a hard, long landing
The VDP is a go/no-go cue, which is what you need when the picture is ambiguous
It supports stabilized-approach criteria:
Stabilized by 1,000 feet AGL in IMC (500 in VMC): on speed, on path, configured, with a normal descent rate
A descent from the MDA at the VDP on a 3° path meets that standard by construction; a dive from the MDA past the VDP cannot
Configure before the MDA so the descent at the VDP is a power reduction, not a scramble
The VDP turns a nonprecision approach into a stabilized one from the MDA down
The VDP and the CDFA
Two ways to arrive at the same point.
Dive-and-drive with a VDP:
Descend from the FAF to the MDA, level, continue, and at the VDP (with references) begin the normal descent
The VDP is the trigger for the final descent
Maximum time at the MDA to look for the runway
Classic, legal, and the VDP makes it safe
CDFA with a VDP:
A planned continuous descent from the FAF that crosses each step-down at or above its altitude and reaches the MDA at or near the VDP — so that if you see the runway there, you simply continue the same descent
If you reach the MDA (or a derived DA slightly above it) at the VDP without references, you level and continue to the MAP, or go missed per your SOP
You may cross the VDP already descending; that’s the design — the VDP is still the checkpoint: “does this picture look landable?”
An MDA is still an MDA: no descent below it without the references, even on a CDFA
Either way:
The VDP is where the stable landing is still available
Brief it, identify it, decide at it
The technique differs; the decision point doesn’t
Past it, think missed approach first
A Briefing Flow
Minimums — which MDA line you’re flying (with/without DME, category); the HAT at that MDA
VDP — published? Its distance and how you’ll identify it (DME, along-track to the MAWP). Not published? Why not (obstacles?) — and the computed VDP for your HAT (HAT ÷ 300 from the threshold/MAWP), treated as planning only
Visual references — threshold, approach lights, or approach-end markings clearly visible; flight visibility; position for a normal descent (91.175(c))
The plan — “At the VDP with references: descend on a normal 3° path. Not before. Without references: continue to the MAP, missed approach likely. References well past the VDP: evaluate — steep or long means missed”
VGSI — angle and TCH, “not coincident” note if any; use it once in sight
MAP — how identified; the missed approach briefed as if it’s guaranteed
Worked Scenario
The setup:
RNAV (GPS) RWY 12, LNAV MDA 1,460; TDZE 860 (HAT 600); VDP published at 2.0 NM to RW12 (the MAWP, at the threshold); MAP at RW12; LPV not available today (WAAS NOTAM); 1,000 overcast, 3 miles, rain
The brief:
HAT 600, so the published 2.0 NM VDP matches a 3° path (600 ÷ 300 = 2). CDFA from the FAF to arrive at 1,460 at about 2.0 NM. At 2.0 NM with the threshold, approach lights, or approach-end markings clearly visible: continue the descent. Not before. Without them: level, continue to RW12, expect the missed. If the runway appears at 1.0 NM: 600 feet in a mile is twice a normal path — missed
Flying it:
Descending through 1,700 at 2.8 NM; the layer is ragged. At 2.1 NM, 1,470 feet — approach lights come into view, then the threshold; references clearly visible; flight visibility looks like 3 miles. At 2.0 NM, continue the descent on the same rate; VGSI shows slightly above (the “not coincident” note — expected); align with the PAPI; land in the touchdown zone
The variation: at 2.0 NM, nothing. Level at 1,460, continue toward RW12. At 1.2 NM the threshold appears through the rain. The honest check: 600 feet in 1.2 miles is a 500-foot-per-mile path, steep and fast in the wet. Missed approach, as briefed — the second attempt (or the alternate) is the professional choice
Common Mistakes
Descending below the MDA before the VDP because the runway is “in sight” (the AIM: not before)
Treating the VDP as the MAP — going missed there automatically, or continuing past it as if nothing changed
Using the charted VDP with a higher MDA than it was built for
Computing a VDP on an approach where the FAA withheld one for obstacles, and flying it in the dark as if it had been evaluated
Expecting a VDP on a circling approach
Measuring the VDP distance from the wrong reference (DME facility vs. threshold; FAF vs. MAWP)
Descending at the VDP on “something in sight” rather than the P/CG references clearly visible
Leveling at the MDA past the VDP, then diving when the runway appears — long landing, overrun
Letting a VGSI/descent-angle mismatch cause a chase near the runway
Not briefing the VDP at all, then improvising the descent decision in the moment
Checkride Questions — With Answers
“What is a VDP?”
A defined point on the final approach course of a nonprecision straight-in approach from which a normal descent from the MDA to the runway touchdown point may be begun, provided the approach threshold, approach lights, or other markings identifiable with the approach end of the runway are clearly visible (P/CG). Shown as a “V” on the profile view.
“Can you descend below the MDA before reaching the VDP?”
No — AIM 5-4-5: the pilot should not descend below the MDA prior to reaching the VDP. At the VDP, with the required references and a position for a normal descent, you may.
“What’s the difference between the VDP and the MAP?”
The VDP is where a normal descent to the touchdown zone may begin — guidance about a safe, stable landing. The MAP is where the missed approach must begin without the references — a legal requirement. The VDP comes first; between them you may continue legally, but a normal landing becomes less realistic.
“How is a VDP identified?”
On VOR and LOC approaches, by DME from the reference facility; on RNAV approaches, by along-track distance to the next waypoint (the MAWP). A suitable RNAV system may substitute for DME.
“If there’s no VDP on the plate, what do you do?”
Fly the approach as though no VDP had been provided (AIM). You may compute one — HAT ÷ 300 gives the distance in NM from the touchdown zone — but recognize it isn’t obstacle-evaluated; a VDP is withheld when obstacles penetrate the visual segment, among other reasons, so brief the visual segment and the VGSI carefully.
“Is a VDP published on circling approaches?”
No. Only on straight-in nonprecision procedures.
“Which MDA is the charted VDP based on?”
The lowest published straight-in MDA. If you’re flying to a higher MDA, your VDP is farther out — compute it for your HAT.
Final Thoughts
The VDP is one of the most practical details on an approach plate because it converts a legal question into a flying question. The MAP tells you how far you may go; the VDP tells you how far you can go and still land the way you were trained to — on a normal path, at a normal rate, to the touchdown zone. The AIM’s one rule is don’t descend before it. The judgment it demands is to recognize when you’re too far past it.
Brief which MDA you’re flying and the VDP that goes with it; identify it by DME or along-track distance; at the VDP with the references clearly visible, descend on a normal path; without them, continue toward the MAP with the missed approach already in mind; and if the runway appears late enough that landing would take a dive, go around. The chart put the “V” there to protect you from the pressure to make it work.
On the Written Test and Checkride
VDPs appear on the instrument knowledge test and in instrument orals. The most commonly tested topics:
P/CG definition and the specific visual references
AIM 5-4-5: don’t descend below the MDA before the VDP; fly as if no VDP when you can’t identify it
VDP vs. MAP
Identification: DME (VOR/LOC) vs. along-track to the MAWP (RNAV); RNAV substitution for DME
Straight-in only; based on the lowest MDA
Computing a VDP (HAT ÷ 300); why one may be unpublished (obstacles)
91.175(c) “normal rate of descent using normal maneuvers”
VDP in a CDFA
Quick Reference
VDP — Visual Descent Point (P/CG, AIM 5-4-5):
A point on the final approach course of a nonprecision straight-in approach from which a normal descent from the MDA to the touchdown point may begin, provided the threshold, approach lights, or approach-end markings are clearly visible
The “V” on the profile view; straight-in only (never circling); based on the lowest straight-in MDA
Identified by DME (VOR/LOC) or along-track distance to the MAWP (RNAV); RNAV may substitute for DME
The Rule:
Do not descend below the MDA before the VDP (AIM)
At the VDP with the 91.175(c) references (position for a normal descent, flight visibility, references in sight) → descend on a normal ~3° path
Without references → continue level toward the MAP; expect the missed
References well past the VDP → steep or long = go missed
Can’t identify the VDP → fly as if none were published
VDP vs. MAP:
VDP = “can I land normally from here?” (guidance; first)
MAP = “may I continue legally?” (mandatory; last)
Between them: legal, but the normal landing is slipping away
Computing Your Own:
HAT ÷ 300 = NM from the touchdown zone/threshold (900 ft → 3 NM; 600 → 2; 450 → 1.5); use distance to the threshold/MAWP
Timing: ~10 sec per 100 ft of HAT subtracted from the FAF-to-MAP time (at ~120 kt; rough)
For a higher MDA than the charted VDP’s, compute your own — it’s farther out
Unpublished VDP = possible obstacle penetration of the visual segment (or the VDP would be at/beyond the MAP — common when the MAP is before the threshold — or no DME/along-track to identify it) → a computed VDP is planning only, not obstacle-evaluated; brief the visual segment and VGSI
VGSI Note:
“VGSI and descent angles not coincident” → expect the PAPI/VASI to disagree slightly until near the runway; fly the VGSI once it’s the better reference
Technique:
Dive-and-drive: MDA, level, descend at the VDP
CDFA: plan to reach the MDA (or derived DA) at the VDP; cross it descending; still an MDA
Configured before the MDA; stabilized by 1,000 ft AGL IMC / 500 VMC
Key Principle:
The VDP is where a normal descent from the MDA to the touchdown zone becomes possible — don’t descend before it, and recognize when you’re too far past it. The MAP says how far you may go; the VDP says how far you can go and still land normally. Brief the VDP for the MDA you’re actually flying, identify it, decide at it with the references clearly visible, and when the runway shows up late enough that landing means a dive, go around.
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.