They have to publish them so they make it into the nav databases for the operator’s FMS / GPS systems, as flying GPS approaches with user defined waypoints is not normally permitted.
I’ve done a bit more digging on the plates.
Tiree EGPU had an LPV introduced on 4 Feb 2016. The plate appears in the UK AIP (no NDB, AFIS only). Again different minima depending on 2.5% or 3% glideslope.
However, it doesn’t appear in my iPad Jeppesen plates (i have a more limited UK only subscription).
I haven’t looked to see if it appears on the actual aircraft Garmin box.
Can anyone else confirm if the Jepp plate is available to them to view, and whether it appears on their aircraft navigation equipment?
Nothing in current Jepp for EGPU, apart from two VFR pages.
Well I guess that’s how they limit it to “Approved Operators” then…
Presumably Jepp still produce the plates and Garmin code the approaches but only available through a private/secret arrangement.
If true, that’s a blow.
But why? Why are RNAV approaches still treated like a mysterious, holy grail in the UK, 20 years after their rollout in the US, and 18 years after their rollout in Germany?
But why?
There is no valid “why”. If there is a “why” it will be either politics or incompetence. The whole thing is illogical and frankly embarrassing, as is the whole NDB nonsense.
And the whole “what if your GPS fails?” argument for requiring NDBs for the MAP is a red herring. What if your NDB fails on an old-school NDB-only approach? Why is that deemed an acceptable risk and GPS failure is not?
Maybe we should send some of the CAA guys to the US for a few weeks flying holiday and see if they can come back with a single valid reason as to why the US system is not appropriate for the UK. We could even do a EuroGA fund raising to send them there :)
As I said, it’s embarrassing.
In the US, there are private airports. Some of these request instrument approach procedures. The owner of the airport pays for the development and on going maintenance of the procedure. The procedure ends up in the Jeppesen database, but there is no chart for it other than a special contracted chart, usually from Jeppesen. The operator must control who gets the chart and who may use the procedure. Public airports have published charts for free from AIS (Aeronautical Information Services aka AeroNav aka MACO).
A few comments
/Regulators – the bright kids from college never go here, it’s more of a retirement home for people from industry that are tried of working hard. Their main objective is to protect their under-employment status as they likely no longer qualify for private industry after an extended period at a reduced pace of life. This is a general comment, nothing specific to aviation. Expect illogical (defensive) thinking.
/Approved Operators Only – I believe as stated above, it maybe in the nav box but the plates will not be published. Whether one needs to request them by email OR use the AIP plates, time will tell. I won’t be surprised if you had to sign an indemnity paper in advance to fly it (no proper ATC etc).
/Dundee – illustrates the value in cross checking the approach against the DME. Full LPV approaches should eliminate this requirement – but as per point 1 – PPLIR may need to lobby the GA Section of the CAA to encourage publication of the approaches.
/NDB – it’s best just to treat it as a GPS waypoint and move on. One should overrule silly regulations where in doing so, will increase safety. NDB approaches to minimums are so dangerous for private pilots, they should be banned. Refer to point 1!
One PPL/IR Exec member flew the head of the CAA in his King Air to one of their meetings, 2 years ago…
IMHO the CAA seems to have factions within it’s Retirement Support Department 
EGPU – not on my Jepp but in the aircraft database.
Can I go off at a bit of a tangent?
Does anyone know the purpose of LIVPO? Why are some procedures designed with a “straight in” IAF, rather than just using the IF as an IAF, as is rather more common?
