Don’t want to stray off topic too much, but these LPV approaches need WAAS, correct? From what I understand is that these WAAS stations are only set-up in the US, Canada and Mexico, or is WAAS also available in Europe?
It needs SBAS (Space Based Augmentation System) which does use ground stations to provide the corrections to the satellites. WAAS is the US SBAS system and EGNOS the European. LPV works fine in Europe.
Thanks! Does a G430W also read out EGNOS?
Thanks! Does a G430W also read out EGNOS?
Yes.
The funny thing is that every road navigation system and smartphone and tablet computer (as well as every 5$ GPS receiver module that you can buy on eBay) manufactured during the last five years contains a WAAS capable GPS receiver while the vast majority of aircraft don’t. After all, differential GPS was once developed for aviation…
My estimate regarding the original question: Of the aircraft in the companies I work for (bizjet operator and flying school) maybe 25% are LPV capable. Do people officially fly LPV approaches? I guess no, because right now no LPV procedure here in Germany has lower minima than the “normal” GPS approach. So you will be cleared for a GPS approach in any case. There is no way of knowing if pilots follow their GPS derived glidepath or the altitude vs. distance table on the approach chart.
Thanks! Does a G430W also read out EGNOS?
Yes.
Thanks, I never understood the talk about upgrading to WAAS in Europe. Guess I do now!
because right now no LPV procedure here in Germany has lower minima than the “normal” GPS approach
You mean German GPS/LPVs have no lower MDH than the co-located GPS/LNAV approaches?
That’s an outrageous waste of effort. Doubly so when you consider that most (all?) of the airports will have the GPS/LNAV*+V* Jepp-generated glidepath in the database which allows the GPS/LNAV nonprecision approach to be flown fully autopilot coupled like an ILS!
Does a G430W also read out EGNOS?
Yes – a GNS430W is GPS/LPV capable.
But, whether you can fly a GPS/LPV approach depends on
The last two are “just legalities” and it should still work OK if not complied with.
You mean German GPS/LPVs have no lower MDH than the co-located GPS/LNAV approaches?
That’s an outrageous waste of effort. Doubly so when you consider that most (all?) of the airports will have the GPS/LNAV*+V* Jepp-generated glidepath in the database
It’s an intermediate step. This way, Germany got a large number of LPVs very quickly. In the future, the DH will be adjusted.
I dont bother with all that new fangled equipment like my G600 with synthetic vision or my G430 with Waas. I only use what the governing bodies allow. Stopwatch and altimeter. You know I fly like Jimmy Doolittle. This way I know Im really safe.
It’s an intermediate step. This way, Germany got a large number of LPVs very quickly. In the future, the DH will be adjusted
It’s what I call “useless”.
To reduce the DH they will need the obstacle survey which is where most of the money goes, so they haven’t really got anything useful.
It’s a bit like Shoreham publishing an ILS (200ft DH) with the GS and LOC notamed INOP.
It probably also puts a new slant on when I asked, a while ago, whether there were any LPVs in Europe at airports which had Customs but didn’t have an ILS.
I dont bother with all that new fangled equipment like my G600 with synthetic vision or my G430 with Waas. I only use what the governing bodies allow. Stopwatch and altimeter. You know I fly like Jimmy Doolittle. This way I know Im really safe.
Did you forget the smiley? 
