Terminal VS Non-Terminal Approach
- Thread starter awacs94
- Start date
tgrayson
New Member
What is a "terminal" vs. "non-terminal" approach? Never heard of such a distinction.
A PT isn't based on time, it's based on distance. Time is merely a stand-in to judge a distance based on a known ground speed. Two or three minutes is fine at, say, 90 knots ground speed. You're going 1.5 miles per minute, so 3 minutes is 4.5 miles, well within the 10 mile limit. Still, I don't see much need to go beyond 2 minutes in a no-wind situation.
AmazingPilot
Well-Known Member
Terminal Approach is an approach where the primary navaid for the approach is located on the field.
Non-Terminal Approach is where the the primary navaid for the approach is located off of the airport property.
The timing difference will be based on keeping the aircraft within a safe distance from the field.
Non-Terminal Approach is where the the primary navaid for the approach is located off of the airport property.
The timing difference will be based on keeping the aircraft within a safe distance from the field.
tgrayson
New Member
Where is this terminology coming from? Seems non-standard. And why would the OP not be able to tell whether the navaid was on-airport or off-airport (standard terminology)?
Still, the protected area is the same for both types of procedures. If the navaid is on-airport, a three minute outbound makes getting established on final much easier.
tgrayson
New Member
Googling suggests this is FlightSim language. I find it in no FAA publication.
MidlifeFlyer
Well-Known Member
Out of curiosity, I did a search for "non-terminal approach" and "non terminal approach" on my Summit CD (just about everything that FAA has out there). No hits.
Assuming Amazing is right about what the OP means (although the question suggests he means something else), the timing of the outbound of the PT is a matter of personal preference based on how much time/distance you want in order to get set up and is limited only by the requirement that you stay within any distance specified on the approach chart (typically within 10 NM of the IAF/FAF).
Assuming Amazing is right about what the OP means (although the question suggests he means something else), the timing of the outbound of the PT is a matter of personal preference based on how much time/distance you want in order to get set up and is limited only by the requirement that you stay within any distance specified on the approach chart (typically within 10 NM of the IAF/FAF).
TFaudree_ERAU
Mashin' dem buttons
They taught us the phrases terminal and non-terminal at Riddle. Could this be a "pilot factory" phrase to make it easier to remember when to time 2 versus 3 minutes on the outbound leg to a procedure turn? Could it be that instead of saying "with a VOR located on the field, you fly outbound for 3 minutes" they say "terminal approach is a 3 minute outbound leg"?
I've never heard these terms used before. If indeed non-terminal means the primary navaid is located off airport, then how can someone assume that 3 minutes will work for the PT? To me it appears like the navaid could be located damn near anywhere under this term. In that case, 3 minutes is useless.
TFaudree_ERAU
Mashin' dem buttons
If the NAVAID is "non-terminal" you use 2 minutes on the outbound leg.
EDIT: Just found a site on the internet that mentioned that a NAVAID is categorized as terminal if it also serves as the missed approach point. If it is not the MAP, it is a non-terminal NAVAID. It was a Flight Simulator "how-to" book, but most of the time the people that write these have real world knowledge and experience that they wish to pass on to the non-rated simulator enthusiast. If the author is the same person that I have cross referenced in the FAA Airman database, he is an Advanced Ground Instructor with instrument endorsement.
EDIT: Just found a site on the internet that mentioned that a NAVAID is categorized as terminal if it also serves as the missed approach point. If it is not the MAP, it is a non-terminal NAVAID. It was a Flight Simulator "how-to" book, but most of the time the people that write these have real world knowledge and experience that they wish to pass on to the non-rated simulator enthusiast. If the author is the same person that I have cross referenced in the FAA Airman database, he is an Advanced Ground Instructor with instrument endorsement.
Just to clarify - this is a technique. Probably used for only slower airplanes.
Again, this is not an FAA reference.
And it really doesn't take much to get an AGI or IGI, so take that reference for what it's worth.
TFaudree_ERAU
Mashin' dem buttons
I agree, it shouldn't be used for anything more than 120-140 knots, so you can stay within 10NM of the FAF. However, I'm surprised that some people haven't heard of this technique. How were you taught to proceed outbound from the NAVAID in a 172 or other common training aircraft for your instrument rating if you weren't using the 2 or 3 minute technique?
I just hover up to the FAF and do a pedal turn.
Seriously though, I teach a similar technique. I just like to avoid factual sounding statements that are really just technique.
Another, albeit pain-in-the-ass, technique, would be to calculate the time using your groundspeed and an E6B. Had to do that one in Army flight school. Not fun.
casey
Well-Known Member
NAVAIDs, VORs in particular already contain the nomenclature of Terminal/Low Alt/High Alt, and has nothing to do with anything other than service volume. I can understand what he means there but thats way non-standard terminology from anything ive ever heard.
Anybody can get a gliem book, rote memorize answers and pay $90 for an IGI, AGI or BGI. I dont really put any stock in those ratings unless he has a pilot cert to go along with them.
assuming no wind, 1 minute outbound from the fix, then a turn for the PT and one minute on that heading, do a 180 away from the FAF, intercept and fly inbound, restart timer at the FAF for the approach.
nosehair
Well-Known Member
Yep, that's about it.
I do use the terms 'terminal' and 'non-terminal', ...wait, I just use the word 'terminal' to indicate it is on the field. I don't think I use the 'non-terminal' word, but it is implied, I guess.
I've always used the word terminal, guess it came from the concept that the VOR is the MAP, and that is the big difference to look at.
The rote 2 or 3 minutes outbound is a 'pilot mill' technique that gets schooled into the idea that it is a 'standard'.
Those are rough approximations of time, but time is unique to the approach.
Depends on how much altitude you have to lose, if any, during the PT, as well as wind.
A PT on 'non-terminal vor approach with no altitude would be about 2 minutes. If you have altitude to lose....go longer.
A PT on a terminal approach is a different matter and takes more planning. Again, it depends on how much altitude you have to lose after the turn and established inbound. Three minutes, evenin in wind, is not usually enough. You want to plan on being down to MDA at least one minute before you arrive at the MAP, so 3 out would only give 2 in which is only enough to lose a little under a thousand feet comfortably, and if you have any tailwind, you won't get down even close.
The whole point of all this ramblin' is that a rote 2 or 3 minutes is...
???...what are you thinkin'...???
mtsu_av8er
Well-Known Member
I just hover up to the FAF and do a pedal turn.
