This is contained in FAA 7110.65, paragraph 4-8-1h3. ATC
can vector the aircraft to a fix
between the IAF/IF and the FAF, but then the intercept angle falls to 30° or less.
3. Established on a heading or course direct to a fix between the IF and FAF, at an intercept angle not greater than 30 degrees, and assigned an altitude in
accordance with b2.
But this only works if there's a fix between the IAF/IF and the FAF. Otherwise, the IAF/IF is the last point at which the aircraft can join the approach.
Under no circumstance is the controller authorized to vector to intercept the inbound course alone,
and never has been as far as I know. With RNAV approaches it's all about the fixes, not the course.
Really? Vectors to final on an ILS are and have always been improper? Notice the quoted paragraphs apply to conventional approaches as well as RNAV approaches. The paragraph you quoted begins with:
For RNAV-equipped aircraft operating on unpublished routes, issue approach clearance for conventional or RNAV SIAP only after the aircraft is:
And the AIM paragraph says:
In addition to the above, RNAV aircraft may be issued a clearance direct to the IAF/IF at intercept angles not greater than 90 degrees for both conventional and RNAV instrument approaches.
OTOH, 5-9-1 of the ATC Handbook specifically contemplates vectors to final on an RNAV approach:
5-9-1. VECTORS TO FINAL APPROACH COURSE Except as provided in para 7-4-2, Vectors for Visual Approach, vector arriving aircraft to intercept the final approach course:
a. At least 2 miles outside the approach gate unless one of the following exists:
1. When the reported ceiling is at least 500 feet above the MVA/MIA and the visibility is at least 3 miles (report may be a PIREP if no weather is reported for the airport), aircraft may be vectored to intercept the final approach course closer than 2 miles outside the approach gate but no closer than the approach gate.
2. If specifically requested by the pilot, aircraft may be vectored to intercept the final approach course inside the approach gate but no closer than the final approach fix.
EXCEPTION. Conditions 1 and 2 above do not apply to RNAV aircraft being vectored for a GPS or RNAV approach.
So, when vectoring for the final approach with RNAV, the 2 mile outside the approach gate requirement is there, but not the two exceptions.
As I read it, RNAV aircraft give ATC an additional option for RNAV equipped aircraft; it does not remove other proper options.
Or are you saying there is something else that allows Orlando Approach to vector to final on the KORL ILS or LOC 25 but does not allow them to do it on the virtually identical RNAV(GPS) 25? Or, ATC can give vectors to final on the ILS but can't if the aircraft is equipped with RNAV? It's certainly possible, although I have received vectors to final on GPS approaches, but if there is such a thing, what is it? The paragraphs so far referred to don't say that.
What ATC is and has been precluded from is vectoring an aircraft to intercept the inbound course inside the FAF(or GSI) or within a certain distance outside. All both the ATC Handbook and the AIM paragraph quoted say ATC is
allowed to, in
addition, give a direct-to-a fix between the IF and the FAF, which are, of course outside the FAF.
