KPTV approach confusion

I see this as a real problem and not just an inconvenience like a lot of the bells and whistles.  This one tosses all positive guidance and forces you to rebuild the flight plan.

When I was flying these practice approaches, I was being vectored all over for traffic.  I told them I could just shoot the published approach (so I'd know what to expect) and that worked great for their timing.  I'd hate to say "nevermind, I'm not sure what my GPS is doing, I'll need that vector now."

BTW, the example above is trying to load a waypoint between the missed approach from the GPS approach into KDLO and the VOR approach into KPTV.

I earlier proposed a swipe to close.  I know it'll be different than the MAP page, but I think it would be better to let them be different and have clear labels rather than having the FPL and MAP pages have the same buttons and have unclear procedure labels.  I assume this wouldn't have been a problem with the old FPL+ design since it would have been a different tab, but I like the current design better except for the label clutter.

After reaching the MAP and in holding at TTE, go the the FMS page (at least on an IFD440).  Note the LSK that says "exit holding." Click on that.  Go back to the MAP page and you will note that the alternating magenta and white stripes now show on the procedure turn.  When you get back to TTE, the FMS will sequence to the procedure turn and commence the approach.

Maybe a suggestion of a better way to program with FMS software would result in a change for the better, but FMS's behavior in this scenario makes sense, to me at least.

What puzzles me a little is that I posted a message on another thread that described the FMS automatically sequencing to the approach after reaching the MAP, where two identical approaches were to be flown back to back.  I did not simulate that flight, but I did this one, and found the FMS did not automatically sequence in this scenario involving separate airports.  I do prefer the FMS behavior on this simulated flight, where I have to tell it to sequence.  But I would be checking the FMS page to see what it intended to do in any case (where are the white and magenta lines - where I expect or not?).  If the FMS behaves differently in cases where you are flying duplicate approaches, it would be something to remember when practicing them.  In any case, just make sure you know whether the FMS is going to hold or not so you can tell it differently if you so desire.

No, that's not correct.  If you don't tell it to exit holding, it will stay in the missed approach hold indefinitely.  That's as it should be.

Your impression of how the FMS system works was incorrect.  Every FMS is sensitive to improper inputs. Some of them are downright counterintuitive and take a lot of training to learn how to use properly, but the IFDs are better than most.  You might want to spend some with an Avidyne CFI or some time reading Mike Bauer's new book "Flying With the Avidyne IFD" which is an easier read than the Avidyne Pilot's Guide, which is only a reference and not a teaching aid.  Once you better understand the logic, you will be less likely to guess wrong and ask the now-classic question: "What is it doing now??"  Don't feel like the Lone Ranger - we've all been there. 

I don't look at it as "losing the MAP page."  It just takes a moment to go to the FLP page when you want to change the FPL.  In fact, as soon as I do that, it's back to the MAP page to make sure the white/magenta alternating stripe reflects the change to the next segment that I've made.

If you want to duplicate approaches, there is an LSK for "do it again" that you can hit when ready.  I don't see the need to try to do it any other way, but you can if you want.  But this is personal preference.  Those of us who have flown with Garmin 530/430s probably have a similar wish list a mile long, but you learn the logic and it becomes second nature.  I don't think the IFDs are any different in that respect (but they are much easier to learn thankfully).

Whatever FMS and autopilot combos the military uses in drones no doubt can handle 3D with no human assistance.  Maybe one day they will be cheap enough to put in a Cherokee.  Until then, I'm old school and still think it's pretty miraculous that a Garmin 430 or and IFD540 can take us from Miami to LA following a 2D route, on autopilot without any VORs or ADFs.  But I never had an FMS/INS/GPS/RNAV in any civilian or military aircraft I've flown that I'd trust for 3D navigation.  I don't even trust ATC for that.

You can have the last word.

That doesn't help when it is a different approach, which is the more common scenario and what I was referring to. For example, you can fly the ILS 12, and then the LOC 30 from the other direction.

Quite often the missed hold point for the first, will be the IAF of the other, which jams them together, exactly as described in this thread -- unless you add a bogus point in between.

* Orest

There are plenty of reasons a person may want to shoot an approach into two nearby airports or another approach to the same airport.  You can go and try to shoot down all of the legitimate reasons to have this issue addressed if you'd like, but just because you don't care doesn't mean others shouldn't either.

I'd suggest reading though some of the earlier posts for more details, but here is a summary of some of the issues described here and in some similar posts.

- When two approaches are loaded back to back that have the missed approach hold and IAF anchored at the same waypoint, then the IAF from the 2nd approach moves to the missed approach of the previous approach.

- The above issue can spur several other issues including the missed approach hold being deleted and replaced with an IAF hold in lieu of procedure turn.  This is totally the IAF hold including altitude, turn direction, and inbound course.  Meaning if you fly the "hold" that the IFD loads into the missed, you can be flying at the incorrect altitude, direction, etc.  I gave a case in another post where the hold was 1500 lower than published and on the wrong course.

- You can no longer go Direct To the IAF of the second approach once you exit the missed from the first approach because it thinks you have already flown the missed and it skips you to a waypoint beyond that in the flight plan.

- If you don't exit the missed approach hold properly, it is very difficult to get the FMS back to normal behavior.  Getting the IFD back on track on the second approach usually requires deleting the first approach that you are no longer flying, not something most people would think would be necessary.

- The IAF being kicked out of the approach is not just with back to back approaches, it happens when you close the gap prior to the IAF, but if the is not immediately proceeding approach, it doesn't cause any issues other than improper approach labeling.

There are a few other things in the above posts such as a suggestion to remove the vertical MAP tab to clarify the approach labeling, but I think I hit the highlights.