|DO NOT USE FOR NAVIGATION!|
A voicemail left with the Jeppesen navdata folks eventually led to a return phone call and explanation: Yes, the KVUO LDA-A approach is not contained in the G1000 database (or presumably in any other GPS receiver's database) because this is the only case in the US where a localizer installed at one airport (KPDX) for an ILS is used to implement an LDA approach at another, nearby airport (KVUO).
|DO NOT USE FOR NAVIGATION!|
The approaches even have two approach fixes in common: BUXOM and TRAYL. Unfortunately, the programming language used to code approaches for the GPS database and executed by GPS receivers, ARINC 424, does not allow a localizer established for an ILS at one airport to also be used for an approach at another airport. So Jeppesen chose not to include the KVUO LDA-A in the navigation database, even though the LDA approach is the only instrument approach into Pearson. This means users of the G1000, and presumably other GPS receivers, may want to know how to set-up and fly an approach the old-school way.
Tune NAV1 to the localizer manually, verify the Morse code ID is correct, and ensure the front course is set on the HSI (or CDI #1 for non-G1000 installations). Tune NAV2 to the Battle Ground VOR, verify the Morse code is correct, and set bearing pointer #2 (or CDI #2) to use NAV2. When you've joined the localizer, use the tail of the bearing pointer (or adjust CDI #2) so you'll know when you've passed the BTG radials that define the step-down fixes on the approach. If this sounds awkward, you are probably a Child of the Magenta Line who needs more exposure to the way instrument flying was done for decades.
The Instrument Rating Practical Test Standards requires applicants to demonstrate the ability to fly an approach without reference to the primary attitude and heading instrument. Perhaps applicants should also be required to demonstrate flying an approach without using the GPS. Selecting an approach with the G1000 does much of the work for you, sets the primary navigation frequency, sets the navigation course, and may prevent you from acquiring understanding and correlative levels of knowledge with regard to radio navigation.
A Little Less Old School
Now if you fly into Pearson on a regular basis, there's another way to prepare for this approach, though the set-up work is best done on the ground or during low workload while in flight. You can manually create a flight plan that defines the sequence of fixes that make up the approach, which is similar to what you'd see if the LDA approach was defined in the GPS's aviation database and you selected the approach. I'm going to illustrate using screen shots from Garmin's GTN Trainer app for the iPad, but the process is essentially the same in a G1000 or most any other GPS receiver.
You're still going to fly the localizer and you'll need to tune it manually, verify the Morse code, and verify the front course of 103˚ is set on the HSI (or CDI, if so equipped). In your GPS flight plan, add the fixes BUXOM and TRAYL. ZEZJI and QEHBY are not included in the GPS database (Hey Jeppesen, toss us a bone here!), but you can enter them as user-defined waypoints. Simply insert a fix named ZEZJI, your GPS will say that no such fix exists, and give you the option of creating a user-defined waypoint. Accept that option and define ZEZJI on the 283˚ radial and 4.7 miles out from IVDG localizer. Then repeat the process for QEHBY on the 283˚ radial and 2.9 miles out.
|Create user waypoint? Yes, please!|
|Rho-theta using IVDG localizer|
|Enter theta (radial is opposite of front course), then rho (distance) on the next screen (not shown)|
If you want, you can define these waypoints by entering the latitude and longitude for ZEZJI and QEHBY, but more numbers and user input steps are more complicated and error prone. Lastly, insert the BTG VOR into the flight plan since that's where you'll be headed if you end up flying the missed approach segment and you should see something like this.
In both options remember that you'll be flying the localizer, not the magenta line. In option #2, you have the luxury the GPS flight plan sequencing appropriately so you'll know where you are on the profile view of the chart. You can even combine both options and use the cross-radials and the GPS to verify your position.
If you're old enough to remember VOR/DME RNAV approaches, which seem to have all been replaced with RNAV (GPS) approaches, you'll recall it was standard procedure to enter each approach fix in a VOR/DME RNAV approach as a VOR radial and distance into a unit like the Bendix-King KNS-80. I'm getting all misty just thinking about it ...
|The venerable KNS-80 VOR/DME RNAV receiver|
Now you may be asking yourself "Is it legal to define your own flight plan for an approach?" I'm not a lawyer, but let's use the tried and true method of testing an argument by prefacing it with "Your honor" and see how it sounds.
Your honor, since IFR-certified GPS is a legal substitute for DME, and since I defined the ZEZJI and GEHBY correctly using rho-theta from the IVDG localizer, and since I was flying the localizer, I believe my procedure to be both legal and safe.
This argument sounds pretty good to me, but the first option (flying the localizer and displaying the cross-radials) seems easier from the get-go and involves less head-down time: There are times when flying raw data is less distracting than trying to bend the G1000 to your will, provided you're one of those increasingly rare pilots who actually knows how to fly raw data.