Welcome

Hi Nico,
It's in AMC1 FCL.050 Recording of flight time, In the details of how to complete the Log Book (Column 11)

@ Steve Roesli
i think using constant FPA doing NPA apch is not the more easy way to conduct 2D APCH....as nobody compute the true FPA otherwise you have to change FPA every NM to adjust your gradient.

Does AIRBUS correct delta isa Temp on FPA ? ...ATR does not.

On NPA 2D ,delta temperature can be a big penalty or trigger EGPWS on finale.

If you use a constant FPA to perform a NPA , difference of altitude between true altitude and indicated altitude will be maintain til MDA , while out of ISA conditions.

EXAMPLE (for ATR pilots)
if your temperature delta ISA temperature is +30 like some hot countries (india, saudia etc.. ) at 3000" FAF/FAP your true altitude is 3360"

At FAF/FAP if you descend using constant FPA 3° :
- you'll arrive at your normal DA point ( CDFA ) at 610" too bad if your ceiling is 500".
- If you continue to descend to 250" you will be almost at threshold.

In this case to descent from your FAF to MDA correcting delta temp you need to increase your FPA by 0.3° FPA should be set at 3.3°
Now you can imagine what will happen if temperature delta isa is -30° like most of polar countries ....maybe you'll do your descent below your OCH.

that is why LNAV/VNAV APCH have low temperature limit and sometimes a high temperature limit.

It reminds to me when i was flying in Indonesia , most of my trainees asked to me why we have at FAF 3 whites on PAPI ... and 2 whites close to MDA

Thank you ALL for recommendations and reading.
Problem SOLVED.
Case CLOSED.
Special Thank's to EASA people for the providing
very useful Community Network service!

Thanks, Mario.
Below 120m - 400ft is also where most Rotorcraft ops take place, hence the potential for collision, a risk well managed in European regulations, both on the Rotorcraft and Drones sides.
Always good to remind helicopter pilots of this risk and provide them risk mitigation tips: that's what Safety Promotion is for.
The ultimate goal, I suggest, is to have all users sharing the airspace in a safe and effective manner.

Dear Hagop,
many thanks for this interesting report. If you are interested on cybersecurity reporting, ISMS, or product change impact analysis, we are just starting standardization activities on those topics, do not hesitate to join!

A-ISAC offers good insight into the aviation-targeted activities of TA2451. For example, some A-ISAC members have blocked phishing attempts from TA2541 with an Airbus spoofed email address.

Great job. I had a dozen of these in my notes but I wasn't expecting such a large list.

Thank you Tjerk.

Come and meet us during the European Rotors 2022 and the ESPN-R Safety Promotion Workshop!