The vast majority of approaches are still using an ILS. Pretty much the only time we would use an alternative approach (most often RNAV or LPV, and rarely VOR) would be if an ILS is not available.
That said, in the US especially, controllers are quite keen to offer a "visual approach" as it then relieves them of the duty to maintain separation from the aircraft in front. This is a cultural thing in the US, and the rest of the world does not operate this way. Even when flying a "visual approach" in the US, the ILS is usually still radiating, and we often still fly the approach using the autopilot coupled to the ILS, just maintaining our own separation from other traffic visually.
Comments
Valid question!
The vast majority of approaches are still using an ILS. Pretty much the only time we would use an alternative approach (most often RNAV or LPV, and rarely VOR) would be if an ILS is not available.
That said, in the US especially, controllers are quite keen to offer a "visual approach" as it then relieves them of the duty to maintain separation from the aircraft in front. This is a cultural thing in the US, and the rest of the world does not operate this way. Even when flying a "visual approach" in the US, the ILS is usually still radiating, and we often still fly the approach using the autopilot coupled to the ILS, just maintaining our own separation from other traffic visually.