PBN Performance Based Navigation - ICAO

1ICAO PBN SeminarICAO PBN Seminar

Seminar Case Studies Seminar Case Studies –– Days 1,2,3Days 1,2,3

PBNPBNPPerformance erformance BBasedased

NNavigationavigation–– Seminar Case Studies Seminar Case Studies ––

Days 1, 2 & 3Days 1, 2 & 3

Federal AviationAdministration

2


ICAO PBN SeminarICAO PBN SeminarSeminar Case Studies Seminar Case Studies –– Days 1,2,3Days 1,2,3

OverviewOverview

Case Study - Day 1

Case Study - Day 2

Case Study - Day 3

3



Case Study - Day 1Learning ObjectivesLearning Objectives

Identify navigation performance Identify navigation performance requirements after describing an Airspace requirements after describing an Airspace

Operational Concept.Operational Concept.

4



Reference: BERET AirportReference: BERET Airport

BERET AIRPORT

Input to Process 1

5



Chapeau TMAChapeau TMA

Input to Process 1

6



CHAPEAU CURRENTCHAPEAU CURRENT

Input to Process 1

7



1st Change: Chapeau TMA1st Change: Chapeau TMA

Input to Process 1

From 120 toFrom 120 to400 400 IFR IFR

Movements Movements per dayper day

8



2nd Change: Chapeau TMA2nd Change: Chapeau TMA

Growth of Growth of HombergHomberg TownTown• Spread of Turn Performance• Complaints from Homberg & political pressure re Noise

Input to Process 1

9



3rd Change: Chapeau TMA3rd Change: Chapeau TMA

NDB withdrawnNDB withdrawn• Strong GA lobby want replacement procedure on 03R

Input to Process 1

10



Set up Project

Team

[Regulator]

Process 1Process 1

11



P1: Strategic ObjectivesP1: Strategic Objectives

Safety? Capacity? Efficiency? Environment? Access?

From 120 toFrom 120 to400 400 a/c per daya/c per day

Growth of Growth of HombergHomberg TownTown• Spread of Turn Performance• Complaints from Homberg re Noise

NDB withdrawnNDB withdrawn• Strong GA lobby want replacement procedure

12



P1: Airspace Requirements P1: Airspace Requirements

Safety? Capacity? Efficiency? Environment? Access?

Accommodate Accommodate increased trafficincreased traffic

MinimiseMinimise noise impact over noise impact over HombergHomberg Town & City of Town & City of ChapeauChapeau

GA requires IFR approach for RWY03RGA requires IFR approach for RWY03RVFRsVFRs want continued access to/from BERETwant continued access to/from BERET

13



P1: Analyse Traffic DistributionP1: Analyse Traffic Distribution

35%

15%

40%

10%

40%

10%

35%

15%

60%60%

40%40%

Step 1

14



P1 – Airspace ConceptP1 – Airspace Concept

35%

15%

40%

40%

10%

35%

15%

60%60%

40%40%

10%

Step 1

Route A

Route B

15



P1 – Airspace ConceptP1 – Airspace Concept

Initial Analysis by PANSInitial Analysis by PANS--OPS Specialist:OPS Specialist:RNAV or RNP SIDs/STARs required to achieve Airspace RNAV or RNP SIDs/STARs required to achieve Airspace ConceptConcept

TMA WTMA WTMA ETMA E

Step 1

16



P1 – Assess Fleet CapabilityP1 – Assess Fleet Capability

Aircraft Performance Mix :70% jets (IFR)28% Twin Turbo Prop (IFR)2% Single-engine trainers (VFR only)

NAV Capability of IFR Operations:85% with RNAV-type system + database

30% (mainly GA) have GNSS + VOR70% (mainly Commercial Transport) have D/D/I + VOR

15% conventional VOR/DME only (IFR mix).

Aircraft Performance Mix :Aircraft Performance Mix :70% jets (IFR)70% jets (IFR)28% Twin Turbo Prop (IFR)28% Twin Turbo Prop (IFR)2% Single2% Single--engine trainers (VFR only)engine trainers (VFR only)

NAV Capability of NAV Capability of IFRIFR Operations:Operations:85% with RNAV85% with RNAV--type system + databasetype system + database

30% (mainly GA) have GNSS + VOR30% (mainly GA) have GNSS + VOR70% (mainly Commercial Transport) have D/D/I + VOR70% (mainly Commercial Transport) have D/D/I + VOR

15% conventional VOR/DME only (IFR mix).15% conventional VOR/DME only (IFR mix).Further Analysis by PANSFurther Analysis by PANS--OPS Specialist:OPS Specialist:Take advantage of GPS equipage for APCH RWY03RTake advantage of GPS equipage for APCH RWY03R

Step 2

17



P1 – Assess Nav InfrastructureP1 – Assess Nav Infrastructure

Two DMEsHOM (Homberg)BER (Beret)

Two VORsHOM (Homberg)BER (Beret)

NDB (HAT)

Two DMEsTwo DMEsHOM (HOM (HombergHomberg))BER (Beret)BER (Beret)

Two Two VORsVORsHOM (HOM (HombergHomberg))

BER (Beret)BER (Beret)NDB (HAT) NDB (HAT)

Step 2

18



P1 – Assess COM/SUR Infrast.P1 – Assess COM/SUR Infrast.

Primary SUR Radar15 r.p.m.

1 MSSR15 r.p.m.

COM = VHF VoiceATM

Modular Sectorisation: Max 4 SectorsFlight Data ProcessorRadar Data Processor

Primary SUR RadarPrimary SUR Radar15 15 r.p.mr.p.m..

1 MSSR1 MSSR15 15 r.p.mr.p.m..

COM = VHF VoiceCOM = VHF VoiceATMATM

Modular Sectorisation: Max 4 SectorsModular Sectorisation: Max 4 SectorsFlight Data ProcessorFlight Data ProcessorRadar Data ProcessorRadar Data Processor

Step 3

19



P1 –Navigation Functionalities Required for SID/STARs


RNAV SystemComputation of Desired Flight PathWith Data Base

Navigation PerformanceAccuracy ≤ 1 NM constrained track keeping in the turn

Automatic execution of leg transitionsIF; CF; TF

Load RNAV ATS route from database

RNAV SystemRNAV SystemComputation of Desired Flight PathComputation of Desired Flight PathWith Data BaseWith Data Base

Navigation PerformanceNavigation PerformanceAccuracy Accuracy ≤≤ 1 NM 1 NM constrained track keeping in the turn constrained track keeping in the turn

Automatic execution of leg transitionsAutomatic execution of leg transitionsIF; CF; TF IF; CF; TF

Load RNAV ATS route from databaseLoad RNAV ATS route from database

Limited Listing

Step 4

20



P1 –Navigation Functionalities Required for Final Approach


RNAV SystemComputation of Desired Flight PathWith Data BaseDisplay of desired flight path

Navigation PerformanceAccuracy ≤ 0.3 NM on Final ApproachAccuracy ≤ 1 NM elsewhere

Automatic execution of leg transitionsIF; DF; TF;

Conventional or RNAV missed approach required

RNAV SystemRNAV SystemComputation of Desired Flight PathComputation of Desired Flight PathWith Data BaseWith Data BaseDisplay of desired flight pathDisplay of desired flight path

Navigation PerformanceNavigation PerformanceAccuracy Accuracy ≤≤ 0.3 NM on Final Approach0.3 NM on Final ApproachAccuracy Accuracy ≤≤ 1 NM elsewhere1 NM elsewhere

Automatic execution of leg transitionsAutomatic execution of leg transitionsIF; DF; TF; IF; DF; TF;

Conventional or RNAV missed approach Conventional or RNAV missed approach requiredrequired

Limited Listing

Step 4

21



Next Next ……..DAY 2 DAY 2 ––……..Selection of ICAO Navigation Specification..Selection of ICAO Navigation Specification

Problem Identified at Beret AirportTraffic growthEnvironmental issues (noise) Withdrawal of NDB

Project Team set upNew Airspace Concept describedCOM, SUR assumptions detailedNAV performance requirements identified

Summary: Process 1Summary: Process 1

Problem Identified at Beret AirportProblem Identified at Beret AirportTraffic growthTraffic growthEnvironmental issues (noise) Environmental issues (noise) Withdrawal of NDB Withdrawal of NDB

Project Team set upProject Team set upNew Airspace Concept describedNew Airspace Concept describedCOM, SUR assumptions detailedCOM, SUR assumptions detailedNAV performance requirements identifiedNAV performance requirements identified

22



Case Study - Day 1

Learning ObjectivesLearning ObjectivesIdentify navigation performance Identify navigation performance

requirements after describing an Airspace requirements after describing an Airspace Concept.Concept.

23



QuestionsQuestions&&

FeedbackFeedback

24




Selecting an ICAO Navigation Specification Selecting an ICAO Navigation Specification for Terminal Airspace to satisfy the Airspace for Terminal Airspace to satisfy the Airspace

Concept.Concept.

25



From P1 – Airspace ConceptFrom P1 – Airspace Concept

26






Navigation PerformanceAccuracy ≤ 1 NM constrained track keeping in the turn

Automatic execution of leg transitionsIF; CF; TF

Capability to Load RNAV ATS route from database


Navigation PerformanceNavigation PerformanceAccuracy Accuracy ≤≤ 1 NM 1 NM constrained track keeping in the turnconstrained track keeping in the turn

Automatic execution of leg transitionsAutomatic execution of leg transitionsIF; CF; TF IF; CF; TF

Capability to Load RNAV ATS route from Capability to Load RNAV ATS route from databasedatabase

Limited Listing

27





Limited Listing




Conventional or RNAV missed approach required




Conventional or RNAV missed approach requiredConventional or RNAV missed approach required

28



P2 – Find suitable Nav SpecP2 – Find suitable Nav Spec

Volume IIVolume IIPart A: Overview and Generalities of Nav Specs

Part B: Implementing RNAV

Part C: Implementing RNP

Step 1

29




RNAV 10RNAV 5RNAV 2RNAV 1RNP 4BASIC-RNP 1RNP APCHRNP AR APCH

Day 3

Step 1

30



P2 – Assess Fleet Capabilityfor RNAV 1 functional requirements

P2 – Assess Fleet Capabilityfor RNAV 1 functional requirements


Navigation PerformanceAccuracy ≤ 1 NM Constrained performance on turn

Automatic execution of leg transitionsIF; DF; TF; CF;



Navigation PerformanceNavigation PerformanceAccuracy Accuracy ≤≤ 1 NM 1 NM Constrained performance on turnConstrained performance on turn

Automatic execution of leg transitionsAutomatic execution of leg transitionsIF; DF; TF; CF; IF; DF; TF; CF;


Limited Listing

85% of IFR can satisfy RNAV 1 with DME/DME/

IRU or GNSS

85% of IFR can 85% of IFR can satisfy RNAV 1 satisfy RNAV 1 with DME/DME/ with DME/DME/

IRU or GNSSIRU or GNSS

Step 1a 2

31



P2 – Assess Fleet CapabilityFor Basic RNP 1 functional requirements

P2 – Assess Fleet CapabilityFor Basic RNP 1 functional requirements

Limited Listing

3% of IFR having GNSS satisfy

B-RNP 1 requirements

3% of IFR having 3% of IFR having GNSS satisfy GNSS satisfy

BB--RNP 1 RNP 1 requirementsrequirements

Step 1a 2RNAV System

Computation of Desired Flight PathWith Data Base

Navigation PerformanceAccuracy ≤ 1 NM Constrained performance on turn

Automatic execution of leg transitionsIF; DF; TF



Navigation PerformanceNavigation PerformanceAccuracy Accuracy ≤≤ 1 NM 1 NM Constrained performance on turnConstrained performance on turn

Automatic execution of leg transitionsAutomatic execution of leg transitionsIF; DF; TF IF; DF; TF


32



P2 –Nav Infrastructure for RNAV 1?P2 –Nav Infrastructure for RNAV 1?

Two DMEsHOM (Homberg)BER (Beret)

Two VORsHOM (Homberg)BER (Beret)

NDB (HAT)

Two DMEsTwo DMEsHOM (HOM (HombergHomberg))BER (Beret)BER (Beret)

Two Two VORsVORsHOM (HOM (HombergHomberg))

BER (Beret)BER (Beret)NDB (HAT) NDB (HAT)

Further Analysis by PANSFurther Analysis by PANS--OPS SpecialistOPS SpecialistAdditional DME needed to support RNAV 1 D/D/IAdditional DME needed to support RNAV 1 D/D/I……

Step 1a 2

33



P2 –Nav Infrastructure for RNAV 1?P2 –Nav Infrastructure for RNAV 1?

Is it more costEffective for Aircraft toRetrofit GPS?

Is it more costIs it more costEffective for Effective for Aircraft toAircraft toRetrofit GPS?Retrofit GPS?

ADDITIONAL DME REQUIRED AT LOCATION ADDITIONAL DME REQUIRED AT LOCATION ‘‘XX’’

No retrofit in this caseNo retrofit No retrofit

in this casein this case

Consult AOsConsult Consult AOsAOs

Step 1a 2

x

34



P2 –Nav Infrastructure for RNAV 1?P2 –Nav Infrastructure for RNAV 1?Step 1a 2

Introduction of CAP DME = coverage for the TMA (no obstacles)With 3 DMEs: provision for limited Redundancy in most areas.

Introduction of Introduction of CAP DME = CAP DME = coverage for coverage for the TMA (no the TMA (no obstacles)obstacles)With 3 With 3 DMEsDMEs: : provision for provision for limited limited Redundancy in Redundancy in most areas. most areas.

CAPCAP

35



P2 –Nav Infrastructure for RNAV 1?P2 –Nav Infrastructure for RNAV 1?Step 1a 2

All proposed routes lie within the service volume

All proposed All proposed routes lie within routes lie within the service the service volumevolume CAPCAP

36



P2 – Compare COM/SUR Infrast. To requirements in RNAV 1 spec.

P2 – Compare COM/SUR Infrast. To requirements in RNAV 1 spec.

Primary SUR Radar1 MSSRCOM = VHF VoiceATM System

Modular Sectorisation: Max 4 SectorsFlight Data ProcessorRadar Data Processor

Primary SUR RadarPrimary SUR Radar1 MSSR1 MSSRCOM = VHF VoiceCOM = VHF VoiceATM SystemATM System

Modular Sectorisation: Max 4 Modular Sectorisation: Max 4 SectorsSectorsFlight Data ProcessorFlight Data ProcessorRadar Data ProcessorRadar Data Processor

Further Analysis by project teamFurther Analysis by project teamApproach Radar is Required for RNAV 1Approach Radar is Required for RNAV 1…… (OK)(OK)

Step 1a 2

37



P2 – Apply Trade-offs P2 – Apply Trade-offs

Not all aircraftCan achieveRNAV 1 (15%)

Not all aircraftNot all aircraftCan achieveCan achieveRNAV 1 (15%)RNAV 1 (15%)

Step 3

Mix of 85% - 15% OK

Mix of Mix of 85% 85% -- 15% OK15% OK

Consult ATCConsult ATCConsult ATC

Need Some Conventional SID/STARsNeed Some Conventional SID/STARs

38



P3 – Safety PlanP3 – Safety Plan

Having Selected RNAV 1…..

Formulate Safety Plan

How will safety be measured?

How will safety be assessed?

What factors need to be considered?

Having Selected RNAV 1Having Selected RNAV 1……....

Formulate Safety PlanFormulate Safety Plan

How will safety be measured?How will safety be measured?

How will safety be assessed? How will safety be assessed?

What factors need to be considered? What factors need to be considered?

Step 1

39



P3 – Validate Airspace ConceptP3 – Validate Airspace ConceptStep 2

40



P3 – Procedure Design & ValidationP3 – Procedure Design & ValidationStep 3 + 4

HOM SIDHOM SIDHOM SID

41



P3 – Prepare for ImplementationP3 – Prepare for ImplementationStep 5 8

42



P3 – Training from RNAV 1 SpecP3 – Training from RNAV 1 SpecSteps 8a & 8b

Core & Specific Trainingas per

RNAV 1 Specification

Core & Specific Core & Specific TrainingTrainingas per as per

RNAV 1 SpecificationRNAV 1 Specification

Pilot Knowledge & Training as per

RNAV 1 Specification

Pilot Knowledge & Pilot Knowledge & Training as per Training as per

RNAV 1 SpecificationRNAV 1 Specification

43



P3 – Implementation & ReviewP3 – Implementation & ReviewSteps 9 & 10

44



Next Next ……..DAY 3 DAY 3 –– IFP for RWY03RIFP for RWY03R

Summary: Process 2 & 3Summary: Process 2 & 3

In Process 2 we identified the possibility of designing SIDs & STARs based on RNAV 1The fleet was assessed (OK); COM/SUR assessed (OK) Navaid Infrastructure was found needing a DME (cheaper than GPS reftrofit).Process 3 focused on realising the implementation of RNAV 1 specification.

The Airspace Concept was validated.Procedures were designedATC and Pilots were Trained and Implementation Achieved

In Process 2 we identified the possibility of designing SIDs & In Process 2 we identified the possibility of designing SIDs & STARs based on RNAV 1STARs based on RNAV 1The fleet was assessed (OK); COM/SUR assessed (OK) The fleet was assessed (OK); COM/SUR assessed (OK) Navaid Infrastructure was found needing a DME (Navaid Infrastructure was found needing a DME (cheaper than cheaper than GPS GPS reftrofitreftrofit).).Process 3 focused on Process 3 focused on realisingrealising the implementation of RNAV 1 the implementation of RNAV 1 specification. specification.

The Airspace Concept was validated.The Airspace Concept was validated.Procedures were designedProcedures were designedATC and Pilots were Trained and ATC and Pilots were Trained and Implementation AchievedImplementation Achieved

45



Case Study - Day 2

Learning ObjectivesLearning ObjectivesSelecting an ICAO Navigation Specification Selecting an ICAO Navigation Specification for Terminal Airspace to satisfy the Airspace for Terminal Airspace to satisfy the Airspace

Concept.Concept.

46




FeedbackFeedback

47




Selecting an ICAO Navigation Specification Selecting an ICAO Navigation Specification for Approach to satisfy the Airspace for Approach to satisfy the Airspace

Concept.Concept.

48



From P1 – Airspace ConceptFrom P1 – Airspace Concept

49



3rd Change: Chapeau TMA3rd Change: Chapeau TMA

NDB withdrawnNDB withdrawn• Strong GA lobby want replacement procedure on 03R• Suggested that GNSS equipage could enable this

Input to Process 1

X

50







Automatic execution of leg transitionsIF; DF; TF; Consistent with CA & FM



Automatic execution of leg transitionsAutomatic execution of leg transitionsIF; DF; TF; IF; DF; TF; Consistent with CA & FM Consistent with CA & FM

Limited Listing

51




Volume IIVolume IIPart A: Overview and Generalities of Nav Specs

Part B: Implementing RNAV

Part C: Implementing RNP

Step 1

52



P2 – Find suitable Nav SpecFor Final Approach

P2 – Find suitable Nav SpecFor Final Approach

RNAV 10RNAV 5RNAV 2RNAV 1RNP 4BASIC-RNP 1RNP APCHRNP AR APCH

Step 1

53



P2 – Assess Fleet Capabilityto RNP APCH functional requirements

P2 – Assess Fleet Capabilityto RNP APCH functional requirements

Limited Listing

30% of GA have GPS

30% of GA 30% of GA have GPShave GPS

Step 1a 2

All can meet RNP APCH

All can meet All can meet RNP APCHRNP APCH




Conventional missed approach possible (single system)




Conventional missed approach possible (single Conventional missed approach possible (single system)system)

54



P2 – Compare COM/SUR Infrast. To requirements in RNP APCH spec.

P2 – Compare COM/SUR Infrast. To requirements in RNP APCH spec.

COM = VHF Voice (not required for RNP APCH)

NAV = GNSSRequired

Radar(not required for RNP APCH)

ATM - n/a

COM = VHF Voice COM = VHF Voice (not required for RNP APCH)(not required for RNP APCH)

NAV = GNSSNAV = GNSSRequiredRequired

RadarRadar(not required for RNP APCH)(not required for RNP APCH)

ATM ATM -- n/an/a

COM/NAV/SUR infrastructure OKCOM/NAV/SUR infrastructure OK

Step 1a 2

55



RNP APCH Procedure RWY03RRNP APCH Procedure RWY03R

DESIGNDESIGNDESIGN

VALIDATEVALIDATEVALIDATE

56



P3 – Prepare for ImplementationP3 – Prepare for Implementation

Step 8aTrain ATC

Step 8bTrain Flight

Crews

Step 9Establish OperationalImplementation Date

Step 10Post

ImplementationReview

Step 6Flight Inspection

& FlightValidation

Step 7ATC SystemIntegration

Considerations

Step 8Awareness &

Training Material

57



Summary: Process 2 & 3Summary: Process 2 & 3

In Process 2 we identified the possibility of designing a procedure for Final Approach using RNP APCHThe fleet and Navaid Infrastructure was assessed (OK).Process 3 focused on realising the implementation of RNP APCH.

The Procedure was designedThe Procedure was validated & Integrated into ATC

SystemATC and Pilots were Trained and

Implementation Achieved

In Process 2 we identified the possibility of designing a In Process 2 we identified the possibility of designing a procedure for Final Approach using RNP APCHprocedure for Final Approach using RNP APCHThe fleet and Navaid Infrastructure was assessed (OK).The fleet and Navaid Infrastructure was assessed (OK).Process 3 focused on Process 3 focused on realisingrealising the implementation of the implementation of RNP APCH. RNP APCH.

The Procedure was designedThe Procedure was designedThe Procedure was validated & Integrated into ATC The Procedure was validated & Integrated into ATC

SystemSystemATC and Pilots were Trained andATC and Pilots were Trained and

Implementation AchievedImplementation Achieved

58



Case Study - Day 3

Learning ObjectivesLearning ObjectivesSelecting an ICAO Navigation Specification Selecting an ICAO Navigation Specification

for Approach to satisfy the Airspace for Approach to satisfy the Airspace Concept.Concept.

59




FeedbackFeedback

60



- END -

61



Reference: BERET AirportReference: BERET Airport

62



Determine a suitable Navigational Specification

For Final Approach to Runway 03R

Determine a suitable Navigational Specification

For Final Approach to Runway 03RGiven the desire to create an RNP approach (Phase 1 decision), two navigation specifications are appropriate for the final segment

RNP approachRNP AR approach

RNP AR is more flexible than RNP alone in that it canAccommodate Radius to Fix (RF) turns in all segments including final approachAllow a narrower Obstacle Evaluation Surface (OES) to be applied

However, RNP AR requiresMore stringent equipment and flight crew training requirements compared to RNP aloneSpecial authorization for each airframe and operator

Given the desire to create an RNP approach (Phase 1 decision), tGiven the desire to create an RNP approach (Phase 1 decision), two wo navigation specifications are appropriate for the final segmentnavigation specifications are appropriate for the final segment

RNP approachRNP approachRNP AR approachRNP AR approach

RNP AR is more flexible than RNP alone in that it canRNP AR is more flexible than RNP alone in that it canAccommodate Radius to Fix (RF) turns in all segments Accommodate Radius to Fix (RF) turns in all segments including final approachincluding final approachAllow a narrower Obstacle Evaluation Surface (OES) Allow a narrower Obstacle Evaluation Surface (OES) to be appliedto be applied

However, RNP AR requiresHowever, RNP AR requiresMore stringent equipment and flight crew training More stringent equipment and flight crew training requirements compared to RNP alonerequirements compared to RNP aloneSpecial authorization for each airframe and operatorSpecial authorization for each airframe and operator

63



RNP Final and Missed Approach Surfaces

RNP Final and Missed Approach Surfaces

64



RNP 0.3 AR ApproachRNP 0.3 AR Approach

65



RNP Versus RNP AR ApproachRNP Versus RNP AR ApproachBoth types of procedures can serve the needs of the airportSince there are no terrain or obstacle issues, both procedures can be designed with a Decision Altitude (DA) as low as 250 feet above the airport.The additional flexibility of the narrower surfaces and the application of RF legs available with RNP AR are not necessary to achieve the objective of accommodating the GA traffic to Runway 03RBecause of the additional equipment and training requirements necessary for RNP AR, significantly fewer operations will be initially capable of flying such a procedure Given these considerations, the best choice for Beret Airport is to develop the RNP approach

Both types of procedures can serve the needs of the Both types of procedures can serve the needs of the airportairportSince there are no terrain or obstacle issues, both Since there are no terrain or obstacle issues, both procedures can be designed with a Decision Altitude procedures can be designed with a Decision Altitude (DA) as low as 250 feet above the airport.(DA) as low as 250 feet above the airport.The additional flexibility of the narrower surfaces and The additional flexibility of the narrower surfaces and the application of RF legs available with RNP AR are the application of RF legs available with RNP AR are not necessary to achieve the objective of not necessary to achieve the objective of accommodating the GA traffic to Runway 03Raccommodating the GA traffic to Runway 03RBecause of the additional equipment and training Because of the additional equipment and training requirements necessary for RNP AR, significantly fewer requirements necessary for RNP AR, significantly fewer operations will be initially capable of flying such a operations will be initially capable of flying such a procedure procedure Given these considerations, the best choice for Beret Given these considerations, the best choice for Beret Airport is to develop the RNP approachAirport is to develop the RNP approach

66



RNP and RNP AR Surfaces Combined Showing ObstacleRNP and RNP AR Surfaces

Combined Showing Obstacle

Blue final and magenta missed approach = RNP AR 0.3

Red final and green missed approach = RNP approach

Obstacle A

• RNP DA = 280 feet above the airport

• RNP AR DA = 250 feet above the airport

67



SummarySummary

In many applications both RNP approaches and RNP AR approaches may be consideredDue to additional flexibility in the procedure design, use of curved segments and narrower OES surfaces, RNP AR allows for greater flexibility than RNP aloneHowever, careful consideration should be given to each situation to determine if any gain in lower minima or curved segments is offset by the additional aircraft, aircrew and flight operation requirements demanded by RNP ARInitially, significantly fewer aircraft and operators will be qualified for RNP AR than will be able to fly RNP approaches, overshadowing the benefits of RNP AR in this case

In many applications both RNP approaches and RNP AR In many applications both RNP approaches and RNP AR approaches may be consideredapproaches may be consideredDue to additional flexibility in the procedure design, use of cuDue to additional flexibility in the procedure design, use of curved rved segments and narrower OES surfaces, RNP AR allows for greater segments and narrower OES surfaces, RNP AR allows for greater flexibility than RNP aloneflexibility than RNP aloneHowever, careful consideration should be given to each situationHowever, careful consideration should be given to each situation to to determine if any gain in lower minima or curved segments is offsdetermine if any gain in lower minima or curved segments is offset et by the additional aircraft, aircrew and flight operation requireby the additional aircraft, aircrew and flight operation requirements ments demanded by RNP ARdemanded by RNP ARInitially, significantly fewer aircraft and operators will be quInitially, significantly fewer aircraft and operators will be qualified for alified for RNP AR than will be able to fly RNP approaches, overshadowing thRNP AR than will be able to fly RNP approaches, overshadowing the e benefits of RNP AR in this case benefits of RNP AR in this case

PBN Performance Based Navigation - ICAO

Documents

Transcript of PBN Performance Based Navigation - ICAO