You are on page 1of 31

Implementing RNP Workshop – Toulouse 4-5 October 2005

RNP for Everyman
Jeremy Davidson

ATM Drivers

   

Improved Safety Increased Capacity Greater Efficiency Reduced Environmental Impact

Navigation Enablers - Now
Certification Operational Approval Airspace Design Procedure Design

     

TGL 10 AMC 20XX (near approval) AMC 20XZ (mature draft) PANS-ATM TGL 10 - based route spacing PANS-OPS
RNAV(GNSS)  RNP (1 - 0.3) with RF legs  RNAV/Baro VNAV  APV I/II  ILS/MLS/GLS

Airspace design addresses procedural separation/route spacing and takes direct account of: • NSE • FTE • Traffic direction and density • Workload • ATM environment • Blunder .PANS-OPS vs PANS-ATM 1. takes direct account of: • Navigation System Error (NSE) • Flight Technical Error (FTE) and adds a buffer for any other errors. 2. Procedure design addresses obstacle clearance.

Safety  Standard operations wherever possible Standard design and charting criteria  Standard certification and approval requirements  Standard ATC and pilot procedures    Acceptable workload (pilot and controller) Action to reduce CFIT Replace circling approaches with straight-in approaches  Replace conventional NPA with RNAV approaches  Review operations that require special approval  .ATM Drivers .

charting.3 Approach – RNAV(GNSS). RNP 0.3 and APV I/II . certification and approval criteria in place for:    En-route – B-RNAV and P-RNAV Terminal – P-RNAV and RNP 1 – 0.Safety – Current Capabilities Standard design.

2NM 1 NM IF FAF .Safety .Basic GNSS NPA Design 3NM 1.

Safety .APV I/II Design IF FAF .

2NM 1 NM IF FAF .Basic GNSS vs APV I/II 3NM 1.Safety .

3 + 2 x 0.Safety -Basic GNSS vs RNP 0.3 RNP 0.2NM Buffer RNP 0.3 + buffer 1 NM ROC .3 + buffer 1.2NM 4 x RNP 0.5 + buffer 3NM RNP 0.

”  For P-RNAV and Basic GNSS NPAs. arrival and approach phases of flight. the probability of displaying misleading navigational or positional information to the flight crew shall be remote. and PANS-RAC air traffic separation criteria.Are the Buffers Necessary?  TGL 10.Safety . AMC 20XX and AMC 20XZ Integrity Requirements: “on procedures notified exclusively for RNAV equipped aircraft. the buffers are used to justify the integrity alleviation. conservative safety margins are used in the design of (P-)RNAV procedures such that the risks are not increased above those currently experienced.” An airborne safety objective of Remote is an alleviation to the current guidelines of AMJ 25-11. .  In TGL 10 and AMC 20XX: “This alleviation recognises that the PANS-OPS procedure design. account for and accommodate these type of aircraft and their system integrity in current airspace. which specifies Extremely Remote for the departure. Furthermore.

 How much enhancement is expected from the PANS? . to avoid confusion with existing assessment practices. The result is that the safety assurance provided greatly exceeds that of conventional navigation systems. Both are subject to the same objective of Remote such that the results could be combined in an overall system assessment after accounting for any conditional or common elements. and PANS-RAC air traffic separation criteria that account for and accommodate these type of aircraft and their system integrity in RNP terminal area arrival. departure. a combined assessment is not required.Safety . that is unique for RNP. However. The RNP operational safety objective is further enhanced through the PANSOPS procedure design. and approach procedure airspace.Are Buffers Necessary in RNP?  In AMC 20 XZ : This alleviation recognises that not only is the RNP system design evaluated consistent with known industry and regulatory system safety assessment practices but is now augmented with a comprehensive assessment of system performance assurance.

Safety .Specials Special approvals are given for specific operations where standard criteria cannot be applied. Steep approaches/off-set approaches/landing on beaches… etc .

Specials – RNP Solutions D .

Capacity Maximise airspace and runway usage.ATM Drivers . Current ATC options: Fixed route/procedure structure – „best‟ route spacing (P-RNAV) 8 -10NM  Radar vectoring – best lateral separation 3 – 5NM  Vertical separation – 1000ft  There are no international route spacing standards for RNP≤1 .

direct routing and no delays.  Revised ATC procedures supported by ATC tools.) No mixed mode operations – all aircraft meet the same navigation standard.  .Efficiency Efficient flight requires optimum profiles.  All operators follow standard procedures.ATM Drivers .  (Better tools will allow aircraft to stay on profile longer. Careful airspace design based on RNAV.

These are only of benefit if the whole aircraft population in the sector can participate. P-RNAV allows optimised routing in enroute and terminal airspace.Current Capabilities      B-RNAV allowed some choke points to be removed. Mixed mode operations not acceptable.Capacity & Efficiency . . RNP with fixed radius transitions (en-route and terminal) could help further.

Operational Requirements .Capacity and Efficiency .

.Capacity & Efficiency . Experience with parallel approach operations has showed that these are very site specific and difficult to generalise.Close to the runway Parallel Operations Converging Operations Adjacent Airport Operations 9 Single Runway Access Airport A 36L 36L 36 36 Airport B All these RNP examples address traffic separation on final/missed approach.

ATM Drivers .Environment RNAV functionality is the key to:   Optimising profiles to minimise environmental impact Keeping routes clear of sensitive areas .

3 – 0. vertical and time)  PANS-OPS (and associated manuals)  Revised criteria:   RNAV(GNSS) / Change to RNP 0. RTA  PANS-ATM  RNP-based system separation (lateral.3 RNP(AR) (0. RNP holding.Future Improvements  AMC 20 XZ Rev1    Certification Operational Approval Airspace Design Procedure Design Fixed radius transitions (en-route).1)   ATC Tools    Track integrity monitoring State Intent Data link .

 .Future Improvements .RNP(AR) Latest deliberations by OCP:    New RNP criteria to be developed To be known as RNP (Authorisation Required) RNP(AR) to be based upon FAA AC 90 Public RNP SAAAR and FAA Order 8260.51 Expect RNP(AR) criteria to be published in a separate manual. referenced in PANS-OPS.

3 and proposed RNP(AR) 0.3 + 2 x 0.5 RNP 0.2NM Buffer ROC .3 RNP 0.3 RNP 0.5 + buffer RNP 0.3 4 x RNP 0.3 + buffer RNP 0.3 + buffer 4 x RNP 0.3 RNP 0.RNP 0.

3 + buffer 4 x RNP 0.5 + buffer RNP 0.3 + 2 x 0.3 and proposed RNP (AR) 0.RNP 0.1 RNP 0.1 RNP 0.2NM Buffer ROC .1 4 x RNP 0.3 + buffer RNP 0.1 RNP 0.

1 .APV I/II and proposed RNP(AR) 0.1 RNP 0.3 RNP 0.1 RNP 0.

1 Note that the ILS caters for early. unguided missed approaches .ILS Cat I and proposed RNP(AR) 0.1 RNP 0.1 RNP 0.

including the approach and missed approach.RNP(AR) – Outstanding Issues In AC 90 Public RNP SAAAR: The probability of the aircraft exiting the lateral and vertical extent of the obstacle clearance volume shall not exceed 10-7 per approach. and operational procedures and mitigations is all depends on the „mitigations‟. This requirement as a numerical value does not imply that the objective should be met by the aircraft navigation systems alone through numerical methods. „2XRNP‟ is not sufficient in itself . A qualitative combination of the aircraft navigation systems. other aircraft systems. .

RNP (AR) will be beneficial at difficult airports but will probably only be of value in densely populated airspace when all aircraft have the same authorization.  The design criteria available today can be used by a large percentage of the existing fleet.    . The future will bring international standards for lower RNP values and improved functionality. There are benefits that can be gained immediately. However there are still issues to be addressed.CONCLUSION  Standardisation breeds success.

With RNP – almost anything is possible! .

Questions? .

Session 4 RNP – The Expectations? Question and Answer Session .