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

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

CertificationOperational ApprovalAirspace DesignProcedure Design

PANS-OPS vs PANS-ATM

1. Procedure design addresses obstacle clearance, takes direct account of:

• Navigation System Error (NSE)

• Flight Technical Error (FTE)

and adds a buffer for any other errors.

2. Airspace design addresses procedural separation/route spacing and takes direct account of:

• NSE

• FTE

• Traffic direction and density

• Workload

• ATM environment

• Blunder

ATM Drivers - 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

Safety – Current Capabilities

Standard design, charting, certification and approval criteria in place for:

En-route – B-RNAV and P-RNAV

Terminal – P-RNAV and RNP 1 – 0.3

Approach – RNAV(GNSS), RNP 0.3 and APV I/II

Safety - Basic GNSS NPA Design

Safety - APV I/II Design

Safety - Basic GNSS vs APV I/II

Safety -Basic GNSS vs RNP 0.3

Safety - Are the Buffers Necessary?

TGL 10, AMC 20XX and AMC 20XZ Integrity Requirements:

“on procedures notified exclusively for RNAV equipped aircraft, the probability of displaying misleading navigational or positional information to the flight crew shall be remote.”

An airborne safety objective of Remote is an alleviation to the current guidelines of AMJ 25-11, which specifies Extremely Remote for the departure, arrival and approach phases of flight.

In TGL 10 and AMC 20XX:

“This alleviation recognises that the PANS-OPS procedure design, and PANS-RAC air traffic separation criteria, account for and accommodate these type of aircraft and their system integrity in current airspace. Furthermore, conservative safety margins are used in the design of (P-)RNAV procedures such that the risks are not increased above those currently experienced.”

For P-RNAV and Basic GNSS NPAs, the buffers are used to justify the integrity alleviation.

Safety - 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, that is unique for RNP.

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. However, to avoid confusion with existing assessment practices, a combined assessment is not required. The result is that the safety assurance provided greatly exceeds that of conventional navigation systems.

The RNP operational safety objective is further enhanced through the PANS-OPS procedure design, 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, and approach procedure airspace.

How much enhancement is expected from the PANS?

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

FLY BY WPT FLY OVER WPT

WI006 WI005 WI003

9500

RAD

AR

LOWI AD 2.24-0-0

.

(.)

3000

ELEV 1900 FT

OCA RELATED

TOTH

R 26 ELEV 1890 FT

VAR 1^ E

RAD

AR

TOW

ERATIS

119.27 MH

Z120.10 M

HZ

126.02 MH

ZINNSTRUM

ENTAPPROACH CHART

ÖSTERREICH AUSTRIAI N

N S B R U

C K

Austro Control GmbH

Neuausgabe / New edition 2000

CHANGE: MDA/MDH; EDITORIAL

MA CLIMB GRADIENT

A B C DMDA/MDH

2,5 %s p e c i a l p e r m i s s i o n r e q u i r e d

WI001(NDB RTT)

WI002(FAWP)

WI004(MAWP)

WI007WI008

9500

WAYPOINT LIST (WGS84): WI001 N472553,00 E0115626,00WI002 N472135,12 E0114514,55WI003 N471650,15 E0113255,17WI004 N471558,98 E0112422,82WI005 N471508,72 E0111606,82WI006 N471820,03 E0110511,08WI007 N471912,18 E0105859,94WI008 N471638,56 E0105921,62WI009 N471753,02 E0105834,83

MISSED APPROACH: WI004WI005WI006WI007WI008WI006WI005WI003WI001

WI001

TURN RADIUS 2500 M / 1,350 NM

D R A F T

RNP 0.3 SPECIAL EAST

LOWI

LOWI

8,79,65,95,78,14,3

240° (TT240,7°)

WI007

WI006

WI005

WI008

WI009RF LEG

WI004WI003

WI001

WI002

ATM Drivers - Capacity

Maximise airspace and runway usage.

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

ATM Drivers - Efficiency

Efficient flight requires optimum profiles, direct routing and no delays.

Careful airspace design based on RNAV. Revised ATC procedures supported by ATC tools.

(Better tools will allow aircraft to stay on profile longer.) No mixed mode operations – all aircraft meet the

same navigation standard. All operators follow standard procedures.

Capacity & Efficiency - Current Capabilities

B-RNAV allowed some choke points to be removed.

P-RNAV allows optimised routing in en-route and terminal airspace.

RNP with fixed radius transitions (en-route and terminal) could help further.

These are only of benefit if the whole aircraft population in the sector can participate.

Mixed mode operations not acceptable.

Capacity and Efficiency - Operational Requirements

Capacity & Efficiency - Close to the runway

Parallel

Operations

Converging

Operations

Adjacent Airport Operations

Single Runway Access

36

31

16L

16R

9

Airport A

Airport B

36L 36L

36

All these RNP examples address traffic separation on final/missed approach.

Experience with parallel approach operations has showed that these are very site specific and difficult to generalise.

ATM Drivers - Environment

RNAV functionality is the key to:

Optimising profiles to minimise environmental impact

Keeping routes clear of sensitive areas

Future Improvements

AMC 20 XZ Rev1 Fixed radius transitions (en-route), RNP holding, RTA

PANS-ATM RNP-based system separation (lateral, vertical

and time) PANS-OPS (and associated manuals)

Revised criteria: RNAV(GNSS) / Change to RNP 0.3 RNP(AR) (0.3 – 0.1)

ATC Tools Track integrity monitoring

Data link State Intent

CertificationOperational ApprovalAirspace DesignProcedure Design

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.

RNP 0.3 and proposed RNP(AR) 0.3

RNP 0.3 and proposed RNP (AR) 0.1

APV I/II and proposed RNP(AR) 0.1

ILS Cat I and proposed RNP(AR) 0.1

Note that the ILS caters for early, unguided missed approaches

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, including the approach and missed approach. This requirement as a numerical value does not imply that the objective should be met by the aircraft navigation systems alone through numerical methods. A qualitative combination of the aircraft navigation systems, other aircraft systems, and operational procedures and mitigations is adequate.

‘2XRNP’ is not sufficient in itself - it all depends on the ‘mitigations’.

CONCLUSION

Standardisation breeds success.

The design criteria available today can be used by a large percentage of the existing fleet.

There are benefits that can be gained immediately.

The future will bring international standards for lower RNP values and improved functionality. However there are still issues to be addressed.

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.

With RNP – almost anything is possible!

Questions?

Session 4

RNP – The Expectations?

Question and Answer Session