1

Status of PBN implementation in France

PBN TF/4

Dec 2010

Benoit ROTURIER (DSNA)

2

Context supporting DSNA navigation

strategy

ICAO Navigation strategy

Performance Based Navigation (PBN) concept

Resolutions of the ICAO 36 & 37th Assembly

Eurocontrol Navigation strategy & GNSS policy

Airspace users discussions

SESAR

Rationalisation of Conventional navaids

(VOR, NDB, ILS cat I)

Strategy

(ANSP level)

PBN Impl. Plan

(State level)

3

User needs identified for short term PBN

implementation

Major airlines needs

RNAV 1 arrival/departures within large terminal areas

Re-inforce the GNSS approaches with vertical barometric guidance (APV Baro-VNAV)

Introduce RNP Approaches with Authorisation for specific gains

Business Jets

Area navigation path supporting increased airport accessibility, safety and highperformances.

Supports GNSS approaches with GNSS vertical guidance (APV SBAS)

Helicopters

Supports GNSS approaches with APV SBAS,

Medical Evacuation

RNAV 1 arrival/departures

Other General Aviation

Supports GNSS approaches with ABAS & APV SBAS

4

PBN Operations in France 2010

PBN

RNAV RNP

RNAV5 RNAV1 RNP APCH RNP AR APCH

En-route Terminal

RNAV (GNSS)

Special Approach

with authorisatio

(study)SID STAR

ApproachNPA

ApproachAPV

LNAV

(NPA)

LNAV/VNAV

(APV baro)

LPV

(APV sbas)

INAAirways

Type NavSpec

Name NavSpec

Flight Phase

Procedure designation

Minima Designation

5

Chart Naming Convention

for RNAV 1 and RNP APCH implementation

En-RouteDeparture Arrival Approach

SID RNAV (GNSS, DME/DME)

FAF/FAP

STAR RNAV (GNSS, DME/DME)

INA RNAV (GNSS, DME/DME)

IAF IF

FNA RNAV(GNSS) RWY xx

RNAV(GNSS) RWY xx

FNA ILS RWY xx

Note: RNAV current naming for SID, STAR, INA to be revisited,

possibly using RNAV 1 alternatively

6

RNAV 1 DSNA strategy

Since 2008, most new RNAV applications in TMA are supported by

RNAV1

End 2010, 17 RNAV 1 studies launched, 7 RNAV 1 publications

Progressive shift from existing TMA B-RNAV + to RNAV 1

RNAV 1 supports current CDA experimentations

– Paris, Toulouse, Strasbourg,…

Main hurdles

– Migration to RNAV 1 launched on a case by case basis, when local ATC

dispositions are reviewed

– Lack of a mandate for aircraft equipage, slow migration in TMAs where the ATC

cannot handle a diversity of users without compromising efficiency.

Some new RNAV applications supported by RNAV 5

To include more users within the application

– Ex: Nice high altitude arrivals

7

RNAV 1

chart example

Constant Descent Approach (CDA) experiment in Toulouse Blagnac

PRNAV implementation in Nice

8

RNP APCH DSNA strategy (1/2)

Final target is full compliance with 37th Assembly resolution (2016)

Initial implementation is LNAV

End 2010, 115 RNP APCH with LNAV minima studies launched, 50

have reached publication

– Close to Assembly 37, resolution A36/1, objective of 30% of runway ends by

2010

No specific hurdle identified for LNAV

9

RNP APCH DSNA strategy (1/2)

All RNP APCH approach will support LPV minima:

End 2010, 22 RNP APCH with LPV minima studies launched, 1 has

reached publication (see hurdles)

Main hurdles for LPV

– Delay in EGNOS SoL declaration

– Limited user equipment (AMC 20-28 expected ASAP)

RNP APCH with LPV minima expected to replace some ILS Cat I

France has a large number of ILS Cat I

DSNA strategy is: ILS Cat I not replaced since 2010 on smaller airfields

2015 Strategy fo larger airfields to be reviewed next year

10

LPV approach

chart example :

Pau

11

existing minima

VOR/DME: 500 ft

ILS Cat A: 260 ft

Cat C: 280 ft

LPV approach chart example :

Clermont Ferrand

12

RNP APCH DSNA strategy (2/2)

RNP APCH with BaroVNAV vertical guidance (LNAV/VNAV minima)

implemented in coordination with airspace users:

Implementation coordinated with Air France (priority list of 28 runways)

End 2010, 1 RNP APCH with LNAV/VNAV minima studies launched, 0 has

reached publication (see hurdles)

– Brest will be the first RNP APCH published (2011) with three minima line

– LNAV (370 ft), LNAV/VNAV (370 ft), LPV (250 ft or 300 ft depending runway

classification)

Main hurdles for LNAV/VNAV

– Lack of finalized safety case (Eurocontrol)

– Depending on mitigation of QNH errors, specific ATC/Aircrew phraseology to be

defined

– Users already equiped not yet qualified vs. AMC 20-27

13

RNP APCH user forum

DGAC organizes three times a year meetings with major industrial partners

and DGAC key experts to discuss APV EGNOS implementation :

Airbus France (A 350 LPV certification)

Airbus Transport International (ATI) operating Beluga

Dassault Aviation (cockpit EASy II certification)

Eurocopter

Thales Avionics

Eurocontrol

ESSP

For APV Baro VNAV, a DGAC working group has been setup with one

major airline participation

Air France

14

RNP APCH European projects

DSNA participates to:

Beluga project sponsored by Eurocontrol to equip and certify one Beluga

Aircraft with LPV capability (AMC 20-28) and to publish one LPV procedure

– Beluga Certification expected 1st half 2011, using Pau LPV procedure

Accepta project, partially sponsored by GSA (FP7) with the objective to

publish 3 LPV in France.

15

APV implementation vs. ICAO docs

Operation

Classification

(Annex 6)

Charting and

minima

standards

(PANS OPS)

Signal performance

requirements

(Annex 10 – GNSS

– or PBN manual –

BaroVNAV )

Runway

classification

(Annex 14)

Under approval by

National airspace

authorities

Resulting

Operation from

the combination

of different

ICAO

requirements

(PBN manual

including the

new RNP APCH

Nav. Spec.)

APV

RNAV(GNSS)

charting

LPV

minima

Cat I

NPA → RNP APCH down

to LPV 300 ft

PA Cat I, II, III → RNP APCH down

to LPV 200 ft

APV I or II

NPA → RNP APCH down

to LPV 300 ft

PA Cat I, II, III → RNP APCH down

to LPV 250 ft

RNAV(GNSS)

charting

LNAV/VNAV

minima

BaroVNAV

Attachment

NPA → RNP APCH down

to LNAV/VNAV

300 ft

PA Cat I, II, III → RNP APCH down

to LNAV/VNAV

250 ft

!! APV implementation to different range of minima

using the material in current ICAO docs is possible now !!

16

Return of experience

Phraseology for RNP APCH

6 different cases in theory:FAF/FAP

INA conventional

IAF IF

FNA conventional

FNA RNAV (GNSS)

INA RNAV 1(GNSS, DME/DME)

FNA conventional

FNA RNAV (GNSS)

1

2

5

6

Radar guidanceFNA conventional

FNA RNAV (GNSS)

3

4

ICAO phraeology seems not fully complete to handle all of these cases, including

specific BaroVNAV mitigations required by the Eurocontrol Safety case

Coordination at ICAO level required to support full RNP APCH implementation

17

Conclusions

A lot of operational experience has been collected through the deployment of RNAV 1 and RNP APCH in France

Now documented within an exhaustive DSNA PBN course

Devoted to RNAV 1 and RNP APCH implementation

Used for the initial and on site formation of DSNA operational staff (ATC, etc..)

ICAO material supporting APV implementation is exhaustive, and has been used by France

– Complement to be made to phraseology? Charting?

– Existing ICAO approach classification, including APV, is sound and not expected to change

Completion of Eurocontrol APV generic safety cases now required

DSNA has now developped exhaustive safety material for all other PBN applications

Completion of EASA AMC 20 27 and 20 28 now required

PBN plan for France publication expected 2011