RNAV in Europe - Procedure Design Master Class EUROCONTROL PROCEDURE DESIGN MASTER CLASS James (Jim) W Gregory Civil Aviation Inspector and ATPL pilot.

RNAV in Europe - Procedure Design Master Class

EUROCONTROLPROCEDURE DESIGN PROCEDURE DESIGN MASTER CLASSMASTER CLASS

• James (Jim) W Gregory• Civil Aviation Inspector and ATPL

pilot with Transport Canada AIS and Airspace Standards

• Chair of ICAO OCP• Participant at many RNAV related

forums (RTCA SC-181, ATA FMS Task Force, FMS SID/STAR WG)


EUROCONTROLPROCEDURE DESIGN PROCEDURE DESIGN MASTER CLASSMASTER CLASS

• History of RNAV

• History of ARINC 424

• Problems related to existing procedures

• Reason for limited ARINC 424 set


EUROCONTROL

HISTORY OF RNAVHISTORY OF RNAV(According to Gregory!!)(According to Gregory!!)

• Area Navigation (RNAV)• a method of navigation that permits

aircraft operation on any desired course within the coverage of station-referenced navigation signals or within the limits of a self contained system capability, or a combination of these.


EUROCONTROL


• RNAV developed to provide more lateral freedom

• Better use of airspace

• Route not tied to fly-over navigation aids

• Initially RNAV commonly meant VOR based rho-theta RNAV systems

• Expanded to also include INS/IRS, OMEGA, LORAN C, Doppler, DME/DME and GNSS


EUROCONTROL


• Use of RNAV began in late 1960’s• Most were VOR/DME RNAV systems (for GA

types; INS for large air carriers)• 1st commercial RNAV system (course/track

line computer) NARCO CLC-60 in mid 1968• System used waypoints based on radial/DME

from VOR/DME facilities• Maximum distance WP from facility was

approximately 40 NM


EUROCONTROL


Early VOR/DME RNAV system (KNS 80) track line computer


EUROCONTROL


Rho-Theta RNAV Route Haines to Belgrade

No database support required yet!


EUROCONTROL


• Other agencies began exploring RNAV systems

• KLM/SwissAir/SAS/UTA had a co-operative effort

• SwissAir became responsible for the development of a database to support this effort


EUROCONTROL


• 1972 (?) LITTON INS had database of facilities

• June 1973, National Air DC-10 equipped with Collins ANS-70 conducted RNAV operation, including approaches in VMC, with database


EUROCONTROL

HISTORY OF RNAV/ARINCHISTORY OF RNAV/ARINC(According to Gregory!!)(According to Gregory!!)

• 1973 - avionics manufacturer’s requirement for databases became more critical

• Each manufacturer had their own unique requirements for data

• Aug 1973 - Jeppesen invites avionics manufacturers to meet

• Meeting described as cautious


EUROCONTROL


• Airlines Electronic Engineering Committee (AEEC) approached to broker industry standards for databases for navigation

• Sep 1973 - AEEC Area Navigation Subcommittee established working group to standardize RNAV system reference data format and encoding characteristics


EUROCONTROL


• Committee noted:• different RNAV manufacturers taking

divergent paths with respect to reference data organization

• unless trend was halted, airline industry would face very high costs of supporting the production of data files in several different formats

• economic benefits would result if resolution could be established


EUROCONTROL


• WG met Jan 74

• examined ways different manufacturers dealt with reference data organization

• meeting described as “interesting” as attendees were engineers whose interests were not specifically Aeronautical Information Services


EUROCONTROL


• Subsequent WG meetings in Mar and May 74 concentrated on defining characteristics for data elements

• AEEC RNAV subcommittee reviewed WG’s first draft “Project Paper 424” Sep 74

• RNAV subcommittee endorsed principles established by WG

• RNAV subcommittee took on work itself and disbanded the WG


EUROCONTROL


• Second draft document developed in Jan 75

• additional amendments constituted 3rd draft

• 3rd draft “Project Paper 424 - Area Navigation System Data Base Specification” approved by AEEC in Spring 75


EUROCONTROL


• ARINC Specification 424, adopted by AEEC, first published 21 May 75

• Spec amended regularly

• each amendment following first publication identified as 424-1, 424-2, 424-3, etc

• information up to ARINC 424-3 only included point-to-point-to-point navigation


EUROCONTROL


• ARINC 424-3, published 4 Nov 82, introduced concept of “path and terminator”

• “path and terminator” concept created by Sperry

• concept permits coding of terminal area procedures, SIDs, STARs and approaches


EUROCONTROL


• Concept established “rules” of coding• Concept includes a set of defined

codes known as “path terminators” or “leg type”

• Path Terminator “rules” contained in ARINC 424 Attachment 5

• Currently there are 23 different “leg types”


EUROCONTROL


Track to Fix (TF)


EUROCONTROL


Initial Fix (IF)


EUROCONTROL


Hold to Fix (HF), Hold to Altitude (HA), Hold to Manual termination (HM)


EUROCONTROL


Direct to Fix (DF)


EUROCONTROL


Fix to Altitude (FA)


EUROCONTROL


Course to Fix (CF)


EUROCONTROL


Procedure turn to Intercept (PI)


EUROCONTROL


Course to Altitude (CA)


EUROCONTROL


Course to Intercept (CI)


EUROCONTROL


Course to DME termination (CD)


EUROCONTROL


Course to Radial interception (CR)


EUROCONTROL


Fix to distance on Course (FC)


EUROCONTROL


Fix to DME termination (FD)


EUROCONTROL


Fix to Manual termination (FM)


EUROCONTROL


Arc to a Fix (AF)


EUROCONTROL


Heading to DME distance (VD)


EUROCONTROL


Heading to Altitude (VA)


EUROCONTROL


Heading to Manual termination (VM)


EUROCONTROL


Heading to next leg Intercept (VI)


EUROCONTROL


Heading to Radial termination (VR)


EUROCONTROL


Radius to a Fix (RF)


EUROCONTROL


Certain path terminator assumptions are made to accommodate aircraft

performance:• speed - 210 K ground speed used to

compute distance based upon 3.5 NM per min

• on course reversal - max distance of 4.3 NM used before turn inbound if no distance or time specified


EUROCONTROL


• Max 25 degree bank angle used to compute turn radius

• climb rate of 500 feet per NM used in computations

• intercept angles - no specified, 30 degrees for intercept of localizer based and 30 - 45 degrees for all others


EUROCONTROL


• Path terminator concept developed to code existing conventional instrument procedures

• However, not all conventional procedures easily coded

• “conditional” procedures, easy for pilot to interpret, are difficult for computer to describe


EUROCONTROL


• Industry made representation to ICAO OCP RNAV WG in Jun 91 regarding problems with coding conventional procedures

• OCP 10 Nov 94 proposed amendment 9 to PANS-OPS Vol I regarding use of FMS/RNAV on conventional procedures:


EUROCONTROL


• “FMS/RNAV…may be used…provided:• procedure is monitored using basic display

normally associated with that procedure; and• tolerances for flight using raw data on the

basic display are complied with.”

• “Lead radials are for non-RNAV equipped aircraft and are not intended to restrict the use of turn anticipation by the FMS”


EUROCONTROL


• Furthermore, agreement to have FMS-equipped aircraft fly tracks instead of procedural headings provided heading not required for ATC separation

• Industry requesting that design of terminal area procedures be compatible with increasing number of FMS equipped aircraft


EUROCONTROL


• New criteria introduced into PANS-OPS to cater to the needs of the modern aircraft navigation databases• VOR/DME RNAV (Chap 31)• GNSS “basic receiver” criteria (Chap 33)• DME/DME RNAV (Chap 32)• RNP (Chap 35)• BARO-VNAV (Chap 34)


EUROCONTROL

• When developing RNAV procedures, following path terminators accommodate all procedures:

• IF, TF, DF, FA, CF, HF, HA, and HM

• When developing RNP RNAV procedures, the following path terminators are only used:

• IF, TF, RF, (DF and FA -discouraged), (CF - to be phased out), HF, HA and HM



EUROCONTROL


• OCP 12 introduced material for PANS-OPS Vol II and Procedure Design Manual concerning path terminators, their definitions, and their application

• Encourage procedure designers to become more knowledgeable about path terminator


EUROCONTROL


• On a personal note:• aircraft operation is becoming more reliant

upon computer technology rather than pilot skill

• computers are smart - but cannot think - yet!

• the days of decision making with regard to navigation is being replaced by “monitoring”

• crowded skies dictate clearly defined airspace structure and procedures


EUROCONTROL


• Hence, the reason for procedure designers to clearly understand the airborne technology

• You are the people who have the greatest influence on the success (or failure) of RNAV and RNP RNAV implementation


EUROCONTROL


RNAV in Europe - Procedure Design Master Class EUROCONTROL PROCEDURE DESIGN MASTER CLASS James (Jim) W Gregory Civil Aviation Inspector and ATPL pilot.

Documents

area navigation rnav

wg rnav subcommittee

different rnav manufacturers

vordme rnav systems

rnav systems klmswissairsasuta

conducted rnav operation

navigation slide

rhotheta rnav systems