a flight procedure design method for rnp to xls with...
TRANSCRIPT
Japan-US Aviation Environmental Workshop Fukutake Hall, University of Tokyo, 29 November 2017
A Flight Procedure Design Method for RNP to xLS with Shallow Segment
Sonosuke Fukushima, Ryota Mori, Shinji Saitoh
Electronic Navigation Research Institute, National Institute of Maritime, Port and Aviation Technology
Outline
1. Background 2. “RNP to xLS” Procedure Design
Assumption & Method 3. Full-Flight Simulator Trials 4. Summary
US-Japan Aviation Environmental Workshop, University of Tokyo, 29 Nov. 2017
3
1. Advantage of RNP to xLS
US-Japan Aviation Environmental Workshop, University of Tokyo, 29 Nov. 2017
FACF IAF
Intermediate Segment
FAF
FAF FACF
IAF
RNP AR RNP to xLS
xLS
FAF
No PA PA
PA
FAF
Intermediate Segment
4
1. Glideslope Intercept Altitude
US-Japan Aviation Environmental Workshop, University of Tokyo, 29 Nov. 2017
Hot Day
Cold Day
Normal Day
Dfap
Zfap
θ Zdcp
Intermediate Segment
Intermediate Segment used barometric altitude while final approach segment depends on geometric altitude.
5
1. Temperature Correction
US-Japan Aviation Environmental Workshop, University of Tokyo, 29 Nov. 2017
International Standard Atmosphere (ISA) Temp 15°C at Mean Sea Level, Lapse rate ~ –2°C per 1,000 ft
1000 2000 3000 4000 5000
Altitude on MLS (FT)
0
200
400
600
Corr
ectio
n (F
T) ∆ISA = 20°C 6.8 %
∆ISA = 10°C 3.4 %
Altitude on MLS (FT)
Alti
tude
Cor
rect
ion
(FT)
∆ISA = 30°C 10.2 %
GS should be captured after capturing LOC. For short intermediate design, GS capture may
happen before LOC capture.
6
1. Difficulty of Procedure Design
US-Japan Aviation Environmental Workshop, University of Tokyo, 29 Nov. 2017
GS Capture Point
LOC Capture Point
Hot Day
Cold Day
Normal Day
7
1. Shallow segment
FAA PARC reported RNP to xLS procedure design using Shallow Intermediate Segments
Improving flight efficiency: Long level segment decrease it. Considering capture condition and guideline.
US-Japan Aviation Environmental Workshop, University of Tokyo, 29 Nov. 2017
∆ISA > 0°C Normal Day
Intercept Point
Cold Day
∆ISA = 0°C
∆ISA < 0°C
Hot Day
Length Angle
Discussing more detail, and optimum design method
8
2. Assumption of procedure design
US-Japan Aviation Environmental Workshop, University of Tokyo, 29 Nov. 2017
1. ARINC 424 compliance
ARINC 424-19 specification are supposed All type of aircraft does not support 424-20
2. Hottest day temperature ∆ISA = 30°C 113°F MSL
424-19 (2008) “All such approach procedures
must begin at the FACF” “The rules of coding GLS
approach procedure are understood to be identical to those of LOC coding”
424-20 (2011) “The final approach coding
of GLS instrument approach procedures does not require the coding of a FACF waypoint”
9
2. Assumption of procedure design
US-Japan Aviation Environmental Workshop, University of Tokyo, 29 Nov. 2017
3. Glideslope & Localizer capture timing
5. Glideslope capture boundary a half dot
Type A aircraft are supposed
Type A aircraft allows Glideslope capture before Localizer capture
Type B aircraft inhibits Glideslope capture before Localizer capture
4. Glideslope pointer exceed one dot Pilots need a buffer for pushing APP switch
Critical
10
2. Procedure design
US-Japan Aviation Environmental Workshop, University of Tokyo, 29 Nov. 2017
WP 3
WP 4 WP
2 WP 1
(90FT)
X.X NM
CF LEG
RW24R
WP 1
WP 3
RF LEG
TF LEG
MAX 180KIAS
At 3189FT
GLS: GKW (FREQ: 21475)
WP 4 At 3189FT
2.0 NM
WP 0
3.0 NM
V/A 3.0 V/A 3.0
ANG
LEN
WP 2
ANG
TF LEG
5.0 LEN 7.85 X.X
LEN (NM)
ANG (deg)
A 1.0 1.4 B 1.5 1.5 C 2.0 1.6
TOTAL 17.85
FACF FAF GS intercept alt: 1700FT GS crossing alt: 1053FT
2.5NM
11
2. Deviation & Capture points
US-Japan Aviation Environmental Workshop, University of Tokyo, 29 Nov. 2017
FACF FAF
∆ISA 0°C
VNAV
∆ISA 30°C
GS Dev
Capture
0 1 2 3 4 5
-2
-1
0
1
2
Distance to FAF (NM)
Dev
iatio
n (d
ot)
LOC Capture
Case-B
GS Capture ∆ISA = 0°C
∆ISA = 30°C
12
2. Calculation of ANGmax
US-Japan Aviation Environmental Workshop, University of Tokyo, 29 Nov. 2017
Given LEN, others
ANG = ANG + ∆
IF dist( ) < dist( ) & Max GS > 1.0 dot
Output ANGmax
Iteration Algorithm
Calc
dist ( ) : distance along RF to from FAF
FACF FAF
0°C VNAV
∆ISA 30°C
GS Dev
get close to
Capture
FAA ORDER 8260.58A, PANS-OPS
13
3. Simulator Trials
US-Japan Aviation Environmental Workshop, University of Tokyo, 29 Nov. 2017
Standard procedures based on ARINC 424 specification were coded by NAV database provider
FMS vender checked the database quality, and converted to FMS loadable database
Flight simulations with variable temp were conducted in ANA flight training center
14
3. Comparison with FFSIM
US-Japan Aviation Environmental Workshop, University of Tokyo, 29 Nov. 2017
Horizontal distance to FAF along RF course (NM)
CACLULATED FFSIM (NO WIND CASE)
0 1 2 3 4 5
-2
-1
0
1
2
LOC
∆ISA=0°C
15°C
30°C GS
0 1 2 3 4 5
-2
-1
0
1
2∆ISA=0°C
15°C
30°C GS
A Dev
iatio
n (D
OT)
A LOC
15
3. Comparison with FFSIM
US-Japan Aviation Environmental Workshop, University of Tokyo, 29 Nov. 2017
Horizontal distance to FAF along RF course (NM)
CACLULATED FFSIM (NO WIND CASE)
0 1 2 3 4 5
-2
-1
0
1
2
45°C
∆ISA=0°C
15°C
30°C GS
LOC B
0 1 2 3 4 5
-2
-1
0
1
2 ∆ISA=0°C
15°C
30°C GS
LOC C 0 1 2 3 4 5
-2
-1
0
1
2 ∆ISA=0°C
15°C
30°C GS
Dev
iatio
n (D
OT)
LOC C
0 1 2 3 4 5
-2
-1
0
1
2
B 45°C
∆ISA=0°C
15°C
30°C GS
LOC
Dev
iatio
n (D
OT)
0 1 2 3 4 5-40
-20
0
20
40
16
3. Altitude Variation before FAF
US-Japan Aviation Environmental Workshop, University of Tokyo, 29 Nov. 2017
Alti
tude
Var
iatio
n (F
T) Severe Turbulence
IAS(KT)
200
160
FLAP 5
FLAP 25 FLAP 20
0 1 2 3 4 5-40
-20
0
20
40
Altitude Variation is affected by the Flap Extension, and not exceed +20 FT even severe turbulence condition
Distance to FAF (NM) Distance to FAF (NM)
None Wind Altitude Variation
17
4. Intermediate LEN .vs. ANG
US-Japan Aviation Environmental Workshop, University of Tokyo, 29 Nov. 2017
+50FT (20FT + Margin)
1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500
FAF altitude (FT)
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2
Max
imum
inte
rmid
iate
seg
men
t ang
le (
deg)
Length of intermediate segment (NM)
∆ISA = 30°C
2.0 1.9
1.8 1.7
1.6 1.5
1.4 1.3
1.2
1.1 1.0
FAF altitude (FT)
Max
inte
rmed
iate
seg
men
t ang
le (d
eg)
Direct Proportion
Inverse Proportion
LEN .vs. ANG
FAF ALT. vs. ANG
Additional assumption By FFSIM experiments
LTP 36 ft, TCH 54ft, Length of LOC to THD 4320 m, Course width 210 m
US-Japan Aviation Environmental Workshop, University of Tokyo, 29 Nov. 2017 18
5. Summary
Development of RNP to xLS procedures with shallow intermediate segment were discussed
The design method of shallow intermediate segments were proposed based on the assumptions
Full flight simulator trials confirmed that the method enables to design procedure even in the high temperature condition
Findings also revealed altitude variations required a buffer
The revised algorithm will enable the development of the procedures design criteria
Thank you for your attention !
US-Japan Aviation Environmental Workshop, University of Tokyo, 29 Nov. 2017
Quoted from : Sonosuke Fukushima, Ryota Mori, Shinji Saitoh, “Geometric Approach for RNP Transition to xLS Procedure Design,” 36th Digital Avionics Systems Conference, Sept. 2017.