performance-based navigation and data quality

Jeppesen Proprietary - Copyright © 2012Jeppesen. All rights reserved.

Performance-based Navigationand Data QualityA Commercial Data Supplier View

Bill Kellogg

International Relations

May 6-10, 2013

Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia

ICAO APAC AAITF/8

Jeppesen Proprietary - Copyright © 2012 Jeppesen. All rights reserved.

PBN specifies RNAV system performance

accuracy, integrity, continuity, availability + functionality

Navigation specifications

On-board self, contained

performance monitoring + alerting

required

Designation RNP X Designation RNAV X

On-board, self contained

performance monitoring + alerting

not required

2

Note: For both RNP and RNAV designations, the expression „X‟ (where stated) refers to the LNAV accuracy

in NM expected 95 % of the flight time by aircraft operating within the airspace, route or procedure.

Performance Based Navigation (PBN)



RNP 4

Oceanic

Remote

RNAV 5

RNAV 2

RNAV1

Route

Terminal

RNP10

Oceanic

Remote

RNP1

RNP APCH

RNP AR APCH

various phasesof Terminal Operation

RNP

Additional requirement

3D & 4D

(future)

Performance-Based Navigation Applications

RNP RNAV


Example of RNAV and RNP

specifications

At GateTake off

End of

Departure

Gateway

Begin of

Arrival

Gateway

IAF

Landing At Gate

Taxi Taxi

Departure

En-route Continental

Arrival

Approach

En-route Oceanic

RNP 4

For any particular PBN operation

a sequence of RNAV and RNP applications can be used

4


Efficiency / Fuel savings

Environmental (e.g. noise,

emissions)

Airspace congestion

Safety

Decreased operating costs

Increased revenue

Reduced environmental impacts

Increased schedule integrity

Improved safety

Conventional

ApproachRNP

Approach

Benefits of RNP

Why RNP?


Conventional Procedure

• Truth used to be an ILS localizer and glide slope beam

• The airplane flies a ground based signal that is always in the same position

relative to the runway

RNP Procedure

• Truth is the database

• The airplane flies to the waypoint, right or wrong

RNP Approach requires highest quality dataWhy?


Virtually all worldwide procedures are

avalable in on-board navigation databases

In a world based on conventional navigation:

• Pilots have a “Ground Truth“

• FMS/GNSS provide guidance to a ground

based navaid signal

Consequences


Data Quality - The “dark side” of PBN?

In a world of Performanced Based Navigation:

Consequences

• “Ground Truth” is not available

• Nav system provides guidance to waypoints,

wherever the database says they are

• Dependent on accurate data

• Data are mission critical


…. The airplane flies to the waypoint, right or wrong

Actual Runway Location (orange)

Official AIP Location (blue)



RNP 4

Oceanic

Remote

RNAV 5

RNAV 2

RNAV1

Route

Terminal

RNP10

Oceanic

Remote

RNP1

RNP APCH

RNP AR APCH

various phasesof Terminal Operation

RNP

Additional requirement

3D & 4D

(future)

RNP especially need high quality data

RNPRNAV


Major data requirements for safe and efficient PBN operations

• Accurate WGS-84 coordinates

with appropriate resolution for

the operation

• No waypoint name duplication

• No waypoint names with two

different sets of coordinate

• Clear designation of RNP type

to enable RNP data coding


The Future Is Now

Jeppesen

E6B Flight Computer


Digital

Our AIM future is Digital


The Future is Here Data Driven Gate-to-Gate Charting


Evolution of Procedure Design and Charting

15

Ground navaid, complex, rigid paths,

non-standard, manually flown, paper

Satellite based, simple, flexible paths,

repeatable, predictable, data-driven,

electronic

Digital FutureAnalog Past


Integrated Flight Planning

• Load Flight Plans

• Saved Flight Plans

• Flight Information

• Performance

• Weight & Balance

• Dashboard


Airport Moving Map – 2nd Generation

Next Generation of

Features and Functions

for Airport Moving Map

Taxi clearances & route

depiction

Taxi advisories on

apron & taxiways

Runway Incursion

support for Situational

Awareness


Real Time Information Delivery & Integrated 4D Display

Current and forecast weather data

integrated along OFP

Decluttered based on operational

relevancy, flight level, severity,

current and forecast time, etc.

Updated when airborne on per-

request or on subscription &

change


The Enroute Challenge

2012Data Driven Charts

1962Paper Chart

1977Paper Chart

2002Paper Chart


Airline Operations Center

Air Traffic Management SystemToday: Not optimized

Cabin Services

Reference Information

ATC

Airport Operations

Navigation, Flight Optimization

• Flight Planning/Dispatch/Tracking

• Contingencies, Disruption Recovery

• ATC Collaboration

CURRENT SITUATION• Massive amounts of paper

• Labor-Intensive processes

• Limited systems Integration

• Missed opportunities to share

information

• Heavy reliance on voice

communications

• Limited updates to planes once

airborne

• Outdated air traffic control system

• Regulatory not on pace with

technology

Technical & Admin TasksMaintenance Operations

• Separation, safety

• Optimize flow, increase capacity

• Global interoperability

http://www.airliners.net/photo/KLM---Royal/Boeing-737-306/0717461/L/&sid=cc7cbc33390d93138b93d1400fa9e577


Airline Operations Center

Cabin Services

Reference Information

ATC

Airport Operations

Navigation, Flight Optimization

• Flight Planning/Dispatch/Tracking

• Contingencies, Disruption Recovery

• ATC Collaboration

Technical & Admin TasksMaintenance Operations

• Separation, safety

• Optimize flow, increase capacity

• Global interoperability

TARGET• Transformed from Paper to Digital

• Automated processes

• Systems Integration/interoperability

• Intelligent information sharing

• Heavy use of data link communications

• Airplane gets regular/contextual

updates

• Modern air traffic management system

• Responsive & pro-active regulatory

Air Traffic Management SystemThe Vision: Optimized, Shared

http://www.airliners.net/photo/KLM---Royal/Boeing-737-306/0717461/L/&sid=cc7cbc33390d93138b93d1400fa9e577

Jeppesen Proprietary - Copyright © 2012Jeppesen. All rights reserved.

RNAV (RNP) Approach Source Information

22


RNAV (RNP) Approach

RNP (AR) Approach characteristics:

Charted procedure title - RNAV (RNP)

Source contains one of these notes

– "Special Aircraft and Aircrew Authorization Required" Is this still being used?

– "Authorization Required"

– "Approved Aircraft only"

Source has an RNP value of less than 0.3 specified on the final segment to the

runway

RNP values on approach transitions or missed approach are less than 1.0

Use of RF leg within final segment

RNP (Advanced/Basic) Aproach Characteristics:

Charted procedure title - RNAV (GNSS)

No RNP values less than 0.3 on the final segment

No RF leg in the final approach segment

23


Authorization Required (AR) Notes

AR Procedure Note Examples:

Authorization Required

GNSS Required

RF Leg Required.

SBAS VNAV Authorized (or Not Authorized)

Uncompensated BARO VNAV

24


Multiple Approach Indicators

Situation: Multiple approaches of the same type to the same runway

Example: RNAV (RNP) RWY 36 and RNAV (GNSS) RWY 36 are multiple

approaches of the same type to the same runway

A multiple approach indicator should be used in the procedure title when there is

more than one RNAV approach to a runway

– Example: RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 36 and RNAV (GNSS) Y RWY 36

Some avionics cannot handle multiple approaches of the same type to a runway

When multiple procedure indicators are used

– A “preferred approach” should be designated, or

– documentation describing “preferred approach” characteristics should be in the AIP

– Typically the approach that has the lowest equipment requirements is designated the

preferred approach

– Example:

RNAV (GNSS) Z Rwy 01 – APV (Not preferred)

RNAV (RNP) Y Rwy 01 – RNP (Not preferred)

RNAV (GNSS) X Rwy 01 – LNAV/VNAV (Preferred)

25


Waypoints

Procedure source must include coordinates for:

– All waypoints used in the procedure

– Arc center points for RF legs

Waypoint names should be 5-letters

Avoid using ARINC 424 naming conventions CF35, FF35, etc.

The naming conventions were created to handle waypoints not

named by authorities and are often already used by data

suppliers

26

PANS-OPS (Doc 8168), Vol. II,

Amdt 4 (17 Nov 2011), Part 3,

Section 5 - Publication,

Chapter 1


Waypoint Fly-by and Fly-Over

27

– Approach fixes are normally designed as

fly-by

– MAP is always a fly-over waypoint

– Fixes not coded fly-over:

• Fixes on straight lines (geometry causes

fly-over)

• RF fixes (RF leg geometry causes fly-

over)

• Holding fixes (fly-over by definition)

Standard FMS behavior is to anticipate the turn

Fly-by turns are a key characteristic of an RNAV flight path

A fly-over indicator on a waypoint means the aircraft will initiate

the turn after flying over the waypoint

Basic coding rules


Descriptions of Leg Types

• Path – How you get there (heading, course, etc.)

• Termination – The event or condition that causes sequencings to the next leg

Path and Termination(path terminator)


Constant radius to a Fix (RF leg)

Procedure source must include the following to support RF legs:

ARC center fix with coordinates

ARC radius

ARC direction

Overfly indicators should not be designated on the entry or exit fixes of

RF legs. Note: Fly-over is executed by definition on RF leg entry and

therefore, an indicator is not required.

If an altitude is provided on an RF leg between the FAF and MAP, it

should be the same altitude as the VNAV crossing altitude at that fix

29


RNAV (RNP) ApproachCoding Specifications

30

Procedure source must provide a coding specification for each

segment of the approach.

Transition identifiers should be designated for each transition route

No additional information is required for the procedure to be coded


PANS-OPS (Doc 8168)Vol. II, Amdt. 4, Part 3, Section 5 - Publication, Chapter 1

31


RNAV (RNP) AR Approach– Authorization Required

32


33

RNAV (RNP) APCH


Thank You

performance-based navigation and data quality

Documents