Level of Service Policy Design & Maintenance of Instrument Approach Procedures

1. Level of Service Policy Design & Maintenance of Instrument Approach Procedures Marcel Pinon, Manager, Level of Service & Aeronautical Studies

2. Policy Background • Before transfer, IAPs were normally developed for an aerodrome provided that: • a suitable ground-based NAVAID was available • an altimeter source was available, and • the IAP would benefit the ANS as a whole • Design and publication was controlled by Transport Canada • No policy or LOS criteria for design and maintenance of IAPs existed at time of transfer.

3. Rationale • Due to satellite based (GNSS) navigation, any aerodrome – with an altimeter source – can now have an IAP designed • May or may not benefit the system as a whole • GNSS has created huge demand/workload • There are companies in Canada that can design and maintain instrument procedures • A rational approach/policy is required

4. Methodology Presentations and Briefings were provided NOTICE of Consultation was changed to reflect continuing dialogue and discussion Stakeholders were contact and asked what they wanted to see in a Policy document Policy has been amended based on new input received

5. Where are we? All aerodromes have been assessed based on the new IP Policy. Results: • Aerodromes with scheduled passenger service – Supported • Aerodromes with regular courier/cargo service – Supported • Designated isolated or remote Aerodromes – Supported • Non-designated Aerodromes but isolated or remote – Supported (no road or poor road access) • Aerodromes with METAR/TAF – Supported • Aerodromes filed as an Alternate (semi-regular) – Supported • LOS, Positive Business and/or Safety Case – Supported • Others – Not Supported

6. Next Steps • Accepted by the NAV CANADA Board of Directors February 2014 • Communication strategy finalized • Implementation of the new Policy will commence shortly

7. Ground-based Navaids Plan

8. Current navigation environment • Advances in space-based navigation present opportunities to maintain or enhance safety while improving efficiency • Recognize both the robust nature of space-based navigation and inherent limitations • Maintaining a ground-based network that has little relevance to current operations

9. Responsible modernization … • Enable operations under existing CARs for IFR flight (safety) • Meet the operational needs of our customers (safety and efficiency)

10. Change guidelines • Provide a robust navaid network • Maintain accessibility to northern airports • Efficient operational network

11. Focus – IFRLowest common denominator? • Aircraft without an “autonomous” means of navigation in the event of an unforecasted system infrastructure failure • Aircraft outside of surveillance coverage that cannot be assisted by ATC • Aircraft operating at low altitudes and therefore “line-of-sight” challenged for ground-based navigation or surveillance Most “at risk” population of aircraft drive the network requirements

12. Plan assumptions • Normal en route operations are area navigation based relying primarily on GNSS • Approach operations are a combination of RNAV/RNP and ground-based • No CARs changes proposed • Retain all existing ILSs • ILS not to include a requirement for NDB

13. Plan assumptions – fail operational GNSS en route but protect against unlikely loss of signal • NDBs and VORs assessed for removal where within radar coverage at 10,000’ and not required as a landing aid (vectors available) • Majority of designated mountainous region navaids remain (line-of-sight limitations) • Majority of northern navaids remain (remote or sparsely settled areas) • En route dead reckoning acceptable for short durations (~100 nm)

14. Failure probability - the “Perfect Storm” • Most vulnerable aircraft • Outside of surveillance coverage • Outside of line-of-sight to ground-based navigation aid • No inertial navigation capability • Catastrophic loss of all GNSS signals • GPS constellation operational since 1993 without a single interruption to en route operational performance • GPS modernization improving resistance to interference • Multiple constellations becoming available (GLONASS, Galileo) • IMC weather along route of flight

15. Dark blue – surveillance coverage at 10,000’ Yellow – 100 nm ring for potential DR

16. Space-based ADS-B coverage –Extensive opportunities for Canadian surveillance

17. NDBs

18. VORs

19. Plan summary • GNSS is the primary en route aid • All ILSs and DMEs remain • Mixture of space-based and ground-based approach aids meeting current CARs • Recovery plan protecting against highly unlikely catastrophic GNSS failure • Maintain a navigation network that reflects the operational safety and efficiency needs of all of our customers

20. QUESTIONS?