Aerodrome Operating Minima Head-Up Displays Enhanced Vision Systems

2. Aerodrome Operating MinimaHead-Up DisplaysEnhanced Vision Systems NPA-OPS 41

3. Presenters • Tim Price (AEA / British Airways) • Secretary, AWOSG • Theo van de Ven (AEA / KLM) • Member AWOSG and ICAO OCP

4. Background • OST endorsed NPA OPS 41 in May this year • Including: • Rule Material • New ACJs • Explanatory Note • RIA • So what has happened to it? • A feeling in the AWOSG that some final editorial work required before public consultation (including compliance with JAR 11!) • More harmonisation work with FAA and ICAO • Workshop on November 10

5. Contents of Today’s Presentation • Rationale for NPA 41 • Contents of the NPA • Stabilised Instrument Approach • Continuous Descent Final Approach • Harmonisation work • Workshop • Detailed Rule & ACJ changes since May • Regulatory Impact Assessment • Conclusion

6. NPA-OPS 41 • The proposal contains draft texts for: • Aerodrome Operating Minima (1.430) • Comments received post NPA 20 • JAA / FAA AWOHWG work (ongoing) • Requirements for Cat I, II and III Operations (1.440 and Appendix) • JAA / FAA AWOHWG work • Introduction of HUD & HUDLS • Introduction of EVS • Training and qualification requirements for all of the above (1.450)

7. Stabilised Instrument Approach - Background • CFIT & ALARP programmes encouraged authorities to prescribe stabilised instrument approaches: ‘SAp’ • SAp: an approach which is flown in a controlled and appropriate manner in terms of configuration, energy and control of the flight path, from a pre-determined point or altitude/height, without any segment of level flight at MDA(H) • Considered to be much safer than a Non-Precision Approach (NPA) flown as ‘dive & drive’

8. Stabilised Instrument Approach and CDFA • NPA 20 / 41 defines a new variant of the Stabilised Approach: the Continuous Descent Final Approach (CDFA) • An approach with a predetermined approach slope which enables a continuous descent to DA(H) • CDFA includes [precision approaches], non-precision approaches and approaches with vertical guidance (APV)

9. CDFA - Benefits • The CDFA concept aims to increase the safety of Non-Precision Approaches by eliminating level flight at MDA, ie close to the ground • Pilot workload is reduced as a/c attitude, power and energy are stabilised • One decision point for the pilot • The intention is that all approaches should be flown as CDFA (if possible)

10. CDFA NPA DH ICAO MDH THR CDFA v ‘Traditional’ NPA Continuous descent from FAF; no level-flight segment at MDH

11. Harmonisation Work • Meeting of JAA / FAA AWO Harmonisation Working Group in September • FAA members participated in AWOSG meeting November 1-3 • FAA will soon publish revised Ch 3 of TERPS (harmonised AOM) for consultation • Some changes to ICAO PANS Ops incorporated

12. NPA 41 Workshop 10 Nov 05 • Requirement from OST in May: to introduce the NPA 41 material to interested parties • Attended by 25 representatives • Mostly from Europe, but also Australia and Secretary of ICAO OPSP • Subjects covered included: • Purpose, Background and Harmonisation Work • CDFA and SAp • New Technology (HUD & EVS) • New Minima and Minima Calculation • RNAV Issues • Charting Issues • Possible Future Developments • Comments?

13. Detailed Rule, Appendix and ACJ ChangesSince OST 05/2

14. Most Important! • There have been no changes to the philosophy of the NPA since May • Only one detailed Rule change is proposed (explanation later...) • Most of the changes are editorial, designed to explain and simplify • We are not proposing anything vastly different since your previous endorsement! • But... because changes have been made, the material has been brought back

15. Rule Changes • 1.430 Aerodrome Operating Minima – General • (d)(1) & (2) CDFA and SAp are separated more clearly • (d)(2) clarifies that CDFA only applies to Non-precision approaches • (f) deleted as a consequence of (d)(2)

16. Rule Changes • 1.435 Terminology • (a)(10) Definition of SAp aligned with ICAO PANS Ops Vol 1 • (a)(15) Definition of Converted Meteorological Visibility (CMV) introduced • (a)(16) Definition of ‘Lower Than Standard Category I’ included * • (a)(17) Definition of ‘Other Than Standard Category II’ included * • (* NB: these definitions previously endorsed by OST)

17. Rule Changes • General Comment • Most references to RVR changed to include CMV (Rule & Appendix) • Many references to DA(H) changed to DH because they refer to height above the ground

18. Appendix 1 to 1.430 • (b) Cat I, APV and NPA referred to as ‘operations’ • (b)(3) RNAV/Baro VNAV removed from definition of APV • (c)(1) ‘lowest usable’ added • (c)(1)(i) & (ii) ‘CDFAs’ replaced with ‘instrument approaches’ • (c)(2) New para • (d)(1) Added ‘but not greater than the maximum values shown in table 6 where applicable’ for clarity

19. Appendix 1 to 1.430 • (d)(5) Reworded and simplified: • Special requirements for DH 200 – 210 ft deleted • ILS requirements simplified • Guidance required down to DH only • (d)(8) New para based on text agreed at OST 05/2, proposed by ERA • Table 6 Note added at the bottom for clarity • (d)(10) Simplified in similar way to (d)(5) • (e)(2) & (f)(1(iii) Max offset angle limited to 3 degrees instead of 5 degrees • Tables 6a and 6b combined; note moved to become (e)(5)(1)

20. Appendix 1 to 1.430 • Tables 7b and 7c combined • (h)(1)(i)(B) & (C) and (h)(3) Visual reference requirements changed to harmonise completely with FAA • (h)(2) Added ‘APV’ • (j) Only real Rule change. Reinstated the link between minima for circling and preceding instrument approach but only for offset approaches, not circling to an opposite runway • (l) Slight change of wording for clarity

21. ACJs • 1.430 CDFA • Edited extensively to improve English • Discussion about amount of information: your views sought • Appendix 1 (New) to 1.430 (d) AOM • Considerably simplified

22. ACJs • Appendix 1 (New) to 1.430 (f) Circling • Should be (j) not (f) sorry! • Endorsed by OST, believed to be in 2002, ‘cold’ item • To replace current IEM to Appendix 1 to JAR-OPS 1.430, paragraph (f) • Not contentious • Requested from the AWOSG • A good opportunity to include it

23. Regulatory Impact Assessment

24. RIA • Scope: • Discussed already • Relevant ICAO / JAA decisions: • SAp / CDFA • HUD (JAA TGL) • HUD minima: conflict with Annex 14 (RVR not DH) • NPA may well be used by ICAO OPSP • Operations <550m RVR: definition (Cat I or Cat II?)

25. RIA • Objectives: • Enhance safety – especially CDFA • HUDLS / autoland • EVS • Who will be affected? • All JAR-OPS operators, and probably most GA • Training • New operational procedures

26. RIA • Options • Do nothing • Introduce Rule, but no reduction in RVR • Introduce Rule and reduce required RVR • Mandate CDFA / SAp, but no change in AOM • Mandate CDFA / SAp and change in AOM

27. RIA • Equity and Fairness: • Equal and fair procedures in Europe and USA • Regulation for new technologies • Lower minima depending on installed equipment • Europe’s need to ‘catch up’ with FAA

28. RIA • Impacts identified: • Safety • Economic • Harmonisation • Environmental • Social (nil) • Other Aviation Requirements

29. RIA • Consultation: • Industry • Flight-crew • FAA • Comments Response Document • Summary & Final Assessment

30. Conclusion • No major changes have been made since OST 05/2 • Many of the items have been endorsed separately by the OST at various times in the past: • Circling ACJ • HUD material • NPA 20 • NPA 41 (first draft) • This major reworking of Sub Part E is overdue and should be well received by the aviation community

31. Questions?? Theo van de Ven (theo-van-de.ven@klm.com) Tim Price (tim.price@britishairways.com)