slide1 l.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Navigation: Transition to a Performance Based Airspace System PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Navigation: Transition to a Performance Based Airspace System

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 51

Navigation: Transition to a Performance Based Airspace System - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 325 Views
  • Uploaded on

Navigation: Transition to a Performance Based Airspace System. Mr. Bruce DeCleene, FAA 20 th Annual JAA/FAA International Conference Iceland, May 29-June 3, 2003. Overview. RNP Roadmap US Europe Infrastructure Considerations - The Role of GNSS Conclusion. Containment radius.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Navigation: Transition to a Performance Based Airspace System' - oshin


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
slide1

Navigation:Transition to a Performance Based Airspace System

Mr. Bruce DeCleene, FAA

20th Annual JAA/FAA International Conference

Iceland, May 29-June 3, 2003

overview
Overview
  • RNP Roadmap
    • US
    • Europe
  • Infrastructure Considerations - The Role of GNSS
  • Conclusion
required navigation performance

Containment radius

95 % Accuracy established as

1 X RNP

Containment Region (2 X RNP) composed of containment integrity and containment continuity

Required Navigation Performance
  • RNP: A statement of navigation performance for operation in a defined airspace (ICAO Annex 6)
  • RNP airspace: Airspace, route(s), and leg(s) where minimum navigation performance requirements (RNP) have been established, and aircraft must meet or exceed that performance to fly in that airspace (RTCA SC181/EUROCAE WG.13)
rnp roadmap implementation principles
RNP Roadmap Implementation Principles
  • Collaboration
  • Incremental procedure implementation
    • measure benefits
    • resolve issues
    • apply lessons learned
  • Incentive-based approach in near term,
    • possible mandate considerations in mid- and long-term
  • Strategy based on harmonization considerations
rnp roadmap structure
RNP Roadmap Structure
  • Domains
  • Timeframes (Near, Mid, Far term)
  • Structured around operational goals
    • Approach
    • Terminal
    • En Route

Integration to occur across

domains via projects like NAR

RNP Airspace, Routes, Offsets

Vector-Free

Arrivals

Optimized

Departures

RNP Approaches

Far term

Near term

Mid term

implementation strategy

Limited Implementation

Public TERPS, flight inspection,

AVN training, Draft AC 90-RNP,

special authorization (Part 97)

  • Turnkey: Published/signed criteria, published AC 90-RNP
    • Builds upon near-term implementation and lessons learned.
    • Public procedures in all domains
Implementation Strategy
  • “Specials”: Use Core TERPs and Core guidance materials (i.e. AC 90-RNP, FAA bulletins, etc.) with goal of moving towards “limited implementation” ASAP
    • Enables near term implementations, “specials” - via Lead Operator
    • Enables data collection, lessons learned, issue resolution
    • Addresses near term operational impacts
rnp and rnav strategy issue

RNP Airspace, Routes, Offsets

(incremental RNP 2 then RNP 1)

Mid term: Enabling flight paths

separated by 4 nmi or less

Vector-Free 3D

Arrivals (integrated with Approaches)

RNAV vs RNP

Mid-term: Enabling flight paths separated by 3 nmi or less

Multiple

Departure Gates (3D DPs starting at DER) via RNAV L1/L2 vs. RNP 1/2

Mid term: Enabling flight paths separated by 3 nmi or less

RNP and RNAV Strategy Issue
slide9

European Navigation Strategy

2000

2005

2010

2015

TMA Operations

RNP  1 RNAV mandatory

in all TMAs

En-route

BRNAV at all levels

RNAV routes RNP 1 accuracy

RNP 1 RNAV mandatory

en-route

AWO and A-SMGCS

4D RNAV

Conventional SIDs/STARs

P RNAV mandatory in

selected TMAs

RNAV SIDs/STARs

Provide NPA

Provide Cat I/II/III PA

Provide runway guidance

Rationalisation of the Ground Infrastructure for all phases of flight

Terminal Airspace limitations seen as the main driver

operating rnav in terminal airspace
Operating RNAV in Terminal Airspace
  • Basic RNAV not good enough!
  • In Europe about 6 different aircraft TMA RNAV requirements
  • Issues: accuracy, functionality, data integrity.
  • Variety of charting principles, ATC procedures, etc.
  • No approval associated with use of RNAV equipment for TMA RNAV
solution
SOLUTION
  • ECAC States have agreed to introduce a common Terminal; Airspace approach:
    • P-RNAV required where Basic RNAV is not sufficient
    • Common P-RNAV procedure design principles, based on common material
    • Phase out variations in RNAV requirements
    • Given current situation, get this in place ASAP (but allowing for all enablers to be available)
main p rnav enablers
Main P-RNAV enablers
  • JAA TGL/10 with clarification material => available
  • TGL/10 Data Integrity => practical solution agreed with JAA (certification data providers)
  • Approved ICAO Doc 7030 amendment (Phraseology, ATC & flight deck procedures, etc) => comments close 2 May 2003
  • PANS-OPS procedure design guidance => available
  • Operator, Authority and Industry awareness => on steam (but requires State planning as input)
rnp rnav
RNP -RNAV

Business case undertaken in 2002

  • Identified as a way forward subject to demonstration of capacity gains
  • Simulations undertaken in 2002
  • Full analysis complete by end 2003

Issue:

  • P-RNAV NOT mandatory (conventional procedure remain until 2010)
  • However if re-equipping for P-RNAV consider longer term requirements
approach initiatives
Approach Initiatives
  • Vertically-guided approaches!
    • Implementing approaches based on RNAV and barometric VNAV
      • Safety benefit, limited improvement in minima over non-precision approach
      • XX approaches published
    • Implementing new approaches (APV-I) based on GNSS vertical guidance
      • Safety benefit, significant improvement in minima over non-precision approach
      • First approaches to be published 9/03
      • Added to future RNAV approaches
    • Ultimately over 4000 runway ends
infrastructure considerations
Infrastructure Considerations
  • Performance
  • Guidance Materials
  • Benefits
  • Equipage
  • Terminology
rnav performance based on
RNAV (Performance) based on
  • GNSS
  • DME/DME
  • IRS
  • VOR(DME)*

May have some limited requirement in some [remote] airspace areas

Limited RNAV or conventional nav

slide19

2000

2005

2010

2015

NDB

VOR

DME

GPS

SBAS

GBAS

NDB

VOR

DME

GPS

ILS Cat I

ILS Cat II/III

MLS Cat III

SBAS Cat I

GBAS Cat I/II/III

European Infrastructure

En-Route

Approach / Landing /

Departure / A-SMGCS

Cat I

slide20
GNSS
  • GPS
  • ABAS (RAIM, AIME)
  • SBAS (EGNOS, WAAS, etc.)
  • GBAS
  • Galileo
  • GPS Modernization
slide21

EUROPEAN COMMISSION

The European Approach

EGNOS

EGNOS (European Geostationary Navigation Overlay Service) is an initiative of the European Commission, Eurocontrol and ESA

GALILEO: Achieve European sovereignty and service guarantees through dedicated system under civil control: Galileo, operational by 2008

European Policy

European

Commission

gps iii mission and system description

FIX FOM 1

N 42* 01” 46.12”

W 091* 38’ 54.36”

EL + 00862 ft

3

menu

1 ON

2

4

5

6

7

WPT

8

POS

9

NAV

CLR

MARK

0

OFF

NUM

LOCK

ZEROIZE

Rockwell

GPS III Mission and System Description

The GPS III

Maintain Space User

Service

Second Civil Signal

Third Civil Signal

  • Relook at entire GPS Architecture to
    • Achieve long term GPS performance goals
    • Improve long term efficiencies
  • Ensure GPS properly assesses and is synergized with
    • Military and Civil Needs/Systems
    • Possible augmentation opportunities
  • Ensure best GPS for the next 30 years
conclusion
Conclusion
  • Collaboration is paramount to success
  • Incremental procedure implementation
  • Incentive-based approach in near term
  • Transition strategy must include harmonization considerations
  • GNSS remains a fundamental component
backup slides

Backup Slides

Navigation - DeCleene

vertical capability
Vertical Capability

WPT

Vertical angle

(-3.00º)

Vertical flight path

Speed and altitude constraint at waypoint (170/2460)

  • - Waypoint altitude constraint
  • - Vertical angle
  • - Waypoint speed constraint (optional)
rnp roadmap implementation principles concluded
RNP Roadmap Implementation Principles (concluded)
  • Incentive-based approach in near term,
    • possible mandate considerations in mid- and long-term
  • Airspace redesign based on new RNP criteria for maximum benefit
  • Integration with other programs to maximize synergy
  • Strategy based on harmonization considerations
goal structure rnp approaches

Goals:

Goals:

Goals:

Improve airport access (lower minima) and IFR capacity

at locations constrained by airspace separation criteria,

closely spaced parallels, or converging runways

Vertically guided approaches

to all runway ends

Improve airport access at

locations constrained by

airspace/environmental

considerations

Tool set:

Tool set:

Remove DME/DME NA from

existing RNAV (GPS) procedures

Tool set:

RF inside the FAF

for environmental considerations

Publish 8260.51 Public

RNP-0.3 instrument approach procedures

Enable VNAV at all

applicable runway ends

RNP<.3 criteria

for environmental

considerations

Publish 8260.48 linear TERPS

RNP<.3 (2xRNP,

no transition) criteria

Guided missed approach

with RNP<1 for environmental

reduced vertical criteria for

lower minima at sites with obstacles

Guided missed with RNP<1

for sites with converging runways

RF criteria for use outside

and possibly inside the FAF

Reduced vertical criteria to

exploit vertical separation

RPAT Concept

De-conflict adjacent airport arrival flows

Goal Structure: RNP Approaches

Capacity

Environment

Safety / Training

goal structure rnp en route

Goals:

Goals:

Goals:

Reduce path width permitting more

Routes in a lateral space

Improve arrival and departure traffic

management using multiple arrival

and departure flows between en route

and terminal

Reduce length of paths with

fewer legs and more direct routes

Use parallel tactical offsets for passing

Flights around slower flights, and for

Maneuvering due to traffic

Tool set:

Tool set:

Tool set:

Develop criteria for airway

en route RNP-2

(8 nmi track-to-track, no radar required)

Develop criteria for RNP 1 (2xRNP

and 1xRNP)

Develop criteria for RNP 2 (8nmi

Track-to-track; radar not required)

Develop concepts, procedures,

and automation requirements

for strategic ATM between ER/terminal

Determine aircraft capability

requirements

Develop criteria for airway en route RNP 1

(4 nmi track-to-track; radar not required)

Conduct airspace redesign

Conduct airspace redesign

Develop 3D RNP criteria for en route

Develop procedures for offsets

Low Altitude

Airspace Access

Develop controller automation

Requirements and upgrades

Goal:

Develop criteria for RNP routes at low altitudes

Increased low altitude off-airway

flight and access to lower altitudes

for published routes (through lower

MEA).

Tool set:

Develop criteria for performance based separation

(radar not required),

Redesign airspace,

Determine aircraft capability requirements

Goal Structure: RNP En Route

Environmental/

Economic

Strategic ATM

Capacity/Efficiency

goal structure rnp terminal

Goals:

Goals:

Goals:

Improve arrival and departure traffic

management using multiple arrival

and departure flows between en route

and terminal

Improve terminal ingress and egress, reduce Taxi-out times, and reduce/eliminate static restrictions by increasing throughput that is limited due to ground based navigational constraints, and throughput that is limited due to closely spaced procedures, airspace, adjacent airport flows, or airport configurations.

Improve operations to

minimize impacts on noise sensitive areas

Tool set:

Develop fuel efficient 3D procedures to minimize fuel burn and engine emissions

Develop criteria for RNP 1 (2xRNP

and 1xRNP)

Tool set:

Tool set:

Playbook routes

3D SIDs and STAR procedures

RNP overlay and non-overlay

procedures

Conduct airspace redesign

Multiple arrival/departure gates

3D procedures starting from DER

Multiple runway transitions

ARTCC/TRACON/Command

Center interaction

RNP 1 procedures

Subsets of procedures

RNP < 1

- arrival to departure

Develop 3D SIDs and STARs

RF Legs and diverse vector areas

- arrival to arrival

- airport to airport

SUA or restricted airspace locations

Playbook/escape routes

Develop criteria for RNP 1 (2xRNP and 1xRNP)

Airspace redesign based on RNP 1

ARTCC and Command Center interaction

RF Legs and diverse vector areas

Goal Structure: RNP Terminal

Environmental/

Economic

Strategic ATM

Capacity/Efficiency

operating rnav in terminal airspace 1
Operating RNAV in Terminal Airspace (1)
  • Increased use of RNAV in ECAC Terminal Airspace:
    • Connectivity to en-route Basic RNAV network
    • Advantages RNAV (flexibility, accuracy, workload, ..)
    • Increased Aircraft Capabilities
  • However. . .inconsistent application
target situation
TARGET SITUATION

<MSA

MSA>

]

Option

P

+

P

Option

C

P

+

AVOID

]

RNAV Mix

Option

+

B

C

C

+

Option

C

VARIETY RNAV

Not an Option!

VARIETY RNAV

P = P-RNAV B = B-RNAV C = Conventional

Variety RNAV = National RNAV requirements not associated with an ECAC-wide accepted approval requirement

time scales
TIME SCALES

Terminal Airspace Target Situation where RNAV is currently in operation or introduction is already published:

  • Major TMAs: by Nov 2004
  • Other TMAs: by April 2005

New RNAV publications:

  • To directly apply Target Situation
slide34

EUROPEAN COMMISSION

GALILEO & GPS

  • Vertical Accuracy improved from 7.5 m to 4.5 meters worldwide.
  • Visibility under high masking angle conditions highly improved.
the apv implementation program in france
The APV implementation program in France
  • European level: preparation of EGNOS operations:
    • Creation of an entity to operate EGNOS,
      • With other partners civil aviations (EOIG - ESSP)
    • Preparation of EGNOS certification,
      • With EOIG and Eurocontrol
  • National level: preparation of EGNOS operations:
    • In-flight trials of EGNOS APV
    • Creation of an Ad Hoc group in 2002 to study EGNOS APV procedures deployment
      • With participation of Eurocontrol and ASECNA
the apv implementation program in france36
The APV implementation program in France
  • EGNOS APV procedures deployment
    • First step: design procedures for target runways to quantify benefits over NPA approaches (end-2003)
    • Next steps to achieve initial APV operational capability will be :

1. experimental phase with in-flight tests

2. involvement of users (airports and regions) :

        • Operational issues,
        • APV operational safety case (certification),

3. pre-operational phase with selected runways and involving operators (mid-2005).

us sbas apv operational implementation plan
US SBAS APV operational implementation plan
  • WAAS to be commissioned in July, 2003
    • Provide capability to conduct VNAV approaches
  • First APV-I procedure to be commissioned in September, 2003
    • Developed operational concept for APV operations
    • Title will be « LPV » approach
    • Obstacle clearance criteria adapted from ILS
  • Ultimately, APV-I procedures will be commissioned for over 4000 runway ends
apv conclusions
APV Conclusions
  • GNSS APV is now a reality with SBAS
    • Improve safety with operational benefits
  • In France, EGNOS APV will complement existing ILS Cat I infrastructure
    • An operational group to prepare APV deployment starting mid-2005 is in place
  • In the US, APV commissioning using WAAS is starting in 2003
    • APV-I commissioning on all USA runway ends will follow
benefits
Benefits
  • From Pilot Viewpoint, System Behaves Like ILS
  • Can Achieve Minima Below 325’ (1 mi.)
  • Makes Vertical Guidance Safety Benefit Accessible to General Aviation
  • Compared to LNAV/VNAV:
    • No Cold Weather Altimeter Correction Limitation
    • Allows operation with Remote Altimeter Setting (with appropriate minima penalty)
    • Higher System Integrity: “Precision-like”
  • Allows Use of Modified ILS TERPS Criteria
terminology classification
Terminology/Classification
  • Proposal Restricts Minima to 250’ HAT (3/4 mi. Visibility without Lights)
  • Visibility Limited Based on Supporting Infrastructure
    • AC 150/5300-13, Appendix 16, Table A16-1B
    • “Precision Approach” Infrastructure Not Required
  • Current ICAO Annex 6 Approach Classification:
    • Instrument Approach Procedure with Vertical Guidance
  • Proposed ICAO Annex 10 Performance Definition:
    • APV-I
a comparison of lateral obstacle clearance criteria lnav vnav vs lpv

15000

10000

5000

Distance from C/L (ft)

0

20000

25000

35000

10000

15000

30000

-5000

5000

-5000

-10000

Distance from Runway Threshold (ft)

-15000

A Comparison of Lateral Obstacle Clearance Criteria(LNAV/VNAV vs. LPV)

LNAV/VNAV OCS

LPV OCS

lpv vertical criteria

668' HAT

3 Glideslope

o

250' HAT

185' HAT

23:1 Baro-VNAV OCS

34:1 Precision OCS

Best Case

27:1 LPV OCS

48'

Touchdown Elevation

954'

200'

2,379'

1,237'

7,983'

954'

1,154'

3,533'

4,770'

12,753'

LPV Vertical Criteria

WAAS NSE Does Not Degrade with Distance from Threshold,

& At 668’ HAT, WAAS & ILS NSE  Equivalent.

Above 668’ HAT, LPV Uses ILS OCS;

Validates Use of ILS Criteria Adjusted for 50 M Vertical Alert Limit

controlling obstacles lpv lnav vnav ocs
Controlling ObstaclesLPV&LNAV/VNAV OCS

15000

10000

5000

Distance from C/L (ft)

0

-5000

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

-5000

-10000

Distance from RWT (ft)

-15000

lpv estimated approach minima

3500

3000

2500

2000

Number of Runway Ends

1500

1000

500

0

250-

259-

328-

396-

466-

535-

604-

More

GQS

258

327

395

465

534

603

740

Fail

Height Above Touchdown (HAT) in feet

LPV EstimatedApproach Minima

5073 Runway Ends at 1534 Airports

Average: 272 ft

Median: 250 ft

% < 258ft: 81%

the satellite constellation

EUROPEAN COMMISSION

Inclination 56 degrees

The Satellite Constellation

GALILEO

  • 30 satellites in three Medium Earth Orbit MEO planes at 23616 km altitude
  • 1 satellite per orbital plane is a spare
  • Inclination of orbital planes 56 degrees
  • One revolution 14 hours 4 min
  • Ground track repeat 10 days
slide49

EUROPEAN COMMISSION

GALILEO

The Master Schedule

DEPLOYMENT

OPERATIONS

DEFINITION

DEV & VALIDATION

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 …

Definition

Development & Validation

PHASE B2

PSDR

CDR

SQR

PHASE CD

In-Orbit Validation (IOV)

IOVR

Test Bed (GSTB)

Full Deployment

Operations

Local Elements

User Receiver / Applications

Technology Developments

PDR: Preliminary Design Review

SQR: System Qualification Review

Launches

CDR: Critical Design Review

IOVR: In-Orbit Validation Review

gps block iir modernization
Pre-Modernization

Current Signals

L1 C/A

L1, L2 P(Y)

GPS Block IIR Modernization

Post-Modernization

  • Modernized Signals
    • L1 C/A
    • L1, L2 P(Y)
    • L2 C/A or L2C
    • L1, L2 M-Code

First Launch Planned for 2004

gps block iif modernization
Pre-Modernization

Current Signals

L1 C/A

L1, L2 P(Y)

GPSBlock IIF Modernization

Post-Modernization

  • Modernized Signals
    • L1 C/A
    • L1, L2 P(Y)
    • L2 C/A or L2C
    • L1, L2 M-Code
    • L5 Signal

First Launch Planned for 2006