B-RNAV

[JetMcQuack]

Hi guys, just a question about RNAV :E

Let's assume we have a B737 certified BRNAV.
As you know, ICAO general rule in Europe is:

- RNP1 for Terminal area (SID and STAR)
- RNP5 for Enroute

Many times I found charts with specified that you may use BRNAV on that procedure, and it's shown like this, under the name of tha SID or STAR:

"BRNAV (P-RNAV reccomended)"

or

"BRNAV (P-RNAV reccomended) or conventional"

and so on...
but if I find a not specified chart, just the header "RNAV STAR", which RNP is that now? Is it already RNP1 or we may use it as RNP5?
I found in the Jeppesen introduction, specifically in the booklet "Flight Supplement Europe", these sentences regarding the possibility to use BRNAV during departures and arrivals:

"The departure procedures must be conventional (non-RNAV) up to a conventional fix (ora a minimum altitude). Beyond that fix (or minimum altitude) a B-RNAV procedure can be provided in accordance with..."

"the B-RNAV portion of an arrival route must terminate at a conventional fix in accordance with the criteria given above. Beyond that fix, the arrival shall be completed by a conventional (non-RNAV) procedure, or by the provision of radar vectors"

What do you know about this?

[vipero]

wait the usual 154 views to get a reply ;)

[dusk2dawn]

P-RNAV in european terminal areas is generally not required - yet.

Lots of infos on: EUROCONTROL Navigation Domain - Timescales (http://www.ecacnav.com/content.asp?CatID=206)

[FE Hoppy]

As you know, ICAO general rule in Europe is:

- RNP1 for Terminal area (SID and STAR)
- RNP5 for Enroute


are you sure? BRNAV = RNP 5 equivenant PRNAV = RNP 1 equivelant but they are not the same and PRNAV is not widely implemented.

You are mixing apples and oranges a little.

From the link above:
Viewed from a European strategic perspective, the application of P-RNAV in ECAC Terminal Airspace is to be viewed as a pragmatic step towards RNP RNAV application which will form the basis of RNAV terminal area procedures in the future.

a step towards.

[JetMcQuack]

BRNAV comply with RNP5 requirement and PRNAV comply with RNP1 requirement.
In the future the terms BRNAV and PRNAV will not be used anymore, and RNP1 RNAV and RNP5 RNAV terms will be applied.

However, the focus of this topic is to know "Am I allowed to follow a SID or a STAR RNAV on a chart without indication of RNP or B/PRNAV?"

Basically, we need to know how these procedures are certified.

For example, in Italy (from the national AIP), all the STAR RNAV are designed for BRNAV, and the obstacle protection area is RNP5x2+1 nm, so (as stated in the AIP document) is 11 nm of obstacle protection.

So in Italy, if I don't see anything specified on a chart, but only the header "RNAV STAR", I'm allowed to perform that procedure with BRNAV.

How about the rest of Europe?

[FE Hoppy]

BRNAV comply with RNP5 requirement and PRNAV comply with RNP1 requirement.

Not really correct. There are no EU standard for RNP complient equipment. What you are trying to say is: track keeping accuracy of +- 5nm or +- 1nm with equipment certified under TGL 10.


In the future the terms BRNAV and PRNAV will not be used anymore, and RNP1 RNAV and RNP5 RNAV terms will be applied.


Really? reference please?


However, the focus of this topic is to know "Am I allowed to follow a SID or a STAR RNAV on a chart without indication of RNP or B/PRNAV?"

Basically, we need to know how these procedures are certified.

For example, in Italy (from the national AIP), all the STAR RNAV are designed for BRNAV, and the obstacle protection area is RNP5x2+1 nm, so (as stated in the AIP document) is 11 nm of obstacle protection.

So in Italy, if I don't see anything specified on a chart, but only the header "RNAV STAR", I'm allowed to perform that procedure with BRNAV.

How about the rest of Europe?

Have a look here:

EUROCONTROL Navigation Domain - Published AICs (http://www.ecacnav.com/PRNAV/Published_AICs)

there is no answer to your question which applies in all eu states.

[cortilla]

This is how i understand it operationally, but i may be completely misinterprating the charts (AERAD).

B-Rnav you require atleast one point that you can fix your position using raw data before descending below MSA. P-Rnav, you don't need any points for dme/dme or vor/dme assuming regular failure rates.

The only place that really confuses me is PRG. No points to fix yourself below MSA, however you can continue B-Rnav if you're not P-Rnav certified you what now??

[JetMcQuack]

FE Hoppy: I think you should have a look to that site, you'll find this document where it's written the BRNAV and PRNAV terms will not be used:

http://www.ecacnav.com/downloads/rnavst.pdf

JET

[FE Hoppy]

Edition 2 takes into account the subsequent finalisation of RTCA DO
236/EUROCAE ED-75 “Minimum Aviation System Performance Standards
(MASPS) for RNP Area Navigation”. This document has adopted the term
RNP-(x) RNAV for RNAV systems fully conformant to the MASPS where (x) is
the value of the required navigation performance. Therefore, for systems
meeting the additional functional requirements set out in the MASPS:
· RNP-1 RNAV would replace the term Precision RNAV;
· RNP-5 RNAV would replace the term Basic RNAV.
However for systems meeting the requirements of Edition 1 of this Standard
but not the requirements of the MASPS, the terms Basic and Precision RNAV
are retained.

Your 10 year old reference says the terms are used in this document not in general use.

This has been somewhat superseded.

[fandak]

Hi, I've got a question concerning general av. aircraft and BRNAV. When I hire a IFR equipped aircraft Cessna 172 or whatever and want to fly above FL95 in Europe what document should I check to be sure it's BRNAV approved. Would be sufficient it has for example a GNS 430 or there is some special approval? (or chapter in AFM..)

If there is some how could I get that approval for my private airplane (hypothetical)

I know there's AMC20-4 regarding BRNAV topic and local CAA requirements but these involve topics like MEL, crew training, operational procedures. It seems to be intended for commercial operators, not GA.

Thanks a lot.

[CJ Driver]

Fandak - if there is a certified GPS installed with any particular capability - such as BRNAV - then there will be an AFM supplement for the system which lists the capabilities, limitations, and so on.

[reynoldsno1]

The overarching term to encompass all these terms is now PBN - Performance Based Navigation. There is an ICAO PBN manual that lays down the nav specs .....

[fandak]

I try to ungerstand this generally. I suppose that as a pilot I should look to the AFM to check the equipment capability. As an owner (and operator) of some small IFR aircratf when I want to have it BRNAV capable I should
- let some mainten. organization install a BRNAV certified equipment (I suppose this certification is a task of an equipment manufacturer)
- then request a local CAA to approve this installation and related changes in the AFM
Is that at least a bit right?

reynoldsno1 - ICAO PBN is a wider concept that I also try to understand. I found a simple nice presentation at PERFORMANCE BASED NAVIGATION (PBN)Version 1.0 (http://www.ecacnav.com/wbt/pbn/frames/firstwin1.htm)
But there are still many issues with the mess involving PBN and RNAV - I read in the manual that BRNAV is not the same as RNAV 5 from the concept...(I think BRNAV should change according to the manual), today's RNP10 is in fact RNAV10 and so on.

[reynoldsno1]

The main purpose of PBN is to reduce the number of nav. specs - the differentiation between RNAV & RNP is that RNP includes on board performance monitoring and alerting. The implication is that RNAV will require a higher level of ATS surveillance... or that's how I understand it.

[CJ Driver]

Fandak: Your summary is almost true, although it is actually done the other way around. That is, your chosen avionics installer prepares a design change document (which will usually be based on the manufacturer's installation materials) and submits it, along with the draft AFM supplement, to EASA for approval. When it is reviewed and approved, then they can go ahead and do the work. It would be an expensive mistake to first do the work, and then try to get it approved, in case they have got it wrong somewhere.

[fandak]

CJ Driver thank you for your explanation. :)