Gbas Cat Iii

[N380UA]

Hi all

Did anyone get the latest FAA sentiments on GBAS ops. beyond CAT I? I heard that the agency is now distancing itself from CAT II/III ops.. If someone got anything on paper (electronically of course), I’d appreciate a copy.

cheers

[Scott Voigt]

GBAS ops?????

I haven't heard this term. If you are talking about WAAS and GPS then I do understand. WAAS is going to allow for almost cat 1 capability approaches. For cat II and cat III we will be using LAAS...

regards

[N380UA]

Right, GBAS is the European term for LAAS; meaning Ground Based Augmentation System. I suppose that the Europeans will very much be depending on the FAA as to the certification and operation.
Cheers.

[Spitoon]

N380UA, don't know why you think that Europeans need the assistance of the FAA.

But to be serious, on the topic of GPS based procedures, there are wide differences of opinion in Europe. Although some countries are redesigning their TMAs (or should I call them TCAs?) so that it's almost impossible to fly them without some form of GPS input others are less keen. Here in the UK all trials and operational use of RNAV procedures have recently been stopped. Details are here (http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/ATS009.pdf).

Although RNAV does not necessarily mean GPS I hear on the grapevine that this was what was causing concern.

[Findo]

Perhaps permanent downgrading to non military users due changed circumstances ?

[Scott Voigt]

N380UA;

Ahhhhh, I see. As far as I know WAAS is about ready to be on line, and LAAS is plodding through it's testing for both the ground unit and the avionics. I do know that they were doing some testing here at DFW not to long ago. I expect that the FAA will continue with it since they would LOVE to get out of the ground based stuff as soon as they can, and this will allow them to have one box ( sort of ) vrs. many boxes for ILS's... It will in the long run save the FAA money, the airport money and keep things moving since there shouldn't be any ILS critical areas anymore either with LAAS...

regards

[N380UA]

Thanks all

The same economical thought does apply in Europe as well. The question why it is FAA dependant is due to the R&D which potential providers would have to commit to in order to progress the systems evolution. Should the FAA not consider CAT III ops., providers may not see the need to continue the development to CAT III. With a system such as GBAS or LAAS at it were, a full stop at CAT I ops would be a shame IMHO.
An interesting development to follow on in the next few years.
Cheers.

[Iron City]

WRT ATSN 9 it looks like only specific RNAV procedures using LAAS/GBAS are allowed, all others held in abeyance.

Last time I looked WAAS was coming along. as was certification and it would get accuracies good enough for nonprecision approaches and possibly in some cases for CAT I. Initial operational capability next year. The LAAS (or the US name for GBAS) was going to take a few more years.

If new avionics are required the current economic climate for airlines would delay their equipage unless there is some kind of economic benefit to the airlines. GA will resist reequiping just on general principals. But unless someone(s) can agree on some international standards I can't see anybody taking the plunge to build and certify the avionics, much less anybody buying them.

If the benefit of LAAS/GBAS is being able to get precision approaches into multiple runway ends without spending millions for rearranging the landscape and installing/maintaining lots of ground equipment maybe the people with the most to gain are the ones going into smaller or second tier airports that don't qualify for the whole ILS treatment.

In any case, the accuracy is there, but what is unclear is the necessary availability of signals when and where needed. There has been a certain amount of concern about jamming, spoofing, and interference. Could make it doubly necessary to really know what broadband and 3gen cell phones really do.

[N380UA]

Iron et-al

Airbus and now Boeing too are actually building airborne equipment as far as I know Airbus is near certification as well. Other, more avionics oriented companies such as Honeywell are contemplating whether or not to enter the airborne market.

The general consent is that LAAS/GBAS is, however on the long run, economical beneficial to carriers. But it’s a long stretch, we're talking 10-15 years. Also, the air nav providers obviously see the cash benefit.

Spoofing is, I guess an option but would be difficult for a non military/government entity to do. I think much more plausible would be jamming. It’s cheap, easy and over a period of time highly effective, though obviously we shouldn’t discuss any more of those options on a public board.