aterpster wrote:
What concerns me is that the "greenies" have kidnapped the U.S. RNP AR program. The concept a few years ago was "RNAV everywhere and RNP AR only where needed." Now, it has become a vehicle where very complex equipment is required to save a few pounds of jet fuel on each approach. Unless abated this will place the non-RNP AR operators (the majority of business aviation) at an inappropriate and unfair disadvantage. And, at airports without terrain or serious obstacle issues the use of VNAV and RF legs on a conventional RNAV platform will provide the "green solution" without requiring all the conditions and restriction imposed by RNP AR. But, the FAA thus far has been resistive to what I call RNP AR overlays with conventional state-of-the-art RNAV. For example, they won't permit non AR state-of-the art RNAV to perform RF legs in the final approach segment or within two miles of the FAF. That, plain and simple, is regressive policy.
You have a lot of interesting information. A few questions:
How is that a regressive policy? Have they allowed that operation in the past and they are now regressively retracting it?
How is this this an unfair policy toward business operators?
It seems to me that RNP started out as a way for Alaska Airlines to get into Juneau and Sitka more often. Now it's a "Greenie" method to trash BizAv?