PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Approach Climb Gradient vs EOSID
View Single Post
Old 6th April 2011 | 00:12
  #110 (permalink)  
Zeffy
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Feb 2006
: ATPL
Posts: 490
Likes: 15
From: USA
KBDL RNAV (RNP) 15, why is there a wingspan limitation. I'm based there and it escapes me.


Unlike an ILS, an airplane flying an RNP approach may encounter an RF leg in the final.

The RF leg may require significant bank angle. (Not the case for this approach, but the issue remains applicable.)

The "down wing" on large airplanes can extend below the normal gear height. So appropriate allowances must be made.

Per Appendix 1 in the 8260.52, the assumptions are:

Semi-span for narrow body fixed at 68
Semi-span for wide body fixed at 131
Because the BDL procedure is restricted to Cat C aircraft, the designer also had to note that the approach was designed using narrow-body geometries. (2 X 68' = 136').

Hope you can win at least a few beer-bets with that bit of arcana, gf

"Amaze your friends !"
Zeffy is offline  
Reply