FlightPathOBN:
ICAO uses 9905 which is virtually the same for the approach design, but different in that it has a level section (SOC) for the missed approach surface, 8260.52 does not...
It doesn't? What would you call Section 1a then?
Some agencies such as NavCanada, CASA, and others have allowed the use of 8260.52, with an exemption, mostly keeping the RNP at the same level as approach, not jumping to RNP 1 for the missed. (which frequently catches the tower, and drives the DA even higher)
8260.52 provides the option to begin the MAS with the same RNP as final to avoid that tower. Those are all those charts annotated "Missed approach requires RNP less than 1.0."
We were trying to get WestJet certified to use the Alaska Airlines RNP procedure into PSP, which as you know, is a custom RNP criteria... There is a public RNP into PSP, but last I heard, ATC would not clear anyone to use it, but that may have changed.
The Alaska special is not 8260.52 compliant, as are many of their State of Alaska specials. AFS-460 has granted them a deviation from criteria based on fleet performance. I doubt AFS-470 would permit that for another operator. So far as the public procedures go, ATC sometimes balk when the weather is good, but not when one of those winter rain storms makes the 13R RNP AR the only game in town.
The reason we were told by the FAA why foreign carriers cannot, is that the US airports are not ICAO certified, and in accordance with the Chicago Convention of 1944, PSP or whichever airport, would have to be ICAO certified....
Seems odd, but that is what we were told...
Sounds like a old wives tail.
