RNAV approaches

[Voel]

Did a course on RNAV approaches last year, but it concentrated mostly on the flying part. Does anybody have any SOP's that adresses the ATC part (procedures) for the RNAV approaches? Many thanks

Voel

[Goldfish Jack]

HI there

try www.atns.co.za - they have a link there for GNSS/RNAV trials. Got some info there and some links for you to look at.

If you need more info dont write to Herman (the contact name of the website) he has left - long story - dont ask!!!! but you can direct your queries to [email protected]

Hope it helps

[Voel]

Hi Fish, working very closely with Herman. I know his story, about leaving ATNS. We were (are) part of the Gromet trials, but it concentrates only on flying the RNAV approaches. We still lack any ATC porcedures, i.e. holding, separations etc. What does ATC do when you have one acft for the RNAV approach, the other for an ILS and the third a visual. I can't find any documentation yet on ATC procedures.

[126,7]

What does ATC do when you have one acft for the RNAV approach, the other for an ILS and the third a visual. I can't find any documentation yet on ATC procedures.

ATC will hopefully ensure seperation :}

[Voel]

Separation based on what??? Time, distance, vertical, horizontal, geographical???Remember we are in a procedural environment, that means no radar. That makes life in ATC a bit more complicated.

[DirtyPierre]

Voel,

By RNAV approaches do you mean RNP-AR approaches using the FMS and onboard nav systems of the aircraft to a standard of RNP 0.3? These are actually different to the current RNAV instrument approach using the GNSS/GPS that are common into most airfields in Oz.

In Oz we are about to start a major trial using RNP Approaches into Brisbane, Cairns, Coolangatta, Townsville, after RNP approach trials have been conducted at Canberra and also Queenstown in NZ.

At this stage the separation standards are the current standards. So approach radar in Oz uses 3nm, 1000ft, etc. Procedurally, you use your current procedural sep. standards for GPS/GNSS (which would be big in the terminal environment).

ICAO has yet to determine if special sep. standards can be applied to RNP 0.3.

Hope this helps.

Dick N Cider our guru on these sort of things in Brisbane might be able to explain in more detail. (Come in anytime now DnC).

[NudgingSteel]

I'd guess the separations used would be the same as for the current procedural approaches - assuming a non-radar enviroment, then you're clearing traffic for an approach from a particular fix or beacon. Where I used to work there were a couple of different IFR procedural approaches for each runway, but essentially we would clear traffic to leave the minimum holding level to fly the approach, and descend subsequent inbounds to 1000' above the go-around altitude until the first one had landed. At that point the next one is cleared for the procedure, and so on. As you're keeping vertical separation it effectively doesn't matter what track the aircraft takes once it has left the fix, as you can't see it anyway! Procedurally you can't really expedite traffic, at least in the UK.

[Voel]

Tks guys, u're great. Your comments are much appreciated. If ICAO has not developed something yet on ATC procedures, we will not start duplicating it when we develop our own procedures?

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

Nudgingsteel.. . Wow, things much the same as when I did procedural approach abroad and also at Kidlington about 35 years ago. Only way to shift the traffic was by step-down using vertical sepn.

I can't see how anything can beat radar vectoring in a busy TMA to achieve maximum runway utilisation, but I watch with interest!

[BDiONU]

Tks guys, u're great. Your comments are much appreciated. If ICAO has not developed something yet on ATC procedures, we will not start duplicating it when we develop our own procedures?
Have a look at the eurocontrol site (http://elearning.eurocontrol.int/IANS/NAV/prnav/prnav_free_access/firstwin.htm)

BD