RNav Arrivals

[picton]

Can anyone clarify the regulations regarding RNav arrivals when the RNav STAR's are not pre programmed in the box. Eg If I was cleared to fly the RNAV 1 arrival into airfield X and discovered that the arrival was not pre programed into my FMS 1 Could I manualy construct the RNav arrival and accept the clearance or is that illegal, Or would I have to declare to ATC that I cannot accept this RNAV arrival and request an alternative. I.m asking this question relating to existing RNav procedures not the new PRnav stuff. also are the deffinative rules relating to RNav found in Pans ops if not where could I find them?

[ahramin]

Sorry can't help you on the Pans ops but in north america only an approach needs to be loaded from the database, arrivals can be pilot programmed.

[Zeffy]

ahramin: Sorry can't help you on the Pans ops but in north america only an approach needs to be loaded from the database, arrivals can be pilot programmed.

Not correct.

In the U.S., all RNAV SIDs/STARs must be extracted from the database.

The pertinent reference is AC 90-100A (http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf/0/5c94e4f44ba319a98625729c00612f37/$FILE/AC%2090-100A.pdf).


10. U.S. RNAV FLIGHT CREW OPERATING PROCEDURES.

b. General Operating Procedures. Operators and pilots should not request or file U.S. RNAV routes or procedures unless satisfying the criteria in this AC. If an aircraft not meeting these criteria receives a clearance from ATC to conduct an RNAV procedure, the pilot must advise ATC that he/she is unable to accept the clearance and request alternate instructions.

(1) The pilot should comply with any instructions or procedures identified by the manufacturer as necessary to comply with the equipment requirements of this AC.

(2) At system initialization, pilots must confirm the navigation database is current and verify the aircraft’s present position.

(3) RNAV DPs and STAR procedures must be retrieved by procedure name from the onboard navigation database and conform to the charted procedure.

(4) Whenever possible, RNAV routes should be extracted from the database in their entirety, rather than loading RNAV route waypoints from the database into the flight plan individually. Selecting and inserting individual, named fixes from the database is permitted, provided all fixes along the published route to be flown are inserted.

(5) Manual entry of waypoints using latitude/longitude or place/bearing is not permitted. Additionally, pilots must not change any RNAV DP or STAR database waypoint type from a fly-by to a fly-over or vice versa.

[L337]

Could I manually construct the RNav arrival

On my FMC I cannot manually construct a "fly over" waypoint. If you try and manually construct them, they all default to "fly by". Potentially very dangerous at a place like Hong Kong. So the rule for me in my airline is.

If it is not in the box, you cannot do it.

[Capn Bloggs]

Zeffy, I don't think you're right. The AC says you can:

Selecting and inserting individual, named fixes from the database is permitted, provided all fixes along the published route to be flown are inserted.

so if you couldn't retrieve the procedure from the DB, build it up yourself using DB waypoints.

You can't create your own waypoints.

[Zeffy]

Sorry, but this time I am quite right.

The AC takes great pains to differentiate between RNAV routes (Q-routes and T-routes) vs. RNAV procedures (SIDs/STARs).

The technique you cite is OK for manual construction of routes (airways) but is explicitly not permitted for RNAV SIDs/STARs.

RNAV SIDs/STARs must be extracted by name, from the database, period.

:)

[ahramin]

Zeffy is correct :O

Whoops my bad.

Non RNAV STARs can be pilot programmed. RNAV STARs must be retrieved from the database.

[Capn Bloggs]

Zeffy,

Yes, you are right. Sorry. I guess that's why you bolded the bit you did?:ugh:

FYI, here in Oz we can do whatever we like for RNAV waypoints (inc SIDs or STARs), but only above the MSA (below the MSA you have to use ATC or gorund navaids to permit further descent). We have to check the tracks and distances, and if we create our own waypoints each crewmember has to independently check each one. Not that I'd bother making my own waypoints for a STAR; radar vectors are much more exciting.:eek:

[ever_flying]

Can anyone tell me about the regulations in Europe?
Is it allowed to follow a RNAV SID or STAR if the procedure has not been extracted from the database but manually inserted?

[9.G]

ever_flying,
EU-OPS 1.243
(a) An operator shall ensure that an aeroplane operated in areas, or through portions of airspace, or on routes where navigation performance requirements have been specified, is certified according to these requirements, and, if required, that the Authority has granted the relevant operational approval.
(b) An operator of an aeroplane operating in areas referred to in (a) shall ensure that all contingency procedures, specified by the authority responsible for the airspace concerned, have been included in the Operations Manual.

Cheers:ok:

[ever_flying]

Actually, my question was:
You're flying in an european company (i.e. under EU-OPS) to an european airport.
Your aircraft is B-RNAV certified (let's even say P-RNAV certified).
Your company's AOC mention that you're B-RNAV approved.
Can you fly a B-RNAV SID or STAR if you manually construct this SID or STAR or dou have to extract the SID or STAR from the database?

[housecarl]

Our manuals says, The creation of new waypoints by manual entry into the RNAV system by flight crew is prohibited.

[9.G]

ever flying there's some guide lines contained in regional procedures for EU in doc 7030. I tend to agree with the previous posts that it shouldn't be used though don't really see a big problem to connect all the way points together provided they're in the database. However that's what the relevant doc says:
FLIGHT PROCEDURES (Doc 8168) - ARRIVAL AND NON-PRECISION APPROACH PROCEDURES 1 AREA NAVIGATION (RNAV) ARRIVAL AND APPROACH PROCEDURES FOR NAVIGATION SYSTEMS USING BASIC GNSS RECEIVERS
1.2.3 Navigation database
Departure and approach waypoint information is contained in a navigation database. If the navigation database does not contain the departure or approach procedure, then the basic GNSS stand-alone receiver or FMC shall not be used for these procedures.
RNAV approaches of course must be available in the box and remain unchanged in order to fly it.
Cheers.:ok:

[BOAC]

though don't really see a big problem to connect all the way points - see L337 above.

[9.G]

BOAC, nothing to see there as any of airbus do have overfly feature installed by default in the FMGC. :ok:

[BOAC]

Yep - I know that. I also know I saw no mention of Airbus in the question:ugh:

[9.G]

Hey BOAC let's skip the devil's advocate play here, shall we? Flexing the brain cells towards common goal is more useful to all of us. Talking of which one's gotta make sure the nav accuracy requirement is met ergo set 1 NM in the box as required value in case of PRNAV self-constructed arrival. :ok:

[BOAC]

So, skipping the devil's advocate play here, the answer for picton and ever_flying appears to be that no matter what you are flying, in the UK (#13) and the US(#3) you cannot.

[OzExpat]

It truly doesn't matter whether you're in the UK, USA or Timbuktoo, the elemental fact is that, if you string waypoints together from the database, the nav system is most likely going to interpret them all as fly-by. That won't be a problem unless you've got one or more fly-overs in the actual procedure and you are prepared to bet the lives of all on board on the nav system tracking tolerances.

Some Airbus systems might be an exception, but does your Ops Manual REALLY allow you to use it? :eek:

[9.G]

OE no reference in part A whatsoever I'm afraid. Here is what airbus says:
PROCEDURES

The terminal procedure (RNAV SID, RNAV STAR, RNAV TRANSITION, ...) must be loaded from the FM navigation database and checked for reasonableness, by comparing the waypoints, tracks, distances and altitude constraints (displayed on the F-PLN page), with the procedure chart.

The flight crew must not modify the procedure, that is loaded from the navigation database, unless instructed to do so by the ATC (DIR TO, radar vectoring, insertion of waypoints loaded from the navigation database).
Well there we go again typical Airbus saying lots and nothing. Basically NO but if needed can be done, blah blah... On various occasions discrepancies of different severity between the charts and the box were detected and modified to match the chart version. Is it constructing, amending or whatever? I guess depends very much on the particular situation. One thing is for sure though RNAV IAP is not ought to be modified. In case of a doubt say NO. :ok:

[Arty Fufkin]

My understanding is that you may manually construct an arrival / departure proceedure in the FMS / INS if either of the following are satisfied:

1 It is an overlay proceedure where waypoints are also specified as range and bearing from a conventional navaid. (Backed up on the needles.)

2 The proceedure is not designated PRNAV / RNP1. Or if it is, it must also state on the plate that is available in BRNAV.

Im more than willing to be put right though, the whole introduction of RNAV SIDs & STARS has lacked coherency and is still a little confusing.

[BOAC]

I certainly support that last sentence! My understanding for your 1) is that you are NOT going to plug in LNAV/RNAV and unfold the crossword page if you have 'constructed' such a procedure but that you are essentially flying raw data tracks with a map display for 'comfort'?

I once built one particular 'qualifying' SID out of either OSL or ARN (cannot recall which) and tried it in LNAV in a 737-300 'for fun' (in VMC) - it made a complete hash of it!

[Arty Fufkin]

More like allowing the aircraft to fly the procedure in RNAV / LNAV, but monitoring the raw data for "comfort" (my aircraft doesnt have a nav display.) In terms of risk, there's no diference from allowing the A/P to track a VOR radial, as long as you ensure that he raw data has primacy. Also, where those waypoints may be based on NDB radials, the GPS makes a much better job of track keeping than me and my dipping ADF.

I agree that it won't work well for all procedures, but if something is that high in technical merit it should be designated as a PRNAV procedure. And we all know that manual construction / editing of them is a no no.

[aristoclis]

So, coming back to question post #1:

For the US it is crystal clear. You may not.

Also Airbus FCOM is specific. You may not.

Europe regulations are specific for RNAV departures and approaches. You may not.

What about Europe regulations regarding RNAV (not P-RNAV) arrivals? I am not aware of any restriction. Is anybody?

[groundfloor]

ICAO says NO!

So if your state has not filed a difference to say that you can... you cannot! even if in Timbukwana...:}

[aristoclis]

Just a copy from post #13:

"FLIGHT PROCEDURES (Doc 8168) - ARRIVAL AND NON-PRECISION APPROACH PROCEDURES 1 AREA NAVIGATION (RNAV) ARRIVAL AND APPROACH PROCEDURES FOR NAVIGATION SYSTEMS USING BASIC GNSS RECEIVERS
1.2.3 Navigation database
Departure and approach waypoint information is contained in a navigation database. If the navigation database does not contain the departure or approach procedure, then the basic GNSS stand-alone receiver or FMC shall not be used for these procedures."

So as I said, ICAO (so Europe and Timbukwana included) does not allow to use FMC if departure or approach procedure is not in the data base. What about arrivals?

[9.G]

no restrictions on BRNAV. In all the set ups concerning the RNAV operation there are several subdivisions like supported by ground facilities, not supported and GPS required. No regs regarding GPS stand alone RNAV yet as they haven't been developed broadly nor approved. :ok:

[LLLK]

There are no restrictions on B-RNAV because B-RNAV was not designed for use in terminal areas - B-RNAV STARS should be simple with no more than 4 waypoints per 100 track miles and should always be well above MSA. So you can probably get away with manual entry.

However it would be unwise to try and manually build a SID or a STAR for two reasons:

1. There is the question of fly-over and fly-by waypoints, but more importantly, there is the question of path terminators - these are the codes that tell the FMS how to fly each leg - course to altitude, direct to fix, track to fix, radius to fix, course to intercept etc etc - I don't think that any FMS provides the pilot with the means of inserting these codes. In the more complex SIDs the procedure design is based upon the use of particular path terminator codes for particular legs so you wouldn't want to get it wrong.

2. There are still a large number of RNAV SIDs and STARs published by some States in Europe (and perhaps elsewhere) where it is not clear what approval is required. Some of these look a little too complex or close to terrain to be BRNAV even though there is no clear statement of a P-RNAV requirement.

[alexban]

For the 737 :
' Due to potentially indequate terrain clearance,manual waypoint entry should not be accomplished for RNAV or GPS approaches, nor should this method be used with VNAV after the FAF.'

[9.G]

alexban, the subject here is departure or arrivals PRNAV not the RNAV APPROACH which is similar yet requires some additional considerations. To clear most of doubts here is the link http://www.ecacnav.com/downloads/PRNAV.mpg
a reference to manual entry is made as well. Basically before any operator uses PRNAV procedures it must obtain approval from the relevant authority. Crews must be trained and documents updated in terms of SOPs, contingency procedures etc. :ok: