PDA

View Full Version : BRNAV v. RNP-5


cf6-80c2b5f
24th Sep 2010, 10:42
Is there a difference between BRNAV and RNP-5.

I have seen synonymous references to BRNAV/RNP-5, but a fellow crew member insists that they are not the same thing. Is it just a matter of semantics? (e.g., both imply a statement of minimum navigation performance)

Thanks.

dv8
24th Sep 2010, 10:52
From my Performance based Navigation Manual

European BRNAV and Middle East Region RNP-5 may be considered equivalent to the ICAO RNAV 5 specification.

cf6-80c2b5f
24th Sep 2010, 11:18
Thanks. Of all places, I found this on Wikipedia:

Required navigation performance (RNP) is a type of performance-based navigation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Performance-based_navigation) (PBN) that allows an aircraft to fly a specific path between two 3-dimensionally defined points in space. RNAV (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Area_navigation) and RNP systems are fundamentally similar. The key difference between them is the requirement for on-board performance monitoring and alerting. A navigation specification that includes a requirement for on-board navigation performance monitoring and alerting is referred to as an RNP specification. One not having such a requirement is referred to as an RNAV specification.

Based on this, can I presume that if you are RNP-5 certified you are also certified to operate in BRNAV airspace?

FE Hoppy
24th Sep 2010, 11:59
Go here (http://pbnwbt.ecacnav.com/pbn_package_site/firstwin1.htm)

It's free, It's from the horses mouth and it will take about 3 hours to complete.

cf6-80c2b5f
24th Sep 2010, 12:49
Thanks. It looks like useful information.

Nigd3
24th Sep 2010, 16:48
Also have a look on the link below

EUROCONTROL Navigation Domain - PBN (http://www.ecacnav.com/PBN)

cf6-80c2b5f
25th Sep 2010, 03:08
Not to offend ICAO, but it seems to me that, no sooner than the time everyone understands what is required to operate in a particular airspace or state, ICAO decides to scrap that standard and create an entirely new one (from MNPS to RNP to PBN). Combine that with the fact that each state has the discretion to deviate from the ICAO standards and it becomes even more confusing and frustrating.

FE Hoppy
26th Sep 2010, 20:06
We cant agree on a common electrical plug so how the hell are we going to agree on Navigation standards? PBN was supposed to fix the problems that came with the incomplete definitions used in RNP but ICAO choose to allow national variations in PBN so the same problems will still exist. You highlight the real problem in that how on earth are the operators supposed to follow all the changes.

Microburst2002
27th Sep 2010, 07:14
In the old days, if you had the required equipment you could fly in a given airspace. This was specified in ICAO annexes and regional supplementary procedures, etc... This is, I understand, equipment based navigation.

Nowadays, if your equipment, whatever equipment you have as long as it is approved, meets the required navigation performance of a given airspace, then you can fly in it. This is, as opposed to the above, performance based navigation.

The NAT MNPS is a similar thing, a precursor of RNAV-RNP.

The implementation of RNAV-RNP is being progressive. It started with BRNAV, later with PRNAV. But I thought that these would both superseded by RNAV-RNP with RNP 5 and RNP 1.

But who cares! The goddamned FMS will get us where we want no matter what ICAO docs, leaflets etc they may print. I am going to drown in a sea of paper, aaaaaaaaagh

FE Hoppy
27th Sep 2010, 09:04
In the old days, if you had the required equipment you could fly in a given airspace. This was specified in ICAO annexes and regional supplementary procedures, etc... This is, I understand, equipment based navigation.

Nowadays, if your equipment, whatever equipment you have as long as it is approved, meets the required navigation performance of a given airspace, then you can fly in it. This is, as opposed to the above, performance based navigation.

The NAT MNPS is a similar thing, a precursor of RNAV-RNP.

The implementation of RNAV-RNP is being progressive. It started with BRNAV, later with PRNAV. But I thought that these would both superseded by RNAV-RNP with RNP 5 and RNP 1.

But who cares! The goddamned FMS will get us where we want no matter what ICAO docs, leaflets etc they may print. I am going to drown in a sea of paper, aaaaaaaaagh

Not quite.
ICAO RNP was equipment accuracy based but PBN includes procedures.
EU BRNAV and PRNAV will eventually become RNAV - 1 and RNAV - 5. Note they are not RNP specifications as they do not need onboard performance monitoring and allerting.

The RNAV 1 specification shows that any of the following navigation sensors can meet its performance requirements: GNSS or DME/DME/IRU or DME/DME.
However, a limited DME infrastructure or GNSS policy may lead the authorities to impose specific navigation sensor requirements for an RNAV 1 specification in that State.
Example:
State A's AlP could stipulate GNSS as a requirement for its RNAV 1specification because State A only has GNSS available in its navaid infrastructure.
State B's AlP could require DME/DME/IRU for its RNAV 1 specification (policy decision to not allow GNSS).
Each of these navigation specifications would be implemented as an RNAV 1 application.
However, aircraft equipped only with GNSS and approved for the RNAV 1 specification in State A would not be approved to operate in State B.

Microburst2002
2nd Oct 2010, 15:54
Hi FE

Looks like you are quite knowledgeable about this always confusing matter.

I have seen plates with RNAV 1 or RNAV 5 written as well as RNP 1 and RNP 5.

I thought it was the same concept but now I learn it is not.

Where can I find more info about all that?
I mean good, understandable info, if it exists

many thanks

FE Hoppy
2nd Oct 2010, 20:19
You could pay for our Performance Based Navigation course (you would get it thrown in with a type rating if you did it with us) or you can work through the link I gave above. I would also suggest reading the ICAO PBN doc if you can get hold of it. It's boring but it's got everything you need to know in there.

Some simple stuff that might help:

An RNP specification includes a requirement for on-board self-contained performance monitoring and alerting. RNAV does not.

There are no RNAV final approaches in the new specifications they are either RNP APRCH or RNP AR APRCH.

RNAV arrivals will not go beyond the FAF.

There is an anomaly in that RNP 10 will not be re-named. It is however not an RNP specification it is RNAV (no monitoring and alerting required). They decided not to re-name it simply on cost grounds!

RNP:
RNP 4 For oceanic and remote continental navigation application

RNP 2 Basic-RNP 1, Advanced-RNP 1, RNP APCH, RNP AR APCH For various phases of flight. (advanced RNP 1doesn't exist yet).

RNP with additional requirements TBD (eg 3D, 4D)

RNAV:
RNAV 10 (RNP 10) For oceanic and remote continental navigation applications

RNAV 5, RNAV 2, RNAV1 For en-route and terminal navigation applications


In the past, the United States and member States of the European Civil Aviation Conference (ECAC) used regional RNAV specifications with different designators.

The ECAC applications (P-RNAV and B-RNAV) will continue to be used only within those States.

Over time, ECAC RNAV applications will migrate towards the international navigation specifications of RNAV 1 and RNAV 5.


The United States migrated from the USRNAV Types A and B to the RNAV 1 specification in March 2007.