Virgin - RNP Approaches Queenstown?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Australia
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Virgin - RNP Approaches Queenstown?
Do Virgin have approval for RNP arrivals at Queenstown NZ?
I read they were to have approval by the end of 2012 - we're nearly there.
I read they were to have approval by the end of 2012 - we're nearly there.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: NZ
Posts: 656
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mt Cook does RNP0.3 approaches with it's averagely equipped ATR72-500's, so Virgin should be able to match that.
They'll need RNP-AR approval to do RNP0.11
As of 15NOV, Queenstown ( & Invercargill ) was designated PBN airspace requiring RNP1.0 for RNAV STAR & SID procedures. The STAR's & SID's extend beyond the 30nm transition for enroute & terminal modes.
Big delays and holding if you want to get in there IFR without PBN equipment.
S2k
They'll need RNP-AR approval to do RNP0.11
As of 15NOV, Queenstown ( & Invercargill ) was designated PBN airspace requiring RNP1.0 for RNAV STAR & SID procedures. The STAR's & SID's extend beyond the 30nm transition for enroute & terminal modes.
Big delays and holding if you want to get in there IFR without PBN equipment.
S2k
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: At home
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The end goal for VANZ is RNP 0.1 but that is stage 3. Need 30 vmc approaches of RNP AR, then 300 more to a higher minima than the 0.1.(3000ft or something like that). Once these proving flights are done they will be granted approval for 0.1 minima.
Like Sqwark said the RNP 0.3 approach is able to be flown by virgin but the GNSS and AR are completely different in how they are designed and flown, not to mention the equipment required that an ATR doesn't have.
Like Sqwark said the RNP 0.3 approach is able to be flown by virgin but the GNSS and AR are completely different in how they are designed and flown, not to mention the equipment required that an ATR doesn't have.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Vanz actually have an rnp-ar approval to .1 on the aoc now, not .3... .albeit .1 in vmc initially. Then phase 2 allows down to .3 in imc basically to the faf.
Correct need to do 30 rnp-ar approaches in vmc. These should be completed by feb 2013 all going well.
Squark, are you guys doing the rnav approaches or the rnp-ar approaches? Do you guys have inboard monitoring in the atr?
Correct need to do 30 rnp-ar approaches in vmc. These should be completed by feb 2013 all going well.
Squark, are you guys doing the rnav approaches or the rnp-ar approaches? Do you guys have inboard monitoring in the atr?
Last edited by always inverted; 3rd Dec 2012 at 09:33.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote...
Like Sqwark said the RNP 0.3 approach is able to be flown by virgin but the GNSS and AR are completely different in how they are designed and flown, not to mention the equipment required that an ATR doesn't have.
Not technically correct,
The GNSS approaches are able to be flown now and .3 is manually set in the box just as it is in any RNAV/GNSS approach but the RNP-AR approaches are different in that the rnp-ar has a manually set 125' vertical rnp value as well as the auto set .1 lateral rnp and requires operator approval and also includes an onboard monitoring system as part of the process- amongst other requirements, which is what we have so we can currently do the ar approach down to .1 but in VMC, the data from 10000' to minima is captured and retrieved from the box an then will be sent to caa as part of the process for the first 30.
If you check the charts the GNSS approaches have straight legs not radius to fix legs like the RNP-AR approaches, the ZQN GNSS approaches require a circle to land from minima, just like the BRAVO and the CHARLIE VOR approaches, the RNP-AR does not.
Like Sqwark said the RNP 0.3 approach is able to be flown by virgin but the GNSS and AR are completely different in how they are designed and flown, not to mention the equipment required that an ATR doesn't have.
Not technically correct,
The GNSS approaches are able to be flown now and .3 is manually set in the box just as it is in any RNAV/GNSS approach but the RNP-AR approaches are different in that the rnp-ar has a manually set 125' vertical rnp value as well as the auto set .1 lateral rnp and requires operator approval and also includes an onboard monitoring system as part of the process- amongst other requirements, which is what we have so we can currently do the ar approach down to .1 but in VMC, the data from 10000' to minima is captured and retrieved from the box an then will be sent to caa as part of the process for the first 30.
If you check the charts the GNSS approaches have straight legs not radius to fix legs like the RNP-AR approaches, the ZQN GNSS approaches require a circle to land from minima, just like the BRAVO and the CHARLIE VOR approaches, the RNP-AR does not.
Last edited by always inverted; 3rd Dec 2012 at 12:26.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: NZ
Posts: 656
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Squark, are you guys doing the rnav approaches or the rnp-ar approaches? Do you guys have inboard monitoring in the atr?
Our HT1000 GNSS boxes are coded for auto selection of 0.3 in app mode.
S2k
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah that's what I thought Nath. said on the rnp course I did a few weeks back, sounds like a cock up. Something about its not std equipment to provide rnp capability, but we can option it, oh and it hasn't been tested or something.
Heading in there this week...:
Heading in there this week...:
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is there a mod to the FMC to set the 125' vertical RNP limit for the RNP-AR? The standard B737NG FMC has no facility to monitor vertical ANP deviation.
Last edited by Jet Man; 5th Dec 2012 at 19:02. Reason: spelling
