Light jets to be banned from some UK airspace?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Island of Aphrodite
Age: 75
Posts: 530
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is not hard to get PRNAV approval for a N registered aircraft. I got it for me and my TwinCom last year following the instructions (slightly amended) in the RNAV Manual produced by Vasa Babic for PPL/IR Europe.
BD
BD
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: I wouldn't know.
Posts: 4,499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
According to garmin the GTN series is EASA approved for PRNAV right out of the box and installation is just a minor mod. G1000 installations in light jets either are already PRNAV/RVSM approved right form the OEM or can be for not much hassle.
ECON cruise, LR cruise...
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: MIRSI hold - give or take...
Age: 52
Posts: 568
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hardly "banning" them, is it? Sure, for some itbwould not be worth the cost, but that is a personal/corporate decision.
If we need tobsqueeze in more and more aircraft in the same piece of sky, RNP will increase, no doubt about it. Remember when they wanted us all to have these new-fangled "transponders" on board and how that would kill off GA...
If you are being priced out of operation, then I'm truly sorry to hear that, but we all know what direction the market is heading. If your budget says Global6000, you have a lot more room to soak up these things than if your budget says light twin. Sad, but true.
If we need tobsqueeze in more and more aircraft in the same piece of sky, RNP will increase, no doubt about it. Remember when they wanted us all to have these new-fangled "transponders" on board and how that would kill off GA...
If you are being priced out of operation, then I'm truly sorry to hear that, but we all know what direction the market is heading. If your budget says Global6000, you have a lot more room to soak up these things than if your budget says light twin. Sad, but true.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: London
Posts: 307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The cost of equipment isn't the problem - any reasonably modern GPS in a light aircraft can do RNAV-0.3. The medium-aged business jet and TP fleet will be much more expensive to update...
The issue is operator approval. All the EASA regs are around AOC-type operations, with ops manuals, route manuals, SOPs etc., and the process and cost to obtain operator approval for RNP could be prohibitive for a private operator.
For the FAA, a private pilot/operator can self-study and send a simple letter to the FAA, and will get a letter of approval. Similar for a corporate operator under FAR 91. In EASA-Land, I rather suspect that it wil require either ATPL theory passed or an extra course (remember the high-performance aircraft nonsense?), and high charges by the authority for that letter
And we are talking about RNAV-1.0 for en-route and terminal, something which is very simple, not RNP approaches, which are a completely different kettle of fish.
The issue is operator approval. All the EASA regs are around AOC-type operations, with ops manuals, route manuals, SOPs etc., and the process and cost to obtain operator approval for RNP could be prohibitive for a private operator.
For the FAA, a private pilot/operator can self-study and send a simple letter to the FAA, and will get a letter of approval. Similar for a corporate operator under FAR 91. In EASA-Land, I rather suspect that it wil require either ATPL theory passed or an extra course (remember the high-performance aircraft nonsense?), and high charges by the authority for that letter
And we are talking about RNAV-1.0 for en-route and terminal, something which is very simple, not RNP approaches, which are a completely different kettle of fish.
