Japanese Quake and the fall out for RNAVs
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: NSW
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Japanese Quake and the fall out for RNAVs
Hi all. as you will no doubt be aware, Japan has suffered significantly recently. Upon reading one news story today, I learned that the main Japanese Island is said to have moved 2.4m from it's original location. Pretty significant for such a large mass of land to move so far.
I was just wondering what implications this now has on Aviation. I know this is most definately not their immediate concern over there however, it does pose some interesting questions for the likes of us to ponder.
I'm not sure how or if this is enough of a movement for a review to be required nation wide over there. So if anyone has any thoughts on that please feel free to comment. I'm thinking that for RNAV apporaches that there maybe some implications for location of waypoints etc. Also for those that opperate aircraft with Inertial Reference Systems (IRS), there miay be some issues with exact locations on bays etc.
Is 2.4m enough of a move to put all this into review?
regards,
Bort.
I was just wondering what implications this now has on Aviation. I know this is most definately not their immediate concern over there however, it does pose some interesting questions for the likes of us to ponder.
I'm not sure how or if this is enough of a movement for a review to be required nation wide over there. So if anyone has any thoughts on that please feel free to comment. I'm thinking that for RNAV apporaches that there maybe some implications for location of waypoints etc. Also for those that opperate aircraft with Inertial Reference Systems (IRS), there miay be some issues with exact locations on bays etc.
Is 2.4m enough of a move to put all this into review?
regards,
Bort.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the moon
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree Bloggs. It's not going to effect any of the RNAV wpt's.
However the bay locations for IRS/INS will eventually get changed, I can't see there being any major inaccuracies/problems because of 2.4 mtrs.
However the bay locations for IRS/INS will eventually get changed, I can't see there being any major inaccuracies/problems because of 2.4 mtrs.
Sprucegoose
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Hughes Point, where life is great! Was also resident on page 13, but now I'm lost in Cyberspace....
Age: 59
Posts: 3,485
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Every time I land I'd swear the ground just shifted 2.4 metres straight up!
RNAV is here to stay
I would be more concerned with the stuff supposedly attached to the ground for calibration and serviceability, ILS, LOC or VOR.
The beauty with RNAV is that it does not rely on NAV aids attached to the terra not so firma. So opposite to your conjecture it would actually improve the case for RNAV, as the RNAV approaches are unaffected by ground equipment.
Land movement under the approach is the same issue no matter what sensor is used for an approach.
Normal RNP AR approaches would not be affected as the DA is such that it is slightly higher than CAT 1 and a few meters shift is insignificant (it still does better than VOR!) Differential approaches are a different animal and I would suspect have similar calibration and survey issues to CAT 2 and 3 ILS.
The beauty with RNAV is that it does not rely on NAV aids attached to the terra not so firma. So opposite to your conjecture it would actually improve the case for RNAV, as the RNAV approaches are unaffected by ground equipment.
Land movement under the approach is the same issue no matter what sensor is used for an approach.
Normal RNP AR approaches would not be affected as the DA is such that it is slightly higher than CAT 1 and a few meters shift is insignificant (it still does better than VOR!) Differential approaches are a different animal and I would suspect have similar calibration and survey issues to CAT 2 and 3 ILS.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
.............. and if at the minima there is still a runway in view, albeit a couple of feet in some direction, which may be left right or fwd/back of your track, I reckon you would hardly notice anyway.
in a big jet with a crosswind the view of the centreline can be many feet either side of you so how would you tell?
Forkie would be happy
in a big jet with a crosswind the view of the centreline can be many feet either side of you so how would you tell?
Forkie would be happy
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 344
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Earth tilted?
Some conjecture in the media that the Earths axis actually shifted by 4 degrees. Some of you maths genius types out there might be able to confirm this by relating the 2.4 meter shift on the Japanese coast to a shift in the axis. Its a bit over my head but certainly a worry if there is any truth to it.
Groggy
Groggy
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: I prefer to remain north of a direct line BNE-ADL
Age: 49
Posts: 1,286
Likes: 0
Received 33 Likes
on
10 Posts
I would not even bother if it was a 5m shift the RNP approaches can end you up at least a dot high and regularly around 10-15metres left or right of centreline at minima (around 300')
It is not an issue.
It is not an issue.
