Jeppesens/Circling minima

[BOAC]

Having a bit of a brain scratch here . Set of Jepps for JAROPS airline. Operating into Newfi. I have trawled through the Jepp Master book and I cannot find the answer as to whether the Jepp Circling Minima in Newfi are based on JAROPS radii or on Terps radii.

Perhaps someone from the colonies ( ) could quote me the Canadian Cicling Minima at YDF from their plates which might give me a clue?

[omnidirectional737]

Doesn't it say it on the bottom left hand corner of the plate? i.e PANS OPS or TERPS.

[BOAC]

I am at home at the moment and the answer is no on the copies I have in front of me, but they are not the aircraft plates.

[Zeffy]

Perhaps someone from the colonies ( ) could quote me the Canadian Cicling Minima at YDF from their plates which might give me a clue?

Over the past few years worth of updates, Jeppesen has been been placing a little vertical note on the lower left corner of the chart indicating TERPS or PANS OPS.

For charts without that notation but with circling minima, the alternative clue is revealed in the speed column -- i.e., "90-120-140-165" = TERPS

"100-135-180-205" = PANS OPS.

YDF is TERPS (per the speeds) -- the notation in the lower left corner is absent. (Aren't all Canadian procedures drawn to TERPS?)

[BOAC]

Thanks for that, Zeffy - as I say, my 'home' plates have nothing. I'm stuck in a 2002 time warp . I'll look next time I get in the a/c.

Anyone confirm the circling at YDF (on TERPS) please?

[Zeffy]

Previously answered, sir:

YDF is TERPS (per the speeds)

[BOAC]

It was the numbers I need!

[Zeffy]

My apologies, BOAC -- I misunderstood the inquiry.



Cat A/B = 660' (588') 1-3/4
Cat C = 680' (608') 2
Cat D = 820' (748') 2-1/4

[BOAC]

Thanks zeffy - badly phrased post on my part . Those are the numbers on my 'domestic' charts too and I'll have a look at the a/c set tomorrow.

I am aware of CAA FODCOM 13/2003 btw.

[keep_pushing]

There is scope for much embarrassment if you are using Jeppesen charts, as some will have a JAA/PANS OPS designation on the approach chart despite the fact that the defined area for circling is based on TERPS criteria (Greece is the obvious example). Jepps convert TERPS circling minima (visibility and cloud base) to JAA/PANS-OPS standards (including adding 100 feet), but the defined area remains as published by the state.
This means that although the chart in your hand says JAA and not TERPS, you can only circle to 1.7/2.3 miles. Be careful!

[BOAC]

Interesting! I have just looked at the latest Jepp YDF charts (10/2006) and they have NO denomination as to PANS or Terps. Still puzzled. The circling APPEARS to be that of TERPS but it is difficult to see whether the figures would actually change for PANSOPS (4.2nm).

[Zeffy]

keep_pushing

There is scope for much embarrassment if you are using Jeppesen charts, as some will have a JAA/PANS OPS designation on the approach chart despite the fact that the defined area for circling is based on TERPS criteria (Greece is the obvious example). Jepps convert TERPS circling minima (visibility and cloud base) to JAA/PANS-OPS standards (including adding 100 feet), but the defined area remains as published by the state.
This means that although the chart in your hand says JAA and not TERPS, you can only circle to 1.7/2.3 miles. Be careful!

Could you please cite the basis and some examples for the above assertion?

With several Jeppesen charts in front of me, both the max circling speeds (100-135-180-205) and the little vertical notes indicate that each of the procedures was designed to PANS-OPS criteria.

[keep_pushing]

The foremost example (for those flying in Europe at least) is Greece. If you have a set of Jeppesens, take a look at the ATC section of the text manual. Here you will find details, taken from the respective state’s AIP, of the areas in which each state is non-ICAO (PANS-OPS) compliant. Under Greece you will see that the state has declared that its circling procedures are calculated in accordance with TERPS criteria. There is even a helpful diagram detailing the 1.7/2.3nm defined areas. There are other non-compliant states; Israel was at one point and may still be, but my present Jepps. do not cover Israel.
The danger lies in the fact that the relevant airfield approach charts containing circling minima have a JAA/PANS-OPS designation by the minima box and yet no warning that the defined area for circling is not to PANS-OPS standard.

[Zeffy]

If you have a set of Jeppesens, take a look at the ATC section of the text manual. Here you will find details, taken from the respective state’s AIP, of the areas in which each state is non-ICAO (PANS-OPS) compliant. Under Greece you will see that the state has declared that its circling procedures are calculated in accordance with TERPS criteria. There is even a helpful diagram detailing the 1.7/2.3nm defined areas.

OK -- found a reference in the Greece ATC pages, "For instrument approach procedures showing OCLs circling criteria are based on United States Standards for Terminal Procedures (TERPS)" [emphasis mine]

But also, in the Introduction pages (p-115a), Jeppesen states that, "Different design standards may be applied for the approach procedure than for the circling areas. In those exceptional cases, an additional label in the heading of the circling minimums box will indicate the criteria which have been applied for the construction of the circling area."

The page goes on to provide an example of a circling minimums box with (TERPS) in parentheses and the maximum TERPS maneuvering speeds 90-120-140-165.

A cursory inspection of a number of current Jeppesen charts for airports in Greece (e.g., LGIO, LGKO) reveals no special circling minima box -- are you saying that those airports should have the special box noted above?

[keep_pushing]

Zeffy: you are quite correct; the absence of a warning box should indicate that circling procedures have been constructed using the same criteria as the IAPs. Where it gets more complicated is on the ATC pages, which refer to a shown table which isn’t. I guess that this is simply a formatting issue - or does the circling diagram included later refer to all circling or only where an OCL is presented? More confusing is that in the three decades that I have been operating into Greece, none of the circling heights have, to the best of my memory, been altered on change from OCL to OCH/A. That does not mean that I would not be happy to accept that my original assertion was mistaken.
The definitive answer must of course come from the Helenic AIP. Sadly, I can only find an online version in the Greek language and as nearly forty years has passed since I studied Greek I can offer no more.

[tubby linton]

BOAC if I had a problem such as this I would contact my route planning department and ask them, as they should have studied the operation before you launch.If they have not done this I would certainly CHIRP the matter. I am surprised that you are having to resort to an internet forum for this problem. Jep normally provide a separate minima page (-9x? )with Jar minima on when there is a difference in the way the chart has been compiled or they can even provide airline tailored charts.

[bobs61]

As someone has raised the thorny topic of conflict between ICAO and TERPS circling procedures, I wonder if a kind soul could answer my query on the subject.
I work for a European JAA operator. I fly regularly to the USA and use Jeppesen charts. Approach charts for US airfields are constructed to TERPS criteria and fully annotated as such. I am not permitted to use TERPS minima and to this end have to use the standard TERPS charts in conjunction with JAA minima which are provided by Jeppesen on charts designated 10-9X. All fine and dandy; the circling minima on the 10-9X, annotated JAA, includes the higher JAA/ICAO speeds, but the question is on the defined area. If the defined area is increased to ICAO/JAA standards, who does the obstacle clearance survey? It isn’t Jeppesen, as their disclaimer clearly states that they only reproduce data provided by the state (with minima converted). So does the FAA produce defined area obstacle clearance data based on ICAO criteria in addition to that based on TERPS? If not, where does the information come from?
Thank you

[Zeffy]

...All fine and dandy; the circling minima on the 10-9X, annotated JAA, includes the higher JAA/ICAO speeds, but the question is on the defined area. If the defined area is increased to ICAO/JAA standards, who does the obstacle clearance survey? It isn’t Jeppesen, as their disclaimer clearly states that they only reproduce data provided by the state (with minima converted). So does the FAA produce defined area obstacle clearance data based on ICAO criteria in addition to that based on TERPS? If not, where does the information come from?

One can examine source data for US procedures that are under development or revision at FAA's ACIFP web site. The "maps" files depict the evaluated circling areas and the critical obstacles (for procedures with circling minima).

I've not seen evidence of FAA using PANS-OPS maneuvering areas for an airport within the U.S.A. So unfortunately, your question remains a mystery.

Best,

Z