RNav Arrivals
My understanding is that you may manually construct an arrival / departure proceedure in the FMS / INS if either of the following are satisfied:
1 It is an overlay proceedure where waypoints are also specified as range and bearing from a conventional navaid. (Backed up on the needles.)
2 The proceedure is not designated PRNAV / RNP1. Or if it is, it must also state on the plate that is available in BRNAV.
Im more than willing to be put right though, the whole introduction of RNAV SIDs & STARS has lacked coherency and is still a little confusing.
1 It is an overlay proceedure where waypoints are also specified as range and bearing from a conventional navaid. (Backed up on the needles.)
2 The proceedure is not designated PRNAV / RNP1. Or if it is, it must also state on the plate that is available in BRNAV.
Im more than willing to be put right though, the whole introduction of RNAV SIDs & STARS has lacked coherency and is still a little confusing.
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I certainly support that last sentence! My understanding for your 1) is that you are NOT going to plug in LNAV/RNAV and unfold the crossword page if you have 'constructed' such a procedure but that you are essentially flying raw data tracks with a map display for 'comfort'?
I once built one particular 'qualifying' SID out of either OSL or ARN (cannot recall which) and tried it in LNAV in a 737-300 'for fun' (in VMC) - it made a complete hash of it!
I once built one particular 'qualifying' SID out of either OSL or ARN (cannot recall which) and tried it in LNAV in a 737-300 'for fun' (in VMC) - it made a complete hash of it!
More like allowing the aircraft to fly the procedure in RNAV / LNAV, but monitoring the raw data for "comfort" (my aircraft doesnt have a nav display.) In terms of risk, there's no diference from allowing the A/P to track a VOR radial, as long as you ensure that he raw data has primacy. Also, where those waypoints may be based on NDB radials, the GPS makes a much better job of track keeping than me and my dipping ADF.
I agree that it won't work well for all procedures, but if something is that high in technical merit it should be designated as a PRNAV procedure. And we all know that manual construction / editing of them is a no no.
I agree that it won't work well for all procedures, but if something is that high in technical merit it should be designated as a PRNAV procedure. And we all know that manual construction / editing of them is a no no.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Greece
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So, coming back to question post #1:
For the US it is crystal clear. You may not.
Also Airbus FCOM is specific. You may not.
Europe regulations are specific for RNAV departures and approaches. You may not.
What about Europe regulations regarding RNAV (not P-RNAV) arrivals? I am not aware of any restriction. Is anybody?
For the US it is crystal clear. You may not.
Also Airbus FCOM is specific. You may not.
Europe regulations are specific for RNAV departures and approaches. You may not.
What about Europe regulations regarding RNAV (not P-RNAV) arrivals? I am not aware of any restriction. Is anybody?
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Greece
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just a copy from post #13:
"FLIGHT PROCEDURES (Doc 8168) - ARRIVAL AND NON-PRECISION APPROACH PROCEDURES 1 AREA NAVIGATION (RNAV) ARRIVAL AND APPROACH PROCEDURES FOR NAVIGATION SYSTEMS USING BASIC GNSS RECEIVERS
1.2.3 Navigation database
Departure and approach waypoint information is contained in a navigation database. If the navigation database does not contain the departure or approach procedure, then the basic GNSS stand-alone receiver or FMC shall not be used for these procedures."
So as I said, ICAO (so Europe and Timbukwana included) does not allow to use FMC if departure or approach procedure is not in the data base. What about arrivals?
"FLIGHT PROCEDURES (Doc 8168) - ARRIVAL AND NON-PRECISION APPROACH PROCEDURES 1 AREA NAVIGATION (RNAV) ARRIVAL AND APPROACH PROCEDURES FOR NAVIGATION SYSTEMS USING BASIC GNSS RECEIVERS
1.2.3 Navigation database
Departure and approach waypoint information is contained in a navigation database. If the navigation database does not contain the departure or approach procedure, then the basic GNSS stand-alone receiver or FMC shall not be used for these procedures."
So as I said, ICAO (so Europe and Timbukwana included) does not allow to use FMC if departure or approach procedure is not in the data base. What about arrivals?
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: paradise
Posts: 559
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
no restrictions on BRNAV. In all the set ups concerning the RNAV operation there are several subdivisions like supported by ground facilities, not supported and GPS required. No regs regarding GPS stand alone RNAV yet as they haven't been developed broadly nor approved. 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: France
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are no restrictions on B-RNAV because B-RNAV was not designed for use in terminal areas - B-RNAV STARS should be simple with no more than 4 waypoints per 100 track miles and should always be well above MSA. So you can probably get away with manual entry.
However it would be unwise to try and manually build a SID or a STAR for two reasons:
1. There is the question of fly-over and fly-by waypoints, but more importantly, there is the question of path terminators - these are the codes that tell the FMS how to fly each leg - course to altitude, direct to fix, track to fix, radius to fix, course to intercept etc etc - I don't think that any FMS provides the pilot with the means of inserting these codes. In the more complex SIDs the procedure design is based upon the use of particular path terminator codes for particular legs so you wouldn't want to get it wrong.
2. There are still a large number of RNAV SIDs and STARs published by some States in Europe (and perhaps elsewhere) where it is not clear what approval is required. Some of these look a little too complex or close to terrain to be BRNAV even though there is no clear statement of a P-RNAV requirement.
However it would be unwise to try and manually build a SID or a STAR for two reasons:
1. There is the question of fly-over and fly-by waypoints, but more importantly, there is the question of path terminators - these are the codes that tell the FMS how to fly each leg - course to altitude, direct to fix, track to fix, radius to fix, course to intercept etc etc - I don't think that any FMS provides the pilot with the means of inserting these codes. In the more complex SIDs the procedure design is based upon the use of particular path terminator codes for particular legs so you wouldn't want to get it wrong.
2. There are still a large number of RNAV SIDs and STARs published by some States in Europe (and perhaps elsewhere) where it is not clear what approval is required. Some of these look a little too complex or close to terrain to be BRNAV even though there is no clear statement of a P-RNAV requirement.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Europe-the sunshine side
Posts: 755
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For the 737 :
' Due to potentially indequate terrain clearance,manual waypoint entry should not be accomplished for RNAV or GPS approaches, nor should this method be used with VNAV after the FAF.'
' Due to potentially indequate terrain clearance,manual waypoint entry should not be accomplished for RNAV or GPS approaches, nor should this method be used with VNAV after the FAF.'
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: paradise
Posts: 559
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
alexban, the subject here is departure or arrivals PRNAV not the RNAV APPROACH which is similar yet requires some additional considerations. To clear most of doubts here is the link http://www.ecacnav.com/downloads/PRNAV.mpg
a reference to manual entry is made as well. Basically before any operator uses PRNAV procedures it must obtain approval from the relevant authority. Crews must be trained and documents updated in terms of SOPs, contingency procedures etc.
a reference to manual entry is made as well. Basically before any operator uses PRNAV procedures it must obtain approval from the relevant authority. Crews must be trained and documents updated in terms of SOPs, contingency procedures etc.
