EGNOS approaches in Europe
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Island of Aphrodite
Age: 75
Posts: 530
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cecco,
The web site you yourself quoted answers your question (if you really meant "how many LPV approaches are there")
http://www.essp-sas.eu/downloads/xcc...18_10_2012.pdf
There are 18 Airports in France with a total of 21 LPV approaches (Toulouse Blagnac has 4 LPV approaches, 2 airports in Switzerland, and one airport in UK.
The others listed are in Germany and are APV Baro approaches.
The web site you yourself quoted answers your question (if you really meant "how many LPV approaches are there")
http://www.essp-sas.eu/downloads/xcc...18_10_2012.pdf
There are 18 Airports in France with a total of 21 LPV approaches (Toulouse Blagnac has 4 LPV approaches, 2 airports in Switzerland, and one airport in UK.
The others listed are in Germany and are APV Baro approaches.
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Beverly Hills
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EGNOS (SBAS) approaches - runway lighting
Hello all,
Please forgive me for bringing this old thread back to the fore, but I need to gather some information about EGNOS approaches in Europe and any related changes in the runway lighting infrastructure..
1st question is:
Are there any European airports now using EGNOS (SBAS or LPV) approaches that did not have an ILS approach capability beforehand?
2nd question is:
What is the typical LPV approach minima (decision height) at these airports?
3rd question is:
Has there been any enhancement to the original runway or approach lighting system to capture the benefits of the EGNOS lower minima capability?
Thank you for your assistance..
Please forgive me for bringing this old thread back to the fore, but I need to gather some information about EGNOS approaches in Europe and any related changes in the runway lighting infrastructure..
1st question is:
Are there any European airports now using EGNOS (SBAS or LPV) approaches that did not have an ILS approach capability beforehand?
2nd question is:
What is the typical LPV approach minima (decision height) at these airports?
3rd question is:
Has there been any enhancement to the original runway or approach lighting system to capture the benefits of the EGNOS lower minima capability?
Thank you for your assistance..
Join Date: May 2009
Location: london
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: New York
Posts: 225
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LPV in the USA
Rest assured, Part 121 carriers in the US do use the RNAV approaches. Technically there isn't an 'LPV Approach' per se, but an GPS Based RNAV Approach (called the RNAV Y or X typically) flown to LPV minima. Last i read there were ~1600 plus RNAV with documented LPV minima. They are rock solid, and frankly, it's gratifying to see our tax dollars at work promoting air safety.
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Beverly Hills
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for the feedback
Thanks all very much for the valuable feedback and links. From what I could quickly tell, the visibility and lighting requirements for LPV are not mentioned in your local examples and this is the point..
With all emphasis on LPVs lowering ceiling and little mentioned on improving (or maintaining) vis criteria, the lighting piece needs to be explored or at least confirmed through ICAO regulation, that the same (precision approach) lighting standard applies to LPV as they do to ILS.
In this, it's my humble view that you shouldn't apply the current precision approach lighting standard, simply because LPVs are better (more stable, more accurate) than ILS - but this is an argument for another day.
As we move towards LPV-200 (genuine Cat 1 ILS equivalent), the lighting requirement is really important and needs sorting out.
Thanks again very much for the quick and informative replies...
With all emphasis on LPVs lowering ceiling and little mentioned on improving (or maintaining) vis criteria, the lighting piece needs to be explored or at least confirmed through ICAO regulation, that the same (precision approach) lighting standard applies to LPV as they do to ILS.
In this, it's my humble view that you shouldn't apply the current precision approach lighting standard, simply because LPVs are better (more stable, more accurate) than ILS - but this is an argument for another day.
As we move towards LPV-200 (genuine Cat 1 ILS equivalent), the lighting requirement is really important and needs sorting out.
Thanks again very much for the quick and informative replies...
Only half a speed-brake
The approach type (+ airborne equipment and crew qualificatinos, ...) determine the lowest Decision height and the lighting facilities determine the visibility. What seems to be the problem? EASA IR (EU-OPS, JAR-OPS...).
cheers,
FD
cheers,
FD
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: I wouldn't know.
Posts: 4,497
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There seems to be a bigger push into GBAS these days. Frankfurt published GBAS approaches to all its landing runways last fall down to CAT I minima after a several year long normal operation in EDDW worked out quite fine. MUC will follow next apparently, Malaga is finally operational as well after years and years of trials.
Currently there is no advantage with GBAS as it just offers CAT I minima and therefore a normal CAT IIIb ILS has to be there anyway, in the future it could of course make those ILS installations obsolete, not to mention that it is easy to offer different glideslope angles and approaches to all runways with just one installation.
And although my outfit was the first certified GBAS airline in europe we will lose that capability soon with the phase out of our 737s. Boeing gives away the GBAS capability for free, retrofit on the A320 costs around 250k per airframe which makes it a non-issue, as it isn't needed at the moment anyway.
Currently there is no advantage with GBAS as it just offers CAT I minima and therefore a normal CAT IIIb ILS has to be there anyway, in the future it could of course make those ILS installations obsolete, not to mention that it is easy to offer different glideslope angles and approaches to all runways with just one installation.
And although my outfit was the first certified GBAS airline in europe we will lose that capability soon with the phase out of our 737s. Boeing gives away the GBAS capability for free, retrofit on the A320 costs around 250k per airframe which makes it a non-issue, as it isn't needed at the moment anyway.
