B737 RAIM or AAIM
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: none
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
B737 RAIM or AAIM
On every website I find it says B737 uses RAIM to augment GNSS signal. Does anybody know where can I find a proof? Any kind of evidence officially signed by Boeing.
There are two types of ABAS: RAIM and AAIM. The AAIM definition suits B737 like a glove, yet literally everyone writes it uses RAIM. I've been asking myself this question for years. Can someone help?
If someone has any evidance on Airbus being or not being equiped with RAIM, that will do the trick too.
Why is it important? If it's RAIM the aircraft is banned from RNP approach during RAIM unavailability. With AAIM there is no such case.
There are two types of ABAS: RAIM and AAIM. The AAIM definition suits B737 like a glove, yet literally everyone writes it uses RAIM. I've been asking myself this question for years. Can someone help?
If someone has any evidance on Airbus being or not being equiped with RAIM, that will do the trick too.
Why is it important? If it's RAIM the aircraft is banned from RNP approach during RAIM unavailability. With AAIM there is no such case.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: EU
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not sure if it can satisfy you - FCTM (definitely Boeing document 
) says on page 5.66:
The ANP is an FMC calculation based on RAIM, method of updating, and other factors, and constantly fluctuates in value.
) says on page 5.66:The ANP is an FMC calculation based on RAIM, method of updating, and other factors, and constantly fluctuates in value.
Last edited by poldek77; 15th Nov 2020 at 17:18.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: none
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank You. I guess that must suffice. Still I can't understand how some EU airlines operating on B737 tell their pilots that they can perform RNP approach (LNAV & LNAV/VNAV) even during RAIM unavailability. This is the key reason why I asked this question.
Sure it is. RAIM is one of two types of ABAS. The other one is AAIM. You can get more details from Annex 10, DOC 9613 and 965/2012 Part-SPA. What the M stands for is completely irrelevant.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: GPS L INVALID
Posts: 579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank You. I guess that must suffice. Still I can't understand how some EU airlines operating on B737 tell their pilots that they can perform RNP approach (LNAV & LNAV/VNAV) even during RAIM unavailability. This is the key reason why I asked this question.
Sure it is. RAIM is one of two types of ABAS. The other one is AAIM. You can get more details from Annex 10, DOC 9613 and 965/2012 Part-SPA. What the M stands for is completely irrelevant.
Sure it is. RAIM is one of two types of ABAS. The other one is AAIM. You can get more details from Annex 10, DOC 9613 and 965/2012 Part-SPA. What the M stands for is completely irrelevant.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: none
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whats your point? Since the 737 in incapable of RAIM prediction itself the operator must at least use some kind of external RAIM prediction service, such as AUGUR, to dispatch aircraft in conditions that would require a certain RNP approach or procedure. If in flight RAIM causes the ANP to shoot up above RNP for the procedure, either because of signal unavailability or other reasons, you obviously can't shoot the approach...
If it is in fact true that a crew is only dependant on the ANP value than what is the point in banning the approach? In case of RAIM loss the ANP will rise, the G/A criteria will be met. But there is more to it than this. The B737 FMS is computing its position based on GNSS, DME/DME, INS and VOR/DME (this one is not even allowed any more on most SIDs and STARs). I can't confirm this but it sems like the latter three systems are considered in the positioning eqation until the aircraft is powered down. So they work just fine during the RNP approach and can augment the positioning. The problem is that they shouldn't. The RNP approach cannot be executed with other than GNSS positioning sensor unless specifically authorised by state (which is rare). I haven't seen single pilot who switch off DME/DME, INS and VOR/DME during the approach in order to have pure GNSS-generated ANP. So it might happen that despite the lack of RAIM the ANP will not rise or rise very slowly. I can't say I have it all right since I can't find any proof but certainly some FIRs/airlines forbid the approach in case of RAIM loss and some don't (some even encourage their crews to try!). I can't figure out why.
Only half a speed-brake
You are mixing apples and oranges, sir. Reading the materials you already have could help, focusing on what they are actually saying as opposed to one's self first perception. Otherwise a brief from someone well acquainted with the inner logic and dependencies is required.
What people do and don't on the line, in the SIM sadly even sometimes teach, may not be strictly in accordance with the approved materials, i.e. OM part B. Yes, tough.
What people do and don't on the line, in the SIM sadly even sometimes teach, may not be strictly in accordance with the approved materials, i.e. OM part B. Yes, tough.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: none
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You are mixing apples and oranges, sir. Reading the materials you already have could help, focusing on what they are actually saying as opposed to one's self first perception. Otherwise a brief from someone well acquainted with the inner logic and dependencies is required.
What people do and don't on the line, in the SIM sadly even sometimes teach, may not be strictly in accordance with the approved materials, i.e. OM part B. Yes, tough.
What people do and don't on the line, in the SIM sadly even sometimes teach, may not be strictly in accordance with the approved materials, i.e. OM part B. Yes, tough.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: IRS NAV ONLY
Posts: 1,230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You might be confusing things with RNP AR, which does not allow reversion to DME/DME, unless the operator is specifically approved. Boeing RNP AR procedures (at least for the 737) require crew to inhibit VOR position updating prior to commencing such approach, with DME updating to be inhibited as well if required.
At least on the 737, there is no way to inhibit IRS position update as such, but its bias is set so low that ANP would skyrocket well before position would drift towards IRS only.
Only half a speed-brake
I can see how the definition of ABAS in EU-OPS as led you astray, its suggestive last sentence is occluding the principles, although it does say what you quoted already.
RAIM definition is much clearer
RAIM is not improving the GNSS signals, nor adding another source for position calculation, but merely a monitoring tool. Assuming otherwise will lead to doubtful findings that at some point, where I believe you may have already arrived, stop making any sense. The answer you need is not available until proper names and meanings are used, no matter whose fault they might be.
I.e. "GPS Required" do not specifically mean "INS (VOR/LOC) not permitted". The FMS/MMR internal logic will take care to use the most accurate and reliable coordinate source - and in such voting process RAIM is essential.
RAIM definition is much clearer
‘Receiver autonomous integrity monitoring (RAIM)’ means a technique whereby a GNSS receiver/processor determines the integrity of the GNSS navigation signals using only GNSS signals or GNSS signals augmented with altitude. This determination is achieved by a consistency check among redundant pseudo-range measurements. At least one satellite in addition to those required for navigation has to be in view for the receiver to perform the RAIM function.
I.e. "GPS Required" do not specifically mean "INS (VOR/LOC) not permitted". The FMS/MMR internal logic will take care to use the most accurate and reliable coordinate source - and in such voting process RAIM is essential.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: EU
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
