RNP SID with RF leg
 

HK has new RNP 1 SID's that use an RF Leg. Are these to be considered -AR (SAAAR for you Yanks) procedures because of the RF Leg or is it merely an issue of equipage? Our A340's can easily fly an RNP 1 SID with an RF Leg but the type has not been certified for RNP-AR operations.

Is this a bit of a grey area wrt ICAO guidance or am I over complicating the issue?

In summery: Can a non-RNP-AR certified aircraft, capable of flying RF Legs legally fly an RNP 1 SID with a RF Leg in the procedure?

I think the answer is yes.
An RF leg in any instrument procedure does not necessarily make it an RNP-AR procedure.
However RNP-AR procedures can by definition include an RF leg.

If it is intended as an RNP-AR the approach chart should be annotated as such.

divinehover:

We Yanks converted from SAAAR to AR about 2 years ago.

Which departures at VHHH have RF legs? I can't locate them.

TITAN 1E/F, SKATE 1E/F, RASSE 1E/F etc

See HK AIP A19/11

divineholder:

I am looking at the current Jeppesen charts and a current database. The turn at ROVER appears to be a flyby waypoint to a TF leg. There is no mention of an RF leg.

I'll try the HK AIP although it is painfully slow here.

Only AIPs on HK site are the current one 07/12
and archive 06/12 and 05/12.

The current one fails to complete download. Poor connection.

I also struggled but got it eventually. I suspect it might only be a trial procedure for approved operators

There is a coded RF leg, so you would have to have this in your database to call it up. They have the radial point, but dont name it.

The other legs are just fly by turns...sortof unusual, the DER should be a flyby waypoint as well, a few of the terminators are goofed up as well....

I believe the answer to your question is no. This procedure would have to be in your navdatabase, and since it actually does have an RF turn, the ac would have to have the the required equipage and certification, as well as crew authorization to use this...

I really dont understand the mystery behind turns, other than the containment areas for AR, follow the 2X RNP rule, and while this is RNP 1.0, AR is AR....

Maybe a little off topic.....but

Can you fly a RNP-AR procedure by hand? or do they have to be flown on autopilot?

If so, where is the reference? I had assumed I would find the answer in the ICAO PBN, but alas no luck....unless I didn't look hard enough (distinct possibility)

Cheers Alpha:ok:

FlightPathOBn

The A340 is certified for RNP 1 operations for SID's and STAR's. The A340 equipped with Honeywell FMS 2 can fly an RF Leg if it is coded in the Nav DB (obviously). My company's Ops Spec allows for RNP 1 operations. This procedure doesn't state that it is an -AR procedure, it just mentions equipage.

If this is an -AR procedure then why isn't stated as so like all other -AR procedures in the text box?

The regulation is in ICAO Document 9905 "Required Navigation Performance Authorization Required (RNP AR) Procedure Design Manual"
Chapter 2 RNP AR APPROACH PROCEDURE DESIGN
2.3 STANDARD CONDITIONS
b) procedure is flown using flight director or autopilot;

Rennaps, Thanks.

I had read that document....but if it is flown on a flight director, doesn't that mean the procedure is being flown by hand?

I am pretty sure that you can fly it by hand using the FD. The requirement is to maintain RNP X. There is no reason why you can't do this using just the FD. In fact in my RNP-AR training at Airbus we did some hand flown -AR work to demonstrate how accurately you could fly on the FD's alone. Autopilot use would obviously be the first option in marginal wx conditions. On a nice VMC day why not hand fly. Just don't bust the RNP requirement.

I wouldn't like to fly an RNP 0.1 AR approach procedure by hand.
You would just have to cough to be outside the protection area. :)
Also can one fly an RF leg by hand?

rennaps:

In the U.S. at least most operators permit an RNP AR 0.30 IAP to be hand-flown but using the flight director. Below 0.30, autoflight is required.

Presumably, a departure with an RF leg should be not less than RNP 1.0, which would be quite easy to hand fly with the flight director.

There is certainly much room for improvement on the part of the regulator for this procedure. Certainly not a standard plate or terminology, leading to the confusion. Some of the waypoint altitude data is conflicting.

With a RF turn, it is defined as AR. I am not sure how HK is with RNP certification, if they follow ICAO, or have their own version with exemptions...

As it is RNP 1, and the turn radius is large enough, there shouldnt be any reason one cant fly it with the FD and stay within containment....or why one wouldnt just let the box fly this, if able.
I would note the first waypoints (PORPA/ROVER) have an altitude of 5000 at 5nm....

If what terpster says is correct, the procedure is not in the Jepp database, then you go no where fast...

BTW...for reference, there is no RNP departure criteria....FAA or ICAO.....

The coding provided by the State is not necessarily the coding in the FMS...
As has been pointed out, there are no design criteria for RNP departures in the public domain, but that does not preclude customised procedures being developed and approved (e.g. GE/Naverus developments).

These procedures appear to require specific approval from the Hong Kong CAD - good luck :rolleyes:

Naverus did custom RNP departures?!?!?!

Who'd 'ave thought.....

Aside from that, the point was that there is NO criteria for Public RNP departures, therefore, this is not a public procedure for just anyone to have access to...

unfortunate, but until ICAO gets it together, you are gonna have to pay for these..