Required Navigation Performance

Presented by The Airline Industry

Agenda

Overview of RNP The importance of RNP to industry Industry progress to date Industry near term vision Immediate FAA action requested

Required Navigation Performance

ANP containment radius

Lateral boundary = 2 X RNP (airspace and obstacle clearance)

ANP < 1 X RNP for continued operation

RNP and ANP are displayed on FMC CDU

RNP: A statement of navigation performance accuracy for operation in a defined airspace (ICAO doc. 9613) RNP airspace: Airspace, route(s), and leg(s) where minimum navigation performance requirements (RNP) have been established, and aircraft must meet or exceed that performance to fly in that airspace (RTCA SC181/EUROCAE WG.13)

Lateral Path Construction

Defined airspace is 2 x RNP either side of track centerline 2 x RNP RW26

RNP Leg Types

TF

DF

RF

WPT02 WPT02 WPT02

Arc center

WPT01
Great circle track between two fixes

Unspecified position Computed track direct to a fix

WPT01

Constant radius to a fix

Vertical Capability

WPT Vertical angle Speed and altitude constraint at waypoint (170/2460) (-3.00)

3 parameters for each leg 1) Waypoint altitude constraint 2) Vertical angle 3) Waypoint speed constraint (optional)

Air Carrier RNP Operations

GPS predictive RAIM FARs & FAA Orders Procedure design criteria Airplane systems

AIM

Airplane performance

Obstacle clearance

Flight publications

Environmental impact

ATC local flows

Dispatcher training

RNP operations

Local WX

Topo data sources

Pilot training

OPS specifications Charting and standards ALPA Simulator Engineering

ARINC 424

Geodetic systems and calculations

FAA process ATC and Flt Stds

Nav data base development

Why is RNP Important to the Aviation System

Safety Enhancement Efficiency/Capacity Improvements Schedule Integrity Delay Reduction Noise Friendly Procedures

Fatalities by Accident Categories

Fatal Accidents - Worldwide Commercial Jet Fleet - 1988 through 1997
3000

462

Total Fatalities = 6,792 (6,566 onboard) 1997 fatalities = 684 (all onboard)

2500

2000

1500

1000

500
178 37

0
CFIT 2806 36

Loss of Control (Inflight) 1932 31

Midair Collision 506 2

Inflight Fire 371 2

Fuel Tank Explosion 238 2

Landing 178 12

Ice/Snow 134 4

Fuel Windshear Exhaustion 121 7 91 2

Takeoff Config 78 4

Runw ay Incursion 45 4

Other 28 13

RTO* 5 2

Unknow n 259 5

Fatalities Accidents

TAWS and RNP Improved Safety Net for Obstacle Clearance

VNAV path contained within TAWS envelope
Look-ahead splays +/- 3 degrees

Starting width = 1/4 nmi

Look-ahead distance varies with ground speed and turn rate

Slopes vary with flight path angle

Terrain clearance floor 700 ft AGL 400 ft AGL

15 nmi

12 nmi

5 nmi

0.5 nmi

Runway

RNP RNAV called for by CAST

The plan will direct or encourage the aviation community to:
Take advantage of existing aircraft capabilities to improve approach and landing safety to the maximum extent practical, and Transition to use of new and evolving aircraft capabilities that can further improve approach and landing safety at the earliest practical time

RNP RNAV called for by CAST

The plan will direct or encourage the aviation community to: Take advantage of existing aircraft capabilities to improve approach and landing safety to the maximum extent practical, and Transition to use of new and evolving aircraft capabilities that can further improve approach and landing safety at the earliest practical time

In the interest of safety, the industry should discontinue the use of step-down or dive-and-drive NonPrecision approach procedures as soon as, and wherever, possible . . .
This would include procedures such as the constant rate descent that can be flown by all types of aircraft and use of the modern vertical navigation capability (VNAV) by some existing and most new aircraft types

~ Controlled Flight Into Terrain (CFIT) Joint Safety Implementation Team (JSIT) Implementation Plan For Precision-Like Approaches, Statement of Work (formally accepted by the CAST)

Substantial Safety Enhancement

RNP Enables Stabilized Approaches

FAF (5 to 7 miles from runway)

Landing flaps / configuration Landing check complete Lateral/vertical flight guidance to runway Autopilot/autothrottle fully available Typical unstabilized non-precision approach Missed approach Balked landing DA(H) (as low as 250 ft above airport) LNAV, VNAV flight guidance through missed approach procedure

Runway

Situational awareness improved Reduces crew workload Eliminates Dive and Drive (Non-Precision) approaches Provided a Stabilized Approach with LNAV/VNAV guidance to runway threshold

RNP Versus FAAs RNAV

Generic TERPS Final Approach Area RNP 0.15 Containment Zones for Comparison
7:1 transitional surface DA (H) / MAP

RNP 0.15 containment zone

RNP provides vertical and horizontal guidance to the runway RNAV provides no vertical guidance if an obstacle penetrates the vertical surface resulting in dive and drive.

RNP Pilot Training

Objectives: Safe operations and pilot confidence Ground school Flight Simulator 2 Approach Types: - ILS or RNP RNAV - Vertical guidance for all approaches Simplification and commonality of approach profile increases safety

Efficiency/Capacity Benefits

Improved schedule reliability New runway directions available for use Lower landing minimums Improved airport and airspace system capacity Fewer missed approaches Yielding Fuel savings Time savings Improved customer satisfaction

Efficiency Improvements Achieved

Minima below that of ground based equipment at 4 Alaskan Airports Approaches to runways that can or not be served with ground based equipment at 6 Alaskan Airports 65 flights to Juneau in the first 9 months of 2001 were saved by RNP

Supports FAAs OEP

Less airspace needed per operation Independent parallel approaches possible to runways separated by 2500 feet.

RNP Capability Today

7500 or 45 % are RNP capable globally + 50 % in US are RNP capable 85% Continental 70% Alaska 70% American 50% United 40% US Airways

Past Impediments to Progress Are Disappearing

Airline perspective: FAA is not sufficiently supporting RNP Lack of understanding (both government and industry) of RNP capability and safety enhancements Benefits not realized with FAAs RNAV Mixed equipage, but this is rapidly diminishing Resistance to change, but FAA leadership can overcome this

Specific FAA Action Requested

Adapt Alaskas 737 RNP criteria to create FAA approved generalized RNP Approach Design criteria for all carriers

Continue DCA special procedure development Document lessons learned Develop public criteria Develop public procedures

Summary

Many planes are RNP capable and manufacturers continue to deliver more - Airworthiness approval is documented in AFM for terminal/approach use

Many airlines are ready to use this capability - Ops Specs for RNAV have been issued

This expensive capability is already paid for, (May-96 first revenue flight) Air carriers already invested, equipped, trained, ready to fly

Immediate safety, delay reduction and economic benefits are available

Conclusion
Opportunity to facilitate leadership in the U.S. and global air transport industry RNP is unique in its impact (benefits) and changeability (ease of implementation)

Changeability/Impact Matrix

High

RNP
Low High

Changeability
Low

Impact

The End