In anticipation of the NGX (which is supposed to have RNP modeled) I was curious about RNP and RNAV in general. I use RNAV approaches/departures at the airports that support these procedures in the PMDG 747/MD11 and wanted to learn more about what RNP is and how it could impact the workflow of the pilot in the NGX when its released. Though my research on the interwebs, I found plenty of information and can recommend this link for learning the basics of RNP and the real world advantages in terms of fuel and time savings it gives to airline operations.http://www.militarya...np__flying.htmlIt is a very neat concept, and I was always curious about how one uses the autopilot to land without any reference to the concept of localizer/glideslope that we are used to with precision ILS. I can't wait to see this process used in the NGX, I'm curious to know if the navigraph procedures will be written specifically for this new technology so that the flight sim community can simulate it exactly as in real life.

There's no autoland capability with RNP at the current time, just for the record. There is still a decision height / MDA for those approaches. If you can't see the runway, you cannot land. End of story. The advantage is the shorter approach, given the curved legs and the lack of requirement for ATC vectors.

Take a look at this too: http://pilotlab.net/aircraft-manufacture/boeing/anp.pdfThat really helped my understanding of RNP vs ANP etc.

Take a look at this too: http://pilotlab.net/.../boeing/anp.pdfThat really helped my understanding of RNP vs ANP etc.

That's the one very useful link I would have had posted if you had not been so quick. :( It's especially interesting because it explains the NPS concept as well, which I did not get at all by just reading the manuals, but this article explains it in great detail almost in "layman's terms" if you want. The Boeing website usually has a ton of interesting PDFs if you browse thru them, here are a few (have not had the time to read em all myself but will do so asap):Short introduction into Trad. vs. R-navigation, FMS RNAV workshop, RNP & efficient airspace use.Have a good read. :(PS: This one also contains some useful stuff, probably not exactly on-topic but has an article that explains the different approach navigation options. Remember, this is most likely the first time we'll be able to use IAN in FS. :(

There is a good interview with the creator of the RNP approach on episode 127 of the AirplaneGeeks podcast. Fantastic interview, well worth a listen Airplane Geeks - Ep 127

So the big question is......can the PMDG NGX achieve RNP 0.1 for the RNP AR approaches? Perhaps PMDG should do some route proving!

So the big question is......can the PMDG NGX achieve RNP 0.1 for the RNP AR approaches? Perhaps PMDG should do some route proving!

I'm pretty sure it's actually harder so simulate ANP > 0.0, since any FS gauge always knows the exact (i. e. ANP = 0.0) position... :(

I'm pretty sure it's actually harder so simulate ANP > 0.0, since any FS gauge always knows the exact (i. e. ANP = 0.0) position... :(

It would be nice to see PMDG to simulate some inaccuracies e.g. Map shifts. :(

There's no autoland capability with RNP at the current time, just for the record. There is still a decision height / MDA for those approaches. If you can't see the runway, you cannot land. End of story. The advantage is the shorter approach, given the curved legs and the lack of requirement for ATC vectors.

Understood, that is pretty much the gist of the things I have gathered from studying the PMDG NGX manuals, the RNP/IAN procedures in no way replaces autoland Cat II/III, but seems to make non precision approaches (VOR, NDB) much more manageable and automated if the plane is equipped with the necessary hardware/software and the crew is qualified. The way I see it, this new fangled technology will allow the pilot to use LNAV/VNAV to fly to the decision height using the autopilot with the appropriate procedure defined in the FMC, and as before with the older non precision paradigm, it will be the pilot's reponsibility to acquire visual reference to the runway and turn off the autopilot to hand fly the rest of the landing. Thus, the pilot will no longer need to compute the required descent rate and use v/s to descend at the FAF while tracking the localizer or VOR beam. I'm still trying to read up as much as I can on the subject, it will be great to finally distinguish between these new terms and see how it works in the sim, especially since the NGX will likely bring these new approaches into the FSX mainstream!

It would be nice to see PMDG to simulate some inaccuracies e.g. Map shifts. :(

Map shifts on the NG essentially can't happen because you have constant GPS update of the position. Map shift was a problem back in the days when GPS didn't exist and position was determined solely based on the IRS gyros.AJ,There's a host of approach types that an RNP equiped/certified NG can do where there is no ground-based navaid at all involved. It's all calculated by the FMC - both the lateral and vertical paths. It's similar to what you can do with the Garmin 430W/530W WAAS units in GA aircraft - basically a virtual ILS that's totally computer generated. RNP really doesn't have much to do with navaid-based NPAs to my knowledge. What it's going to do eventually is ensure that basically any airport has precision approaches, even if there's no ground navaids.

Map shifts on the NG essentially can't happen because you have constant GPS update of the position. Map shift was a problem back in the days when GPS didn't exist and position was determined solely based on the IRS gyros.

Are all NGs equipped with GPS updating or are some of the early ones still using DME/DME? Apparently some aircraft have approval for RNP 0.3 with DME/DME, but it was later banned in the US. Not sure about the rest of the world though.

Understood, that is pretty much the gist of the things I have gathered from studying the PMDG NGX manuals, the RNP/IAN procedures in no way replaces autoland Cat II/III, but seems to make non precision approaches (VOR, NDB) much more manageable and automated if the plane is equipped with the necessary hardware/software and the crew is qualified. The way I see it, this new fangled technology will allow the pilot to use LNAV/VNAV to fly to the decision height using the autopilot with the appropriate procedure defined in the FMC, and as before with the older non precision paradigm, it will be the pilot's reponsibility to acquire visual reference to the runway and turn off the autopilot to hand fly the rest of the landing. Thus, the pilot will no longer need to compute the required descent rate and use v/s to descend at the FAF while tracking the localizer or VOR beam.

You can already use VNAV to fly NPAs, even without IAN.Cheers,Nick Jones

Are all NGs equipped with GPS updating or are some of the early ones still using DME/DME? Apparently some aircraft have approval for RNP 0.3 with DME/DME, but it was later banned in the US. Not sure about the rest of the world though.

RNP requirements here in NZ, at least, stipulate that GPS is required. We recently rolled out an RNP 0.1 at a regional airport (NZRO) and many of you will already know about the unique and scenically spectacular RNP approaches into NZQN.

WestJet was one of the first airlines to implement RNP. A lot of the marketing publications actually reference one the first airports where RNP was used with WestJet - Kelowna in BC, Canada.A few months ago I flew on WestJet to Kelowna and we actually flew in on the RNP approach into Kelowna airport. The Just Planes WestJet DVD on the 600/700 series they fly has an excellent discussion about the RNP approach by the pilots for Kelowna but unfortunately, they are diverted at the last minute to vectors because of a (suspected) change in wind direction. The RNP essentially has the plane coming in from the west hugging the mountains as the plane makes a right hand turn to the south and curves around a mountain just before touching down on the runway.The airport in Kelowna has absolutely no ILS or other ground-based equipment so its either visual or nothing. In fact, there was a one or two week stretch where the only airline that could fly into Kelowna was WestJet as it was socked in by fog. Decision height using RNP into Kelowna is 100 feet vs. the more typical 200 feet when performing a visual landing.In Canada, there are special RNP charts that can only be used by the carriers that have been certified for those approaches into those airports. Even though the RNP for Kelowna is published, as far as I know WestJet is the only airline certified to fly the RNP into Kelowna. There are a lot more RNP approaches all over Canada that WestJet has used and helps them get in to airports they would not be able to service otherwise.Something else to remember is that using RNP is also much more cost effective for the airlines because they can perform a constant descent to an airport instead of a stepped descent. Every time the plane has to level off during a descent can cost the airline a lot of money in fuel costs. WestJet estimated double digit percentage savings using RNP.Here's a good quote from this document:http://www.navcanada.ca/ContentDefinitionFiles%5CNewsroom%5CInTheNews%5C2010%5Citn0827_en.pdf"A 737NG, with gear down and flaps up, will burn fuel at a rate 3.5 times higher in level flight than during a continuous descent profile such as that on an RNP approach."WestJet has been flying RNP since around 2006 and the other airlines in Canada are starting to implement their own RNP.I can't wait to re-create the flight I flew on into Kelowna after the NG is released using ORBX scenery.

RNP requirements here in NZ, at least, stipulate that GPS is required. We recently rolled out an RNP 0.1 at a regional airport (NZRO) and many of you will already know about the unique and scenically spectacular RNP approaches into NZQN.

It would be great if these approaches into NZQN were in included in the Navigraph cycle but still the arent. Would be great to use these with the will equiped NGX.