RNAV Approach or RNP Approach how to read Chart?

[Driver170 42]

Checkout Salzburg RWY 33 RNAV (RNP)

 

 

RNP is again different and only available with the required additional training, certification and operational and regulatory approval for each aircraft/approach configuration. Quite a lot of work and not many around in europe. I found one i mentioned above and in the US they are much more common.

[Akila 39]

the Salzburg RWY 33 Title is RNP. unlike my example which is GNSS.

it is not the same thing. even more. that proves that the RNAV GNSS by itself is not an RNP...

the SZG has LNAV and VNAV. the LLBG one has only LNAV

 

[Jepps are copyrighted]

[Driver170 42]

From the DOC

 

 

Your chart is titled (GNSS) yes ? So....

 

 

 

The instrument approach procedures associated with RNP APCH are entitled RNAV (GNSS) to reflect that GNSS is the primary navigation system. With the inherent onboard performance monitoring and alerting provided by GNSS, the navigation specification qualifies as RNP, however these procedures pre-date PBN, so the chart name has remained as RNAV.

 

 

And has LNAV minima!? So...

 

 

Lateral Navigation) – This is a Non-Precision Approach with Lateral navigation guidance provided by Global Positioning System (GPS) and an Aircraft Based Augmentation System. (ABAS) Receiver Autonomous Integrity Monitoring (RAIM) is a form of ABAS.

[skelsey 765]

 

 

then how come "scandinavian13" insisted it is not an RNP Approach.
the Min' is also way behind 400ft as you guys claimed earlier...
 
also from the statement above (CAA) I understand that since it indicates LNAV only it is not RNP (Non-Precision).

 

No -- have a look at the diagram:

 

Just because it is an NPA does not mean it cannot be RNP.

 

Once again -- ICAO charts titled RNAV (GNSS) are RNP. FAA chart titling conventions are different, which Kyle has pointed out, but he is wrong to suggest that because it is an LNAV only approach it cannot be RNP.

[Akila 39]

 

From the DOC


Your chart is titled (GNSS) yes ? So....



The instrument approach procedures associated with RNP APCH are entitled RNAV (GNSS) to reflect that GNSS is the primary navigation system. With the inherent onboard performance monitoring and alerting provided by GNSS, the navigation specification qualifies as RNP, however these procedures pre-date PBN, so the chart name has remained as RNAV.

 

 

doesn't Regular RNAV the primary navigation system is also GNSS?

 

BTW Simon, where did you get that flow chart from?

[skelsey 765]

The CAA link that I posted earlier.

[scandinavian13 5,192]

 

 

Is there such thing as a non-precision RNP approach?

 

Yes and no, but for the simplicity of things, no.

 

 

 

To explain a little more of why, I'll point out that there's an RNP standard for just about any flight segment. There's an RNP standard for crossing the NATs. The value there is 12 by default, but there are lower standards (like RNP-10). The only time people really, really pay attention to RNP (particularly in this hobby), though, is for approaches, which is why there is a giant misunderstanding of the concept. This misconception, of course, is that RNP is some special type of approach that requires all kinds of extra certification and procedure, which isn't exactly true, and is where all the confusion creeps in.

 

Just because there is an RNP standard, as there is for the ICAO GNSS approaches, doesn't mean that it's a unique, or out of the ordinary thing. Watch your ND and look at the RNP value change during the flight. The changes in the RNP standards are changing during the flight without you even having to worry about it in most cases. Note that, when selecting most approaches, it automatically changes the value to 0.3, which is the basic RNP standard for an approach (regardless of it being an RNAV approach or not).

 

So, again, unless the chart says "RNP [value]" then you don't need to worry about it too much. You might want to verify that it matches, but for an LNAV approach, as long as you're getting a GPS signal, you're good to go. I can fly an LNAV approach in a G1000 Cessna if I wanted to, and there's no RNP display in those (though this is covered by a RAIM check, which is similar to ANP calculations on a basic level).

[Driver170 42]

Check this out

 

http://www.icao.int/safety/pbn/Pages/DB-View.aspx#chartAnchor

 

 

LNAV NPA -

 

 

non-precision approach - RNAV(GNSS) LNAV

RNAV(GNSS) LNAV approaches are not associated with a vertical track in space.

• Lateral guidance is by means of the RNAV/GNSS system and is based on GNSS positioning

• Vertical flight management the same as for non-precision approaches (VOR/DME, NDB, etc.),

• In accordance with EU OPS, non-precision approaches meeting CDFA criteria must be carried out using the CDFA technique.

For a non-precision RNAV(GNSS) / LNAV minima approach:

The operator must comply with EASA AMC 20-27 (chapter 10 and appendix 4)

 

 

 

Another good link

 

https://www.eurocontrol.int/sites/default/files/field_tabs/content/documents/events/Presentations/120925-2nd-cns-vertical-navigation-dds.pdf

[Akila 39]

Vernon, based on the link you sent is seems that the country which the chart I posted has no PBN airports

but yet it is claimed by few here and yourself to be a PBN RNP Approach (0.3 or below) requirement since it has RNAV (GNSS) on it , or I am total off track.

 

[skelsey 765]

Yes and no, but for the simplicity of things, no.

 

 

 

To explain a little more of why, I'll point out that there's an RNP standard for just about any flight segment. There's an RNP standard for crossing the NATs. The value there is 12 by default, but there are lower standards (like RNP-10). The only time people really, really pay attention to RNP (particularly in this hobby), though, is for approaches, which is why there is a giant misunderstanding of the concept. This misconception, of course, is that RNP is some special type of approach that requires all kinds of extra certification and procedure, which isn't exactly true, and is where all the confusion creeps in.

 

Just because there is an RNP standard, as there is for the ICAO GNSS approaches, doesn't mean that it's a unique, or out of the ordinary thing. Watch your ND and look at the RNP value change during the flight. The changes in the RNP standards are changing during the flight without you even having to worry about it in most cases. Note that, when selecting most approaches, it automatically changes the value to 0.3, which is the basic RNP standard for an approach (regardless of it being an RNAV approach or not).

 

So, again, unless the chart says "RNP [value]" then you don't need to worry about it too much. You might want to verify that it matches, but for an LNAV approach, as long as you're getting a GPS signal, you're good to go. I can fly an LNAV approach in a G1000 Cessna if I wanted to, and there's no RNP display in those (though this is covered by a RAIM check, which is similar to ANP calculations on a basic level).

 

The point is that you need equipment that is certified for RNP APCH operations. The G1000 is probably certified for this, and most if not all 737NGs are, but this is not true for every GPS installation or aircraft type.

[Driver170 42]

That link is from 2012 ! I will look into it

[skelsey 765]

Vernon, based on the link you sent is seems that the country which the chart I posted has no PBN airports

but yet it is claimed buy few here to be a PBN RNP Approach (0.3 or below) requirement since it has RNAV (GNSS) on it , or I am total off track.

 

 

 

No -- it is not an RNP AR approach, which is a different kettle of fish, and I have never claimed it is.

 

It IS an RNP approach, which requires the aircraft to be certified for RNP APCH operations.

 

There is a difference between an RNP approach and an RNP AR approach.

[Akila 39]

The point is that you need equipment that is certified for RNP APCH operations. The G1000 is probably certified for this, and most if not all 737NGs are, but this is not true for every GPS installation or aircraft type.

 

so back to my Original question Simon.

how does the words "GNSS" on the chart suggests that I have to have the Suitable Monitoring and Alerting system that will qualify 

for the RNP Procession approach when GNSS is a navigation system and has nothing to do with the Monitoring ob board.

My question basically is, how can I read from a Chart that "I must" have the Monitoring & alerting systems for RNP just from the word "GNSS" on the chart when this is just a navigation device that is common on any airplane today even though tehy don't have the Monitoring and alerting Systems that RNP req'.

[scandinavian13 5,192]

No -- it is not an RNP AR approach, which is a different kettle of fish, and I have never claimed it is.

 

It IS an RNP approach, which requires the aircraft to be certified for RNP APCH operations.

 

There is a difference between an RNP approach and an RNP AR approach.

 

...and this is why we ignore putting RNP on anything unless we need to specifically call it out to the crew, really. RNP AR is the only one they really need to worry about, as it's the only one that deviates from the standard RNP values (unless otherwise indicated on the chart).

 

 

so back to my Original question Simon.

how does the words "GNSS" on the chart suggests that I have to have the Suitable Monitoring and Alerting system that will qualify 

for the RNP Procession approach when GNSS is a navigation system and has nothing to do with the Monitoring ob board.

My question basically is, how can I read from a Chart that "I must" have the Monitoring & alerting systems for RNP just from the word "GNSS" on the chart when this is just a navigation device that is common on any airplane today even though tehy don't have the Monitoring and alerting Systems that RNP req'.

 

You'd get this in your crew training for the plane. The 737 has it. It would alert you to the lack of ANP monitoring with an annunciation on the EICAS.

 

Slide 22 shows the 737 notification:

http://www.smartcockpit.com/docs/B737-Brnav-Rnp_Ops_and_VNAV_Approaches.pdf

 

The rest of it is good info to know, though.

[Akila 39]

well I guess I totally lost it then.

 

what is the difference between RNP and RNP AR then?

tried reading it in Wikipedia, but I found it hard to understand.