I know, this have been discussed in many topics before, but it's been a while since some dev give us an update on this. Last I found is 1 year old.

 

Are RNP (RF, TF, etc) procedures being implemented in future patches/ airplanes?

 

I ask this because they're coming in dozens and becoming more and more common,pretty soon they'll be retiring most tradicional procedures (already have in many airports).

 

Thanks!

I don't quite understand Rafael - the PMDG 737 and 777 can already both perform RNP procedures just as in the real world, can't they? Or am I missing something?

The real aircraft can do RF turns (Radius to Fix) turns where the plane flies an arc. Currently, the PMDG aircraft don't support this so arcs are made by placing lots of fake fixes along the arc.

Brendan, I've not seen any mention by PMDG nor any scuttlebutt that indicates they made changes to the navdata structure, which of course is required to implement RF legs and other ARINC defined navigation.

Doesn't look like my post was clear enough, I agree that PMDG have never mentioned any changes to their structure. I was just trying to make the issue raised in the OP clearer. But as initially raised, the use of procedures with RF is increasing so sooner or later I see them having to implement it, the timescale, who knows. I have coded my own RNP procedures before and the lack of RF makes it painful to make and to actually fly it.

As I recall, at one time during the 737NGX development cycle they mentioned unspecified developments in the nav data and aircraft capabilities using it. For whatever reasons, that never happened and no promises were made about it.

 

David Jones 

 

 

Doesn't look like my post was clear enough,

 

No that was my mistake, I meant to address the OP directly.  I agree, I've hand coded many approaches and the decades old macro like syntax is insufficient. There are many limitations besides the RF legs as well.

 

I've heard the guys at Navigraph would love to see PMDG move on to a newer data format because it would make their life easier not having to translate modern data into old format. I don't think it hurts to raise the question but I don't expect an answer other than what we have already heard regarding licensing and costs issues on the developer side.

No that was my mistake, I meant to address the OP directly.  I agree, I've hand coded many approaches and the decades old macro like syntax is insufficient. There are many limitations besides the RF legs as well.

 

I've heard the guys at Navigraph would love to see PMDG move on to a newer data format because it would make their life easier not having to translate modern data into old format. I don't think it hurts to raise the question but I don't expect an answer other than what we have already heard regarding licensing and costs issues on the developer side.

 

Hey Dan, how are you? I thought I've read somewhere they were developing a new navdata format in the newer airplanes (747v2 I think). But maybe it's just my imagination. Out of curiosity, what are the other limitations besides, RF, TF legs you see in this old format we use? 

 

I don't quite understand Rafael - the PMDG 737 and 777 can already both perform RNP procedures just as in the real world, can't they? Or am I missing something?

 

No John, they can't unfortunately. 

 

 

No John, they can't unfortunately. 

 

While I see what you're getting at, they actually technically can. What you're referring to is RNP AR with RF/TF legs.

 

RNP as a term itself is much broader than the context in which pilots (particularly of the sim variety) usually refer to it, and RF/TF legs are only a very small part of it. This is a square/rectangle issue. A square is a rectangle, but a rectangle is not necessarily a square. Similarly, RT/TF is always within the RNP discussion, but 'RNP' does not imply a discussion of approaches RF/TF legs.

 

So, no, the NGX and 777 cannot currently fly RF/TF legs.

But, yes, the NGX and 777 are RNP capable. If you're flying in the terminal environment by reference to RNAV equipment, you are subject to RNP 1.0.

While I see what you're getting at, they actually technically can. What you're referring to is RNP AR with RF/TF legs.

 

RNP as a term itself is much broader than the context in which pilots (particularly of the sim variety) usually refer to it, and RF/TF legs are only a very small part of it. This is a square/rectangle issue. A square is a rectangle, but a rectangle is not necessarily a square. Similarly, RT/TF is always within the RNP discussion, but 'RNP' does not imply a discussion of approaches RF/TF legs.

 

So, no, the NGX and 777 cannot currently fly RF/TF legs.

But, yes, the NGX and 777 are RNP capable. If you're flying in the terminal environment by reference to RNAV equipment, you are subject to RNP 1.0.

 

Yeah, I meant RNP approach procedures. And they may be AR or not. 

We've just had dozens of this procedures released here in Brazil this month, and I can tell you they're a beauty! The aircraft flies it so nicely, non-stop turns with constant descents near close terrain!

Yeah, I meant RNP approach procedures. And they may be AR or not. 

We've just had dozens of this procedures released here in Brazil this month, and I can tell you they're a beauty! The aircraft flies it so nicely, non-stop turns with constant descents near close terrain!

 

Agreed - they are really cool. I just wanted to try and cut back on misinterpretations of the RNP term. Too many only associate it with the RF/TF procedures, which ends up confusing the larger RNP topic.

I think RF/TF are part of so-called advanced RNP, which the PMDG 777 & 737 can't do yet. Are you yet at liberty to confirm whether the Jumbo V2 will have this capability, Kyle? No worries if not, just curious.

http://code7700.com/rnav_vs_rnp.html

 

A good overview of the differences and similarities between RNAV and RNP.

 

 

Rob Smith.

Yes it be interesting to see some update and news on progress with this, EASA arejust in the process of turning elements of PBN naviagation into european law (as Kyle says, usual load of red tape) what in reality will happen is technology itself will drive the change and commercial, and regulation will catch up eventually.

 

However with various european funding iniitatives, the number of PBN navagation routes, stars/sids and approaches will be increasing massively this year, especially at smaller airports that cannot justify cost of ILS/NDB etc. There are trials on GBAS cat 3 approaches, and GBAS curved approaches now underway, again funded by SESAR etc, but red tape also gets in the way of that and a NIMBY cutlure, the issue is it provides even greater accuracy so planes will now fly exactly over the same place, which means if you live there it always be over your house, rather than old way where it maybe a bit further away depending on wind, etc. That said PBN then allows airports to build accurate variations to give resbite to residents, something you couldnt do before, but youll still get people who brought their house years after the airport was built complaining !

 

Its progress is rapiding coming, and or areas like the london TMA, its essential, because there simply isnt enough airspace left for the amount of traffic now, let alone the predicited growth.

 

It be good to see PMDG make the jump to the newer data format, because even without RNP-AR, or RF/TF some RNAV elements the PMDG struggles with to accurately cope with.

Yes it be interesting to see some update and news on progress with this, EASA arejust in the process of turning elements of PBN naviagation into european law (as Kyle says, usual load of red tape) what in reality will happen is technology itself will drive the change and commercial, and regulation will catch up eventually.

 

However with various european funding iniitatives, the number of PBN navagation routes, stars/sids and approaches will be increasing massively this year, especially at smaller airports that cannot justify cost of ILS/NDB etc. There are trials on GBAS cat 3 approaches, and GBAS curved approaches now underway, again funded by SESAR etc, but red tape also gets in the way of that and a NIMBY cutlure, the issue is it provides even greater accuracy so planes will now fly exactly over the same place, which means if you live there it always be over your house, rather than old way where it maybe a bit further away depending on wind, etc. That said PBN ear, especially at smaller airports that cannot justify cost of ILS/NDB etc. There are trials on GBAS cat 3 approaches, and GBAS curved approaches now underway, again funded by SESAR etc, but red tape also gets in the way of that and a NIMBY cutlure, the issue is it provides even greater accuracy so planes will now fly exactly over the same place, which means if you live there it always be over your house, rather than old way where it maybe a bit further away depending on wind, etc. That said PBN then allows airports to build accurate variations to give resbite to residents, something you couldnt do before, but youll still get people who brought their house years after the airport was built complaining !

Perfect!