Sign in to follow this  
zazaboeing

Another RNP topic

Recommended Posts

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!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

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?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Has this question been answered anywhere in the forums? This thread was the only one I found. A search for RF is not possible, so tried it with radius...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The other developer of the 737 and 747 have it implemented. Fun to fly. Not sure why PMDD are a little ways behind in this regard. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought only the 747-8 was capable of flying RF legs not the 744.

 

Very true. I think its just on the other one due to the data base for approaches supporting it.  Fun to fly though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I flew some rnp approaches already, and the pmdg stayed within the rnp limit depicted on the chart. There was also a guy that did a small package of Alaska approaches, don't k ow if they were jury rigged for the addon to fly them. Way above my head anyway, I just fly whatever is approved and collect a paycheck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I made this pictorial rep of the RNAV "paradigm". It made it easier for my brain to understand it

 

http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=2ajcldh&s=8#.WGhDcFV96M8

 

Whilst i'd love true RNP-AR and EOSID 9and all things nedded to allow those procedures to be built) on our PMDG's, I also understand that this is a real and relatively new technology (in aviation world terms) and so we're unlikely to receive it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes RNP approaches can be flown with PMDG and it is probably still the most precise product when it comes to Lateral and Vertical Navigation and FMS procedure coding.

Unfortunately RNP-AR approaches (RNP 0.3 or less) tend to have RF legs, which PMDG does not support, hence the sufficient level of precision for these procedures (therefore obstacle clearance in some cases) cannot be guaranteed.

Although they are still a small number I think these type of procedures will tend to increase in the future, as they allow minimas nearly equal to CAT I ILSs, with obvious reduction in infrastructure and maintenance costs.

For those who didn't get into it yet, good and fun examples are found in VNKT, KPSP, FSIA, MHTG, OMAA... to name a few.

 

I agree that PMDG should start looking for possible solutions in order to code RF legs in future products, in order to remain ahead of the game.

 

Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah I've found it...

 

In the avsim library- is this what the OP was referring to?

 

ngx_tp_se_alaska.zip 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this