PROCEDURE DESIGN MASTER CLASS - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 51
About This Presentation
Title:

PROCEDURE DESIGN MASTER CLASS

Description:

Title: No Slide Title Author: toto Last modified by: Rob Cumming Created Date: 6/11/2000 12:21:25 PM Document presentation format: On-screen Show Company – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:83
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 52
Provided by: toto118
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: PROCEDURE DESIGN MASTER CLASS


1
PROCEDURE DESIGN MASTER CLASS
  • James (Jim) W Gregory
  • Civil Aviation Inspector and ATPL pilot with
    Transport Canada AIS and Airspace Standards
  • Chair of ICAO OCP
  • Participant at many RNAV related forums (RTCA
    SC-181, ATA FMS Task Force, FMS SID/STAR WG)

2
PROCEDURE DESIGN MASTER CLASS
  • History of RNAV
  • History of ARINC 424
  • Problems related to existing procedures
  • Reason for limited ARINC 424 set

3
HISTORY OF RNAV(According to Gregory!!)
  • Area Navigation (RNAV)
  • a method of navigation that permits aircraft
    operation on any desired course within the
    coverage of station-referenced navigation signals
    or within the limits of a self contained system
    capability, or a combination of these.

4
HISTORY OF RNAV(According to Gregory!!)
  • RNAV developed to provide more lateral freedom
  • Better use of airspace
  • Route not tied to fly-over navigation aids
  • Initially RNAV commonly meant VOR based rho-theta
    RNAV systems
  • Expanded to also include INS/IRS, OMEGA, LORAN C,
    Doppler, DME/DME and GNSS

5
HISTORY OF RNAV(According to Gregory!!)
  • Use of RNAV began in late 1960s
  • Most were VOR/DME RNAV systems (for GA types INS
    for large air carriers)
  • 1st commercial RNAV system (course/track line
    computer) NARCO CLC-60 in mid 1968
  • System used waypoints based on radial/DME from
    VOR/DME facilities
  • Maximum distance WP from facility was
    approximately 40 NM

6
HISTORY OF RNAV(According to Gregory!!)
  • Early VOR/DME RNAV system (KNS 80) track line
    computer

7
HISTORY OF RNAV(According to Gregory!!)
  • Rho-Theta RNAV Route Haines to Belgrade
  • No database support required yet!

8
HISTORY OF RNAV(According to Gregory!!)
  • Other agencies began exploring RNAV systems
  • KLM/SwissAir/SAS/UTA had a co-operative effort
  • SwissAir became responsible for the development
    of a database to support this effort

9
HISTORY OF RNAV(According to Gregory!!)
  • 1972 (?) LITTON INS had database of facilities
  • June 1973, National Air DC-10 equipped with
    Collins ANS-70 conducted RNAV operation,
    including approaches in VMC, with database

10
HISTORY OF RNAV/ARINC(According to Gregory!!)
  • 1973 - avionics manufacturers requirement for
    databases became more critical
  • Each manufacturer had their own unique
    requirements for data
  • Aug 1973 - Jeppesen invites avionics
    manufacturers to meet
  • Meeting described as cautious

11
HISTORY OF RNAV/ARINC(According to Gregory!!)
  • Airlines Electronic Engineering Committee (AEEC)
    approached to broker industry standards for
    databases for navigation
  • Sep 1973 - AEEC Area Navigation Subcommittee
    established working group to standardize RNAV
    system reference data format and encoding
    characteristics

12
HISTORY OF RNAV/ARINC(According to Gregory!!)
  • Committee noted
  • different RNAV manufacturers taking divergent
    paths with respect to reference data organization
  • unless trend was halted, airline industry would
    face very high costs of supporting the production
    of data files in several different formats
  • economic benefits would result if resolution
    could be established

13
HISTORY OF RNAV/ARINC(According to Gregory!!)
  • WG met Jan 74
  • examined ways different manufacturers dealt with
    reference data organization
  • meeting described as interesting as attendees
    were engineers whose interests were not
    specifically Aeronautical Information Services

14
HISTORY OF RNAV/ARINC(According to Gregory!!)
  • Subsequent WG meetings in Mar and May 74
    concentrated on defining characteristics for data
    elements
  • AEEC RNAV subcommittee reviewed WGs first draft
    Project Paper 424 Sep 74
  • RNAV subcommittee endorsed principles established
    by WG
  • RNAV subcommittee took on work itself and
    disbanded the WG

15
HISTORY OF RNAV/ARINC(According to Gregory!!)
  • Second draft document developed in Jan 75
  • additional amendments constituted 3rd draft
  • 3rd draft Project Paper 424 - Area Navigation
    System Data Base Specification approved by AEEC
    in Spring 75

16
HISTORY OF RNAV/ARINC(According to Gregory!!)
  • ARINC Specification 424, adopted by AEEC, first
    published 21 May 75
  • Spec amended regularly
  • each amendment following first publication
    identified as 424-1, 424-2, 424-3, etc
  • information up to ARINC 424-3 only included
    point-to-point-to-point navigation

17
HISTORY OF RNAV/ARINC(According to Gregory!!)
  • ARINC 424-3, published 4 Nov 82, introduced
    concept of path and terminator
  • path and terminator concept created by Sperry
  • concept permits coding of terminal area
    procedures, SIDs, STARs and approaches

18
HISTORY OF RNAV/ARINC(According to Gregory!!)
  • Concept established rules of coding
  • Concept includes a set of defined codes known as
    path terminators or leg type
  • Path Terminator rules contained in ARINC 424
    Attachment 5
  • Currently there are 23 different leg types

19
HISTORY OF RNAV/ARINC(According to Gregory!!)
  • Track to Fix (TF)

20
HISTORY OF RNAV/ARINC(According to Gregory!!)
  • Initial Fix (IF)

21
HISTORY OF RNAV/ARINC(According to Gregory!!)
  • Hold to Fix (HF), Hold to Altitude (HA), Hold to
    Manual termination (HM)

22
HISTORY OF RNAV/ARINC(According to Gregory!!)
  • Direct to Fix (DF)

23
HISTORY OF RNAV/ARINC(According to Gregory!!)
  • Fix to Altitude (FA)

24
HISTORY OF RNAV/ARINC(According to Gregory!!)
  • Course to Fix (CF)

25
HISTORY OF RNAV/ARINC(According to Gregory!!)
  • Procedure turn to Intercept (PI)

26
HISTORY OF RNAV/ARINC(According to Gregory!!)
  • Course to Altitude (CA)

27
HISTORY OF RNAV/ARINC(According to Gregory!!)
  • Course to Intercept (CI)

28
HISTORY OF RNAV/ARINC(According to Gregory!!)
  • Course to DME termination (CD)

29
HISTORY OF RNAV/ARINC(According to Gregory!!)
  • Course to Radial interception (CR)

30
HISTORY OF RNAV/ARINC(According to Gregory!!)
  • Fix to distance on Course (FC)

31
HISTORY OF RNAV/ARINC(According to Gregory!!)
  • Fix to DME termination (FD)

32
HISTORY OF RNAV/ARINC(According to Gregory!!)
  • Fix to Manual termination (FM)

33
HISTORY OF RNAV/ARINC(According to Gregory!!)
  • Arc to a Fix (AF)

34
HISTORY OF RNAV/ARINC(According to Gregory!!)
  • Heading to DME distance (VD)

35
HISTORY OF RNAV/ARINC(According to Gregory!!)
  • Heading to Altitude (VA)

36
HISTORY OF RNAV/ARINC(According to Gregory!!)
  • Heading to Manual termination (VM)

37
HISTORY OF RNAV/ARINC(According to Gregory!!)
  • Heading to next leg Intercept (VI)

38
HISTORY OF RNAV/ARINC(According to Gregory!!)
  • Heading to Radial termination (VR)

39
HISTORY OF RNAV/ARINC(According to Gregory!!)
  • Radius to a Fix (RF)

40
HISTORY OF RNAV/ARINC(According to Gregory!!)
  • Certain path terminator assumptions are made to
    accommodate aircraft performance
  • speed - 210 K ground speed used to compute
    distance based upon 3.5 NM per min
  • on course reversal - max distance of 4.3 NM used
    before turn inbound if no distance or time
    specified

41
HISTORY OF RNAV/ARINC(According to Gregory!!)
  • Max 25 degree bank angle used to compute turn
    radius
  • climb rate of 500 feet per NM used in
    computations
  • intercept angles - no specified, 30 degrees for
    intercept of localizer based and 30 - 45 degrees
    for all others

42
HISTORY OF RNAV/ARINC(According to Gregory!!)
  • Path terminator concept developed to code
    existing conventional instrument procedures
  • However, not all conventional procedures easily
    coded
  • conditional procedures, easy for pilot to
    interpret, are difficult for computer to describe

43
HISTORY OF RNAV/ARINC(According to Gregory!!)
  • Industry made representation to ICAO OCP RNAV WG
    in Jun 91 regarding problems with coding
    conventional procedures
  • OCP 10 Nov 94 proposed amendment 9 to PANS-OPS
    Vol I regarding use of FMS/RNAV on conventional
    procedures

44
HISTORY OF RNAV/ARINC(According to Gregory!!)
  • FMS/RNAVmay be usedprovided
  • procedure is monitored using basic display
    normally associated with that procedure and
  • tolerances for flight using raw data on the basic
    display are complied with.
  • Lead radials are for non-RNAV equipped aircraft
    and are not intended to restrict the use of turn
    anticipation by the FMS

45
HISTORY OF RNAV/ARINC(According to Gregory!!)
  • Furthermore, agreement to have FMS-equipped
    aircraft fly tracks instead of procedural
    headings provided heading not required for ATC
    separation
  • Industry requesting that design of terminal area
    procedures be compatible with increasing number
    of FMS equipped aircraft

46
HISTORY OF RNAV/ARINC(According to Gregory!!)
  • New criteria introduced into PANS-OPS to cater to
    the needs of the modern aircraft navigation
    databases
  • VOR/DME RNAV (Chap 31)
  • GNSS basic receiver criteria (Chap 33)
  • DME/DME RNAV (Chap 32)
  • RNP (Chap 35)
  • BARO-VNAV (Chap 34)

47
HISTORY OF RNAV/ARINC(According to Gregory!!)
  • When developing RNAV procedures, following path
    terminators accommodate all procedures
  • IF, TF, DF, FA, CF, HF, HA, and HM
  • When developing RNP RNAV procedures, the
    following path terminators are only used
  • IF, TF, RF, (DF and FA -discouraged), (CF - to be
    phased out), HF, HA and HM

48
HISTORY OF RNAV/ARINC(According to Gregory!!)
  • OCP 12 introduced material for PANS-OPS Vol II
    and Procedure Design Manual concerning path
    terminators, their definitions, and their
    application
  • Encourage procedure designers to become more
    knowledgeable about path terminator

49
HISTORY OF RNAV/ARINC(According to Gregory!!)
  • On a personal note
  • aircraft operation is becoming more reliant upon
    computer technology rather than pilot skill
  • computers are smart - but cannot think - yet!
  • the days of decision making with regard to
    navigation is being replaced by monitoring
  • crowded skies dictate clearly defined airspace
    structure and procedures

50
HISTORY OF RNAV/ARINC(According to Gregory!!)
  • Hence, the reason for procedure designers to
    clearly understand the airborne technology
  • You are the people who have the greatest
    influence on the success (or failure) of RNAV and
    RNP RNAV implementation

51
HISTORY OF RNAV/ARINC(According to Gregory!!)
QUESTIONS ? ? ? ? ? ?
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com