alaska airlines, smith presentation

7/30/2019 Alaska Airlines, Smith Presentation

1/30

Required Navigation PerformancePresented by

The Airline Industry


2/30

Agenda

Overview of RNP

The importance of RNP to industry

Industry progress to date

Industry near term vision

Immediate FAA action requested


3/30

Required Navigation Performance

RNP: A statement of navigation performance accuracy for operation in a defined airspace (ICAO doc. 9613)

RNP airspace: Airspace, route(s), and leg(s) where minimum navigation performance requirements (RNP) have

been established, and aircraft must meet or exceed that performance to fly in that airspace

(RTCA SC181/EUROCAE WG.13)

ANP containment radius

ANP < 1 X RNP for

continued operation RNP and ANP

are displayedon FMC CDU

Lateral boundary = 2 X RNP

(airspace and obstacle clearance)


4/30

Lateral Path Construction

Defined airspace is 2

x RNP either side oftrack centerline

RW26

2 x RNP


5/30

RNP Leg Types

WPT02

WPT01

TF

Great circle trackbetween two fixes

WPT02

DF

Computed trackdirect to a fix

Unspecified

position

Arc center

WPT02

RF

WPT01

Constant radiusto a fix


6/30

Vertical Capability

3 parameters for each leg

1) Waypoint altitude constraint

2) Vertical angle

3) Waypoint speed constraint (optional)

Speed and altitudeconstraint at waypoint(170/2460)

WPT

(-3.00)Verticalangle


7/30

Topo datasources

Local WX

ATC local

flows

ObstacleclearanceAirplane

performance

ARINC 424

SimulatorEngineering

FAA processATC and Flt

Stds

ALPA

Charting andstandards

Pilot training

Dispatchertraining

Flightpublications

FARs &FAA

OrdersAIM

GPSpredictiveRAIM

Proceduredesigncriteria

Airplanesystems

Environmental

impact

Geodeticsystems andcalculations

Navdata base

development

OPSspecifications

Air Carrier RNP Operations

RNPoperations


8/30

Why is RNP Important to the Aviation System

Safety Enhancement

Efficiency/Capacity Improvements

Schedule Integrity

Delay Reduction

Noise Friendly Procedures


9/30

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Fatalities 2806 1932 506 371 238 178 134 121 91 78 45 28 5 259

Acc idents36 31 2 2 2 12 4 7 2 4 4 13 2 5

CFIT

Loss of

Control

(Inflight)

Midair

CollisionInflight Fire

Fuel Tank

ExplosionLanding Ice/Snow

Fuel

ExhaustionWindshear

Takeoff

Config

Runw ay

IncursionOther RTO* Unknow n

Total Fatalities = 6,792 (6,566 onboard)

1997 fatalities = 684 (all onboard)

462

37178

Fatalities by Accident CategoriesFatal Accidents - Worldwide Commercial Jet Fleet - 1988 through 1997


10/30

TAWS and RNP

Improved Safety Net for Obstacle Clearance

VNAV path contained within TAWS envelope

Terrain clearance floor

Starting width= 1/4 nmi

700 ft AGL 400 ft AGL

15 nmi 12 nmi 5 nmi 0.5 nmi Runway

Look-ahead distancevaries with groundspeed and turn rate

Look-ahead splays+/- 3 degrees

Slopes vary withflight path angle


11/30

RNP RNAV called for by CAST

The plan will direct or encourage the aviation community to:

Take advantage of existing aircraft capabilities to improve approach and landing

safety to the maximum extent practical, and

Transition to use of new and evolving aircraft capabilities that can further improve

approach and landing safety at the earliest practical time


12/30

RNP RNAV called for by CAST

The plan will direct or encourage the aviation community to:

Take advantage of existing aircraft capabilities to improve approach and landing safety to the

maximum extent practical, and

Transition to use of new and evolving aircraft capabilities that can further improve approach and

landing safety at the earliest practical time

In the interest of safety, the industry should discontinue the use of step-down or dive-and-drive Non-

Precision approach procedures as soon as, and wherever, possible . . .

This would include procedures such as the constant rate descent that can be flown by all types of

aircraft and use of the modern vertical navigation capability (VNAV) by some existing and most

new aircraft types

~ Controlled Flight Into Terrain (CFIT) Joint Safety Implementation Team (JSIT) Implementation Plan

For Precision-Like Approaches, Statement of Work (formally accepted by the CAST)


13/30

FAF (5 to 7 miles from runway)

DA(H)

LNAV, VNAV flight guidance

through missed approach

procedure

Missed

approachBalked

landing

Landing flaps / configuration

Landing check complete

Lateral/vertical flight guidance to runway

Autopilot/autothrottle fully available

(as low as 250 ft above

airport)

Substantial Safety EnhancementRNP Enables Stabilized Approaches

Situational awareness improved

Reduces crew workload

Eliminates Dive and Drive (Non-Precision) approaches

Provided a Stabilized Approach with LNAV/VNAV guidance to runway threshold

Runway

Typical unstabilized

non-precision

approach


14/30

Generic TERPS Final Approach AreaRNP 0.15 Containment Zones for Comparison

RNP Versus FAAs RNAV

7:1 transitional surface

RNP 0.15 containment zone

DA (H) / MAP

RNP provides vertical and horizontal guidance to the runway

RNAV provides no vertical guidance if an obstacle penetrates the vertical surface resulting in dive and drive.


15/30


16/30

Efficiency/Capacity Benefits

Improved schedule reliability

New runway directions available for use

Lower landing minimums Improved airport and airspace system capacity

Fewer missed approaches

Yielding

Fuel savings

Time savings

Improved customer satisfaction


17/30

Efficiency Improvements Achieved

Minima below that of ground based equipment at 4 Alaskan Airports

Approaches to runways that can or not be served with ground based equipment at 6

Alaskan Airports

65 flights to Juneau in the first 9 months of 2001 were saved by RNP


18/30

Supports FAAs OEP

Less airspace needed per operation

Independent parallel approaches possible to runways separated by 2500 feet.


19/30


20/30


21/30


22/30


23/30


24/30


25/30

RNP Capability Today

7500 or 45 % are RNP capable globally

+ 50 % in US are RNP capable

85% Continental

70% Alaska

70% American

50% United

40% US Airways


26/30

Past Impediments to Progress Are Disappearing

Airline perspective: FAA is not sufficiently supporting RNP

Lack of understanding (both government and industry) of RNP

capability and safety enhancements

Benefits not realized with FAAs RNAV

Mixed equipage, but this is rapidly diminishing

Resistance to change, but FAA leadership can overcome this


27/30

Specific FAA Action Requested

Adapt Alaskas 737 RNP criteria to create FAA approved

generalized RNP Approach Design criteria for all carriers

Continue DCA special procedure development

Document lessons learned

Develop public criteria

Develop public procedures


28/30

Summary

Many planes are RNP capable and manufacturers continue to deliver more

- Airworthiness approval is documented in AFM for terminal/approach use

Many airlines are ready to use this capability

- Ops Specs for RNAV have been issued

This expensive capability is already paid for, (May-96 first revenue flight)

Air carriers already invested, equipped, trained, ready to fly

Immediate safety, delay reduction and economic benefits are available


29/30

Conclusion

Opportunity to facilitate leadership in the U.S. and global air transport industry

RNP is unique in its impact (benefits) and changeability (ease of implementation)

Changeability

High

Low

Low High

Impact

RNP

Changeability/Impact Matrix


30/30

The End

alaska airlines, smith presentation

Documents