NETOPS/2

WP19

EUROCONTROL

NETWORK MANAGEMENT

Network Operations Team

Second Meeting, 28-29 February 01 March 2012 (NETOPS/2) EUROCONTROL HQ Brussels

Agenda Item 9.3:

Development of a draft SES interoperability Implementing Rule on Performance-Based Navigation (PBN IR)
Submitted by DSS/REG/SES

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: EUROCONTROL has been mandated by the European Commission to develop a draft interoperability implementing rule on Performance Based Navigation (PBN) that will define navigation requirements and identify the functionalities required in en-route and terminal air-space, including arrival and departure, and also approach. Currently, the activity is in its first phase development of the Regulatory Approach during which several regulatory alternatives for the drafting of the implementing rule are being developed and assessed. The information presented in the paper represents an advanced draft which is aimed at providing an opportunity for an informal stakeholder consultation, as foreseen in the PBN mandate development process. The draft alternatives are still subject to change depending on the outcome of the preliminary impact assessment activities. The regulatory alternatives will form part of the draft Regulatory Approach Document (RAD). The RAD will be subjected to formal stakeholder consultation process, currently foreseen to be launched at the end of March 2012. During the formal consultation process, Stakeholders will have the opportunity to submit comments and express their formal positions on the proposed alternatives. The objective of this paper is to provide early information to and seek feedback from the NETOPS Team Members on the draft regulatory alternatives. RECOMMENDATIONS: The Members of the ANT are requested to: a. note the content of the paper; b. provide feedback on the draft regulatory alternatives.

Blank Page

1.
1.1

Draft Regulatory Approach Scenarios

Four scenarios have been defined and are currently being impact. Only three of the scenarios foresee regulatory contains three parts: En-route, Terminal Airspace and navigation functionalities and navigation performance and have been identified for each scenario. assessed for their potential provisions. Each scenario Final Approach. A set of infrastructure requirements

1.2

In parallel to the scenarios, two levels of continuity are being considered in terms of NAVAIDS infrastructure and airborne equipment, in order to cope with the failure modes and the business continuity requirement. In all scenarios, the specific requirements associated with the accommodation of State aircraft will have to be considered. This entails the consideration of dates aligned with military procurement cycles, taking due account of new production transport type State aircraft, considering the set of navigation functionalities as for civil aircraft, and opportunity for performance-based equivalent compliance for non-transport type State aircraft and transitional accommodation of lower capability State aircraft. A summary table of the characteristics of the regulatory scenarios is provided at Annex 1 to this paper.

1.3

1.4

2.
2.1

Do-Nothing scenario
The Do Nothing scenario describes the case where no new1 PBN regulatory measure is to be applied in Europe. This reference scenario comprises an estimate, built on best expert judgement, of how navigation capabilities and PBN procedures will evolve from today to 2025 and beyond. This scenario is used as a reference to assess the benefits of regulatory measures considered under the other scenarios.

2.2

3.

Scenario 1: Minimum Regulatory Coverage

Aircraft functionalities for scenario 1 En-Route RNP1 Terminal Airspace RNP 1 RF RNAV Holding VNAV Final Approach LNAV

3.1

The key elements of Scenario 1 are aimed at ensuring a uniform PBN solution with RNP1 capability and with full flexibility in terms of TMA operations as well as a long term evolution towards initial 4D. LNAV approaches will be required for final approach at all runways.

B-RNAV is a PBN regulatory measure

En-route Operations 3.2 An area navigation system with RNP capability, 1NM accuracy performance predicated on GNSS will be required onboard aircraft by 20182. The ATS fixed route network will be adapted in order to reduce the spacing to the minimum achievable distance to improve the EATMN performance targets. However the fixed route network adaptation will be limited to straight segments, due to the exclusion of FRT.

Terminal Airspace Operations 3.3 As for en-route operations, an area navigation system with RNP capability, 1NM accuracy performance predicated on GNSS will be required onboard aircraft by 20183 in all European TMAs. SIDs and STARs will be designed with reduced route spacing to improve the EATMN performance targets. The area navigation system required for the en-route part of the flight would be suitable for the TMA in this scenario. RNAV holding functionality will be required. SIDs and STARs with vertical constraints could be flown with coupled guidance (VNAV capability) RF functionality will enable the development of procedures with predictable turns in the initial and intermediate phases of the approach. It will be used particularly in the case of terrain and obstacle rich environments or to build new arrival or departure procedures, intended to reduce the extent of noise on a certain route.

3.4

3.5 3.6 3.7

Final Approach Operations 3.8 For final approach operations, in accordance with ICAO Assembly Resolution A37-11, RNP approaches will be required but in their simplest form: LNAV-only. Deployment of these RNP approaches at all instrument runways to replace NPA or as a backup to ILS will be required by 2016. Onboard capability needed to conduct an RNP approach to LNAV minima will be required by 2018 to align with GNSS carriage requirements for other phases of flight Accommodation of lower capability State aircraft needs to be ensured.4

3.9 3.10

4.

Scenario 2: Complete Regulatory Coverage to Enable Deployment of Operational Improvements in EATMN by 2018
Aircraft functionalities for scenario 2 En-Route RNP1 FRT above FL 195 Tactical Parallel Offset Terminal Airspace RNP 1 RF RNAV holding VNAV Final Approach APV and LNAV

2 3

Date may be different for state aircraft Date may be different for state aircraft 4 Date may be different for state aircraft

4.1

This scenario requires all navigation functionalities that have been identified as sufficiently mature for implementation by 2018. Similarities to Scenario 1 and additional features have been identified separately below to ease the comparison between the scenarios. APVs will be available at all runways by 2016.

En-route Operations Common features with Scenario 1: 4.2 An area navigation system with RNP capability, 1NM accuracy performance predicated on GNSS will be required onboard aircraft by 20185. ATS fixed route network will be adapted in order to reduce the spacing to the minimum achievable distance to improve the EATMN performance targets. SIDs and STARs embedded in the en-route airspace could be flown with coupled vertical guidance (in the same way as in the TMA). This capability will allow for better adherence to vertical constraints in the SID or STAR design.

4.3

New features: 4.4 By 2018, FRT functionality will be required for ATS fixed routes above FL 195 and, therefore, minimum route spacing would be possible on all ATS fixed routes including turning segments. Standardised Tactical Parallel Offset (TPO) airborne capability will also be required to enable in particular predictable transitions to the offset path. This will ease parallel offset use by controllers and will result in radar vectoring reduction and increase of capacity for same and opposite direction traffic. The full set of functionalities is envisaged for transport type State aircraft but only for new production aircraft (this is also the case for subsequent scenarios).

4.5

4.6

Terminal Airspace Operations Common Features with Scenario 1: 4.7 4.8 4.9 By 2018, SIDs and STARs can be designed with reduced route spacing enabling more efficient TMA traffic deconfliction. RNAV holding functionality will be required. SIDs and STARs with vertical constraints could be flown with coupled guidance (Basic VNAV capability). RF functionality will enable the development of procedures with predictable turns in the initial and intermediate phases of the approach. It will be used particularly in the case of terrain and obstacle rich environments or to build new arrival or departure procedures intended to reduce the extent of noise on a certain route.

Final Approach Operations Common Features with Scenario 1: 4.10 LNAV onboard capability will be required by 20186 to align with the GNSS carriage requirement for other phases of flight.

New features:

5 6

Date may be different for state aircraft Date may be different for State aircraft

4.11

In addition to the LNAV requirement, Barometric Vertical NAVigation (BaroVNAV) or Satellite Based Augmentation System (SBAS) onboard capability supporting APV operations will be required. This will ensure that all approaches will be performed with vertical guidance as well as reliable distance to the runway. Different decision altitudes may apply to BaroVNAV and APV SBAS, but these will not be lower than CAT I decision altitude. Deployment of APV approach procedures - APV Baro and/or APV SBAS - will be achieved by 2016 in accordance with ICAO Assembly Resolution A37-11. LNAV is considered in this scenario as a backup to APV operations. Accommodation of lower capability State aircraft must be ensured.

4.12

4.13

5.

Scenario 3: Extended Regulatory Coverage to Enable Long-term Evolution towards Introduction of Trajectory-Based Operations by 2025
Aircraft functionalities for scenario 3 En-Route RNP1 FRT above FL 195 Tactical Parallel Offset RTA Terminal Airspace RNP 1 RF RNAV Holding VNAV 4D RTA/VNAV Final Approach APV and LNAV

5.1

This scenario requires all the navigation functionalities and requirements needed to support all the operational requirements, including the mature features for 2018 and those enabling long term evolution towards initial 4D. APVs will be available at all runways by 2016.

En-route Operations Common Features with Scenario 2: 5.2 An area navigation system with RNP capability, 1NM accuracy predicated on GNSS will be required onboard aircraft by 2018. The ATS fixed route network will be adapted in order to reduce the spacing to the minimum achievable distance to improve the EATMN performance. By 2018, FRT functionality will be required for ATS fixed routes above FL 195 and, therefore, minimum route spacing would be possible on all ATS fixed routes, including turn performances. Standardised Tactical Parallel Offset (TPO) capability will also be required to enable predictable trajectories that controllers could typically use to reduce radar vectoring or to increase capacity for same and opposite direction traffic. SIDs and STARs extended into the en-route airspace could be flown with coupled vertical guidance in the same way as in the TMA. This capability will allow for better adherence to vertical constraints in the SID or STAR design.

5.3

5.4

5.5

Differences to Scenario 2: 6

5.6

Limited 4D navigation capability will be provided to meet a given ATC time constraint in en-route airspace with a 30 seconds window performance. The purpose of this is to enable ATS to provide better tactical control of the traffic flow and thus to contribute to the reduction of flight delays. This would be achieved by using the RTA functionality as the basis for managing constraints as close as possible to congested areas rather than using take-off slots, i.e. real time updates of an aircraft position will complement the Flight Management System's (FMS) contribution. Depending on the accuracies achieved, the necessary procedures and the tools will be developed and deployed. Given that the performance standards required are not as demanding in en-route airspace (i.e.: +/-30 seconds) as in the TMA (i.e.: +/-10 seconds), that more flight levels are to be expected in this phase of flight, and that the meteorological conditions could have a significant effect, the time predictions are expected to be more stable in en-route airspace. This time constraint capability will be used by ATC in a mixed mode environment until 20187 when it will be required for all aircraft.

5.7

5.8

Terminal Airspace Operations Common features with Scenario 2: 5.9 5.10 5.11 5.12 SIDs and STARs can be designed with reduced route spacing enabling easier TMA traffic deconfliction. RNAV holding functionality will be required. SIDs and STARs with vertical constraints could be flown with coupled guidance (VNAV capability). RF functionality will enable the development of procedures with predictable turns in the initial and intermediate phases of the approach. It will be used particularly in the case of terrain and obstacle rich environments or to build new arrival or departure procedures, intended to reduce the extent of noise on a certain route.

Differences to Scenario 2: 5.13 Initial 4D navigation is supported in this scenario by the provision of RTA functionality and the appropriate vertical navigation to meet the ATC time constraint for arrival by 2025. It is the initial step towards the SESAR business trajectory concept. The RTA performance requirement is as demanding as +/-10 seconds.

Final Approach Operations Common features with Scenario 2: 5.14 5.15 LNAV onboard capability will be required by 2018 to align with the GNSS carriage requirements for other phases of flight. In addition to the LNAV requirement, Barometric Vertical NAVigation (BaroVNAV) or Satellite Based Augmentation System (SBAS) onboard capability supporting APV operations will be required. This will ensure that all approaches will be performed with vertical guidance as well as reliable distance to the runway. Different decision altitudes will apply to BaroVNAV and APV SBAS, but these will not be lower than CAT I decision altitude. Deployment of APV approach procedures - APV Baro and/or APV SBAS will be achieved by 2016 in accordance with ICAO Assembly Resolution A37-11. LNAV is considered in this scenario as a backup to APV operations.

5.16

Date may be different for State aircraft

6.
6.1

Operational continuity levels

Continuity in this document is the level of transparency to two types of failures of the PBN system: loss of GNSS and area navigation system failure. Continuity is achieved by means of a reversionary mode which is called a back up system when the required performances under normal conditions cannot be met. Continuity shall, as a minimum, ensure safe operation. However would also consider any more stringent continuity requirement based on operators desired business / mission continuity need. In parallel to the required functionalities identified in Scenarios 1 to 3, two levels of continuity were retained for each scenario: Level 1: Single area navigation system / GNSS single frequency only ; Level 2: Dual area navigation system / dual frequency /Multi constellation GNSS and/or RNP based on conventional NAVAIDS

6.2

6.3

6.4

Other intermediate continuity levels such as Single area navigation system / dual frequency /Multi constellation GNSS and/or RNP based on conventional NAVAIDS or Dual Area navigation system / GNSS single frequency only could be envisaged. At implementation stage the level of continuity of the fleet shall be taken into consideration in the local safety assessment when establishing the back up procedures to RNP system failure and loss of GNSS signal in space ANSPs will be required to define and establish the reversionary mode to deal with GNSS failures and RNP system failures.

6.5

6.6

7.

Recommendations
The Members of the NETOPS are requested to: a. note the content of the paper; b. provide feedback on the draft regulatory alternatives.

Annex 1: Regulatory scenarios & Operational Continuity levels Summary table

Step 1 : 2016
Requirements Deploy LNAV procedures ANSPs (including Airport) action Deploy APV Baro and/or APV SBAS procedures Establish back up procedures to loss of GNSS signal in space Do nothing Scenario 1 FINAL APPROACH NO NO YES NO YES YES YES YES Scenario 2 Scenario 3

NO

YES

YES

YES

Step 2 : 2018
Requirement Do nothing Aircraft performance as required today with local PBN initiatives possible. NO (only B-RNAV) NO NO NO obtain appropriate Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 EN-ROUTE Operators provisions (aircraft equipage) RNP 1.0 FRT Tactical Parallel Offset RTA Equip and approval

YES NO NO NO YES

YES YES above FL 195 YES NO YES

YES YES above FL 195 YES YES YES

TERMINAL AIRSPACE (BELOW FL 195) OUTSIDE FAF No specific

RNP RF VNAV (i.e. Vertical constraints but no coupled guidance) RNAV Holding GNSS carriage LNAV (RNP 0.3) capability Baro VNAV capability or SBAS capability GNSS carriage Equip and obtain appropriate approval Implement minimum route spacing in the fixed ATS route network to meet network performance targets

functionality required at European level; local PBN initiatives NO NO NO NO

RNP 1.0 YES YES YES

RNP 1.0 YES YES YES YES

RNP 1.0 YES YES YES YES

NO YES FINAL APPROACH NO NO NO YES NO YES YES

YES YES YES YES

YES YES YES YES

ANSPs actions Establish ATC back up procedures in case of GNSS outage for all phases of flight

NO Route spacing as required today with local PBN initiatives possible Free Route airspace where required

YES on straight segment only

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

10

Approve GNSS as primary means of navigation for all phases of flight New production state aircraft are equip and obtain appropriate approval by agreed military implementation date. Seek performance-based equivalent compliance for non transport-type State aircraft by national regulators

YES

YES

YES

States Actions

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

Step 3 : 2025
Requirement RTA Operators provisions (aircraft equipage) 4D navigation including RTA and appropriate VNAV Deploy all required elements to support Trajectory Based Operation Concept Do nothing NO Scenario 1 NO Scenario 2 NO Scenario 3 YES TERMINAL AIRSPACE (BELOW FL 195) OUTSIDE FAF TERMINAL AIRSPACE (BELOW FL 195) OUTSIDE FAF NO NO NO YES

ANSPs action

NO

NO

NO

YES

11

TERMINAL AIRSPACE (BELOW FL 195) OUTSIDE FAF Requirements Operators provisions Aircraft Equipage Do nothing Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3

No specific functionality required at European level; local PBN initiatives NO NO NO RNP 1.0 2018 YES 2018 YES 2018 RNP 1.0 2018 YES 2018 YES 2018 RNP 1.0 2018 YES 2018 YES 2018

RNP RF VNAV (i.e. Vertical constraints but no coupled guidance) RNAV Holding 4D navigation including RTA and appropriate VNAV GNSS carriage

NO NO

YES 2018 NO

YES 2018 NO

YES 2018 YES 2025

NO

YES 2018

YES 2018

YES 2018

12

FINAL APPROACH Requirements Operators provisions Aircraft Equipage Do nothing Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3

All RNP APCH possible & conventional NO NO Yes 2018 NO Yes 2018 Yes 2018 Yes 2018 Yes 2018

LNAV (RNP 0.3) capability Baro VNAV capability or SBAS capability GNSS carriage ANSPs actions Deploy LNAV procedures Deploy APV Baro and/or APV SBAS procedures

NO

YES 2018

YES 2018

YES 2018

NO NO

Yes 2016 NO

YES 2016 YES 2016

YES 2016 YES 2016

Continuity Levels:
Continuity levels Operators provisions RNP system Multi-constellation GNSS capability ANSPs provisions Infrastructure Multi-constellation Back up Level 1 Single 2018 NO Level 2 Dual 2025 YES 2025

NO Conventional and ATC procedures

YES 2025 2018 ATC monitoring tools and/or procedure 2025 Multi GNSS

13