ICAO Performance
Based Navigation
Symposium
16th–19th October 2012
Captain Alan Stealey
DSVP Flight Operations
Emirates Airline
Aircraft Avionics - PBN
Emirates have developed PBN approaches at:-
Seychelles, Sa’ana, Addis Ababa, Karachi, Damascus, Male (Maldives), Khartoum and New
York…………..
Performance Based Navigation (PBN)
Removes reliance on ground based aids (e.g. ILS, VOR & NDB)
Removes the need for non-precision or circling approaches
Allows approaches when the weather would preclude non-precision or circling approaches
Available where terrain prevents use of ground based aids
Can increase traffic flows at runway limited airfields
Enhances safety
Addis Ababa – RNAV Approach
“Angled“ Final Approach
Airfield Elevation 7650 ft AMSL
Addis Ababa – RNAV Approach
Runway
Airfield Elevation 7650 ft.
AMSL
Addis Ababa – Reduction in events
RNAV Procedures
Introduced
JFK – “Carnarsie” Approach
Performance Based Navigation – The Challenges
for States
•
We have seen the benefits, so what are the challenges?
•
Recognising that PBN matters
•
Design and development of procedures
•
Implementation
•
Utilisation by the ANSP
Confused? (taken from a current
set of approach charts)
ICAO recognized Obstacles
Lack of expertise
In the airspace environment
In the operational approval process
In pilot and ATC controller training
Misconceptions of the system
Shortcomings in co-ordination between stakeholders
National
Regional
Performance Based Navigation – ANSPs &
Airports
Safety
• Improve traffic flow rate
• Avoid “noise sensitive” areas
• Reduced capital / maintenance costs of ground aids
• Fuel efficiency & reduction of emissions
But
• New mindset (ATM vs. ATC)
• Cost of development
• Use of procedures once developed
•
Route – Inefficient use of airspace
Fuel Cost Examples –
EK 784 Vertical Profile (Accumulated Track Miles)
+2.1 tonnes above planned descent and arrival fuel = emissions
Dubai – RNAV Departure
For the future……………..
The airline industry needs PBN - NOW!
Coordination required between all stakeholders - they must understand their
role in the overall development of PBN for the airline industry
Regulators need to be proactive in the design and development of PBN
Regulators must accept accreditation from foreign states – an operator who
is certified to complete RNP AR approaches by its own regulator should not
be required to get further approval from around the world
Keep it simple
For Operators……
My suggestions are:
Work with the Local Regulators
Take a leadership role, if necessary
Be prepared to pay for development, giving the State the
procedure to maintain/become public
Use the “Best Fit” procedure (RNAV vs RNP AR)
Keep your organization focused that Safety is more important than
cost savings in terms of fuel and emissions..…
We need States to: ...
Establish national multidisciplinary Collaborative Decision Making teams to
facilitate PBN implementation
Concentrate resources on the priorities that will yield the best cost effective
results
Deliver quick wins
Enable rapid use of airborne and ATM capabilities
Optimize and harmonize approval processes
Support globally accepted approvals and accreditations
Invest in education and training
Regulators, controllers, procedure and airspace designers
A Final Thought…..
We need to all work together to ensure that
regulation does not get in the way of
implementation and utilisation
Thank you