PBN Implementation in the Belgian Airspace BCAA presentation

PBN Implementation in the Belgian Airspace BCAA presentation May 2016 Ing. Jelle Vanderhaeghe PBN Implementation in training Belgian Civil Aviation Authority April 2016

Index: 1. History 2. GNSS-technology 3. PBN principles 4. RNP-approaches 5. RNP-Approach in Antwerp 6. PBN Accuracies 7. PBN Legal references 8. Training RNP-approaches in ATO Ing. Jelle Vanderhaeghe PBN Implementation in training Belgian Civil Aviation Authority April 2016

1. History: • In the early days of aviation, the earliest form of areal navigation was DEAD RECKONING: looking down from the airplane and flying from known/recognizable landmarks in the area • With the set-up of airmail and passenger transport after WWI, this was a sufficient technique, but in adverse weather lead to a large number of accidents (CFIT, disorientation, hitting obstacles) • More efficient methods of navigation were required a lead to the second form of navigation: Radio Navigation

1. History: • “Radio Navigation” is a technique of navigation, based emission/reception of electro-magnetic signals (waves) between an aircraft and a ground station (beacon) • Early technology of ground based radio navigation beacons: Decca – Loran C – NDB/ADF (1940 -1960’ies) • More advanced systems, still in use today: VOR – ILS – Markers – DME (1950’ies onward) • Some technology destined to be the “next best thing” never broke through: MLS was to replace ILS but was too complicated to calibrate and expensive for civil use (only 2 systems used in Heathrow status 2016)

1. History: Other navigation techniques were also applied: • Astronavigation: From the astrodome on top of an airplane, a navigator would compute the airplane’s position based on the location of known stars on the horizon, using a sextant • AHRS = Attitude Heading Reference System: INS/IRS strap down gyroscopes measure accelerations in 3 D, calculating position relative to a known initial position • Flux valves: Indicating Magnetic North as accurately as possible, to avoid influences by onboard electric systems

1. History: Disadvantages of “ground station”-based Radio Navigation: • Expensive and technically sensitive ground stations • Sensitivity to environment (terrain restraints of ILS for example) • Commonly available in densely populated areas, hardly any ground stations available in scarcely populated areas (Arctic, Oceanic areas, deserts, Siberia…) • Point-to-Point or station-to-station navigation, lead to waste of fuel/time/airspace • This point-to-point navigation, was replaced by RNAV

1. History: RNAV: = “Area Navigation” • RNAV is a technique whereby an FMS (Flight Management System) of an automated airplane performs the navigation • The FMS combines one or more signals from various approved sources: Ground stations (DME/DME – VOR/DME – ILS), and airplane based sources (IRS and GNSS receivers) = Navigation in straight lines, in between beacons! • RNAV was introduced in the end of the 1970’ies and allowed automated navigation in more straight lines, between departure and destination aerodrome

1. History: RNAV: • Based on the system capabilities and accuracies of the onboard systems, there are various categories: • B-RNAV = The airplane’s navigation equipment is capable of delivering a navigation accuracy to “stay within 5 NM, left and right of track for 95% of the flight time” (= ICAO Certification specification), over a distance of 100 NM between 2 stations • P-RNAV = The airplane’s navigation equipment is capable of delivering a navigation accuracy of “ 1 NM for 95% of the flight time” • RNAV as a navigation concept is now succeeded by RNP Ing. Jelle Vanderhaeghe PBN Implementation in training Belgian Civil Aviation Authority April 2016

1. History: RNP: = Required Navigation Performance: • RNAV is a navigation technique that makes distinction between AIRBORNE NAVIGATION EQUIPMENT, based on the degree of accuracy they can deliver • RNP is a criterion of AIRSPACES where certain minima of navigation accuracy are applicable and must be met by the onboard navigation equipment, before an aircraft is allowed to fly into it • RNP is furthermore based on GNSS signals ONLY!

1. History: PBN: = Performance Based Navigation = NAVIGATION PROCEDURES as an alternative to point-to-point navigation techniques using ground based stations only = combination of RNAV + RNP • 3 D-aspect to the navigation (continuous and engine idle descent)

1. PBN: = Principles of RNP & RNAV COMBINED + 3 D-aspect (vertical aspect added to the navigation) • It allows more efficient use of available airspace • It allows more efficient energy management, less noise, due to continous descent + Engines in low regime when descending

2. GNSS: • The main source of PBN/RNP is GNSS (Global Navigation Satellite Systems) • The navigation data originate from “Constellations”: Systems of multiple satellites, used to determine position • There are 4 Constellations in use/development today: GPS/Navstar (USA) – Globally operational Glonass (Russia) – Globally operational Galileo (Europe) – In test Beidou (China) – Operational in Asia

2. GNSS principles: • Non-geostationary satellites in various orbits around the Earth that emit a signal (carrier wave + encoded message) towards the Earth’s surface and contains the time of emission of the signal • Receivers calculate the time difference (ti) between time of emission of the signal and time of reception • Using the principle vi = xi/ti (Speed = distance/time) and knowing the signals travel at light speed (vi = c = 300. 000 m/s), and the delay (ti), the distance to a satellite (xi) is calculated • It takes 4 satellites to acquire an accurate 3 D-fix

2. GNSS principles: A receiver calculates its position in 3 D (X/Y/Z) and GNSS-time, based on the signals of multiple satellites:

2. GNSS principles: Calculating principle (FYI): A receiver calculates a position in 3 D (X/Y/Z) and time, based on the following matrix of formulae: (X 1 – X)² + (Y 1 – Y)² + (Z 1 – Z)² = (t 1. c – CB. c)² (X 2 – X)² + (Y 2 – Y)² + (Z 2 – Z)² = (t 2. c – CB. c)² (X 3 – X)² + (Y 3 – Y)² + (Z 3 – Z)² = (t 2. c – CB. c)² (X 4 – X)² + (Y 4 – Y)² + (Z 4 – Z)² = (t 2. c – CB. c)² With: X 1, Y 1, Z 1 = 3 D coordinates of satellite 1 when its signal was emitted t 1 = Time when the signal was emitted by satellite 1 X, Y, Z = Position of (and calculated by) the receiver (= 3 unknown factors) CB = Clock Bias = Time error of receiver with respect to the “GNSS time” (= 4 th unknown factor in the equation, as “receiver time” is very inaccurate) c = Speed of the signal = Speed of light (300. 000 km/hour, or 300. 000 m/s)

2. GNSS Constraints: 1. CLOCK INACCURACIES: Each minor difference (CB) between the satellite’s emission time of the signal (“GNSS-time”) and the receivers’ own “time” at that moment, is MULTIPLIED BY 300. 000 and may lead to 100’s meters of position error… • Receivers are regarded as “the weak link” in the GNSS set-up, as they don’t have atomic clocks (with extreme high accuracy) • The time delay (CB) between GNSS-time in the satellites and receivers, is incorporated as a 4 th unknown in the equations to determine receiver position and is solved mathematically • This explains the need of a 4 th satellite for exact 3 Dpositioning, to help solve the 4 th unknown factor: CB

2. GNSS Constraints: 2. TROPOSPHERIC INTERFERENCE: the signals originate from outer space (vacuum, no matter) and travel through the atmosphere, that becomes more dense closer to the Earth => “Bending” or Refraction of the signal (that travel in a curved pattern, not in a straight line!), when encountering denser medium (cfr • Updates of the actual situation of the troposphere in certain areas are constantly “uploaded” by ground stations to the GNSS-satellites and included in the GNSS-signals to receivers

2. GNSS Constraints: 3. The Earth is more of a “sphere” than a ball, in shape • GPS and Galileo use WGS-84 as reference, for the Earth: it considers the Earth’s circumvent as a perfect sphere • Unfortunately the Earth still is a “Rock” in the Universe that is gently forming into a sphere, even after millions of years… • This explains why altimetry is difficult using GNSStechnology! Ball WGS-84 (sphere) Real Earth (rock)

2. GNSS Augmentation: • All the difficulties of GNSS-technology combined, lead to a necessity (for high precision applications, like aviation) to AUGMENT the accuracy of the signal of GNSS Constellations • These augmentation systems are destined to increase the accuracy of position determination by the receivers of the GNSS-signals • There are various types of augmentation systems: ABAS: Airborne Based Augmentation System SBAS: Space Based Augmentation System GBAS: Ground Based Augmentation System Ing. Jelle Vanderhaeghe PBN Implementation in training Belgian Civil Aviation Authority April 2016

2. GNSS - SBAS: Space Based Augmentation Systems EGNOS (Europe) - WAAS (USA) = 3 Geostationary satellites per SBAS system (keeping their position relative to the Earth): they provide extra fixed position data to the users of GNSS receivers, to improve the accuracy of position determination by the receiver

2. GNSS - SBAS: • SBAS is used to augment GNSS signals for ALL FUTURE NONPRECISION APPROACHES (RNP-approaches) in BELGIUM • It is IMPOSSIBLE/USELESS to certify it for CAT I/II/III (PRECISION APPROACHES) due to the reference WGS-84 that differs too much from the real Earth’s shape

2. GNSS - GBAS: Ground Based Augmentation Systems = known), compare the position calculated using GNSS-signals • This allows the GBAS receivers to calculate corrections and send them through to GNSS-receivers in the vicinity (= VDB signal)

2. GNSS - ABAS: Airborne Based Augmentation Systems AAIM Integrityand (Aircraft Monitoring) Autonomous. RAIM = (Receiver Autonomous Integrity Monitoring) = Onboard systems that monitor whether or not the signals received by a GNSS-satellite, are still reliable or not, by comparing the positions calculated with it, to position obtained, using signals of other GNSS-satellites

2. GNSS Benefits: • Truly GLOBAL system: usable in even the most remote areas in the World, with comparable accuracy • Open source (no taxes, or fees) • Much lower maintenance costs of navigation aids for Air Navigation Service Providers (fe Belgocontrol): 1 VOR = +/200. 000 € in purchase + Annual calibration + Maintenance + Monitoring + Repair

3. PBN: • PBN = Performance Based Navigation • After “RNAV” & “RNP” the new “key word” is PBN, although PBN is used for Enroute only, approaches are still designated “RNP-approach”… • PBN is implemented by ICAO DOC 9613 in 2008 1. PBN requires RNAV onboard aircraft equipment + it requires FUNCTIONALITY at any flight stage (=> Verification of INTEGRITY is very important with these navigation methodologies!) 2. PBN describes the requirements to ENTER AN AIRSPACE and to EXECUTE CERTAIN PRIVILEGES 3. PBN not only requires NAVIGATION PERFORMANCE and INTEGRITY, but also FLIGHT CREW QUALIFICATION

3. PBN: Planning Belgocontrol SHORT TERM approach to EN ROUTE NAVIGATION: • Removal of enroute NDB’s (MAK – Mackel, LONDI) • Replacement of enroute VOR (BUN – NIK – AFI – … ) by GNSS waypoints • Maintaining of enroute DME (combined with VOR -> GNSS waypoint) • Maintaining Terminal VOR (ANT – BRU – … ) This planning may vary in the future and timing is uncertain at this stage

3. PBN: Planning Belgocontrol MID TERM approach to TERMINAL NAVIGATION: • RNP Approaches to equip ALL EXISTING non-precision approaches by 2018, with an RNP-overlay • Removal of the classic non-precision ground equipment • GLS (GNSS Landing System) as overlay of ILS (future of CAT II/III certification is dubious at this stage, none planned in Belgium at this stage, status 2016) LONG TERM approach to TERMINAL NAVIGATION: • Removal of ILS fully replaced by GLS (? )

3. PBN: Planning Belgocontrol • Certification beyond CAT I of SBAS/GBAS technology is uncertain at this stage (° 2016) • Fraud of GNSS-signals (“Spoofing”), by transmission of fraudulent “bogus” satellites, pretending to generate actual GNSS-signals, is one of the big challenges in the future (impairing integrity) • “Ionospheric storms” due to intensified Solar Eruptions still is a significant threat for a World where all the landing systems would based on GNSS-technology only • Replacing all ILS antennas by GBAS is not as easy and as safe as it would appear in theory, at this stage…

4. Instrument approaches: 2 main categories of instrument approaches today: 1. PRECISION APPROACHES: • Lateral guidance (≈ Localizer) and Vertical guidance (≈ Glide Slope) • ILS (and MLS & PAR) are the most common types in use today • Vertical minima depend on the certification, but are 200 ft AGL, OR LESS • Certification is possible between CAT I/II/III A-B-C, based on minima, RVR, or visibility criteria • Both the localizer and glide slope must be purchased, maintained and calibrated annually for civil use

4. Instrument approaches: 2 main categories of instrument approaches today: 2. NON-PRECISION APPROACHES: • ONLY lateral guidance (Localizer), NO Vertical guidance (Glide Slope) • Vertical guidance is performed by the pilot(s), is not performed by a automatically, by a system • Minima ABOVE 200 ft AGL • Locator, VOR/DME, 2 NDB are the most common types • Lateral accuracy is less (except Locator-approach) compa-red to precision approaches, vertical accuracy depends on pilot performance and cockpit workload requiring company procedures (OM-A)

4. RNP-Approaches: Ing. Jelle Vanderhaeghe PBN Implementation in training Belgian Civil Aviation Authority April 2016

4. RNP-Approaches: • RNP-approaches are destined to replace existing NONPRECISION approaches • RNP approaches planned in Belgium use the SBAS-principle (EGNOS augmented) => No ground equipment required • In order to certify precision approaches to CAT I and higher, GROUND EQUIPMENT remains necessary = GLS • GLS = GPS Landing System (= GBAS-based)

4. RNP-Approaches: RNP approaches WITHOUT VERTICAL GUIDANCE: 1. NON-PRECISION APPROACH: RNP LNAV-Approach (“LNAV”) • LATERAL navigation only, NO VERTICAL guidance • based on GNSS-signals only, no augmentation 2. NON-PRECISION APPROACH: RNP LP-Approach (“LP”) • LATERAL navigation only, NO VERTICAL guidance • “Localizer Performance”-approach: GNSS signals + augmentation using EGNOS (= SBAS) • LP has higher lateral accuracy compared to LNAV

4. RNP-Approaches: RNP approaches WITH VERTICAL GUIDANCE: 3. NON-PRECISION APPROACH: RNP LNAV/VNAV-Approach (“LNAV/ VNAV”) • LNAV based on GNSS only, no augmentation • VNAV based on barometric inputs, with temperature correction 4. NON-PRECISION APPROACH: RNP LPV-Approach: (“LPV”) • Localizer Precision, or “LP”-approach (GNSS + EGNOS) • With vertical guidance => LPV = LP + Vertical guidance

4. RNP-Approaches: Overview of one of the first GNSSapproach plates: A. Separate identification of the approach, stating the main NAV-aid: “GPS” = Non-standard nomination B. VOR’s are mentioned without the frequency. The VOR is now a way point, signals originating from GPSsatellites C. ESRAQ is the Initial Approach Fix (IAF)

4. RNP-Approaches: D. HERNY is a waypoint also purely provided by GPS-satellite signals, not ground stations E. Missed Approach Point is also (MAPt) provided by GPS F. “ 2. 8 NM from RWY 07”, the distance is not provided by DME (not slant range but distance measure along the surface) G. Final Approach Fix (FAF)

4. RNP-Approaches: • • • Check out the date! This approach was installed, tested, approved and published by October 31 st 1997 by FAA Almost 20 years later, Europe (Belgium) is finally catching up… This type of approach would be considered “LNAV” today: No mention of any augmentation No vertical guidance (step-down)

4. RNP-Approaches: RNP approaches in Europe (Situation 2016 and prospected):

4. RNP-Approaches: RNP approaches in Belgium

4. RNP-Approaches: RNP approaches in Belgium (actual situation and prospect): Safety study Implementation

4. RNP-Approaches: Goal of implementing RNP approaches in Belgium: • Intended at “Enhancing SAFETY”: Replacing of classic/nonprecision approaches with more accurate and less maintenance requiring alternatives (2 NDB – VOR/DME – LOC) • According to statistics most accidents in civil aviation happen in the stages where the airplane is close to the ground: Takeoff & Landing (margins and reaction time are reduced)

4. RNP-Approaches: Goal of implementing RNP approaches in Belgium: • Reduction of costs! All Belgian planned RNP approaches will be GNSS (GPS) with Space Based Augmentation (SBASprinciple): EGNOS • This does not require additional ground equipment in the future (costly in purchase, sensitive and costly in maintenance)

5. RNP-Approach EBAW RWY 11 • Published in november 2015, became active on the 10 th of December 2015 • First PBN Approach, using GPS & EGNOS (SBAS) in Belgium • When selecting the approach, check CHANNEL 48476 (if available in the cockpit-system) • ARPUR, BEVRI and AW 11 F are GPS waypoints: FLY-BY POINTS

5. RNP-Approach EBAW RWY 11 = 3 Approaches in 1: • LPV, High lateral precision + vertical guidance • LNAV/VNAV, low lateral precision, with vertical guidance • LNAV, low lateral precision without vertical guidance

5. RNP Approach EBAW All fly the same lateral pattern! ARPUR and BEVRI are FLY-BY POINTS

6. PBN Accuracy ENROUTE

6. RNP-Approach Accuracies: Enroute: RNP 5 Terminal: RNP 1 Missed: RNP 1 Final: RNP 0. 3

7. PBN Legal references: The legal reference for RNP Approaches are : 1. ICAO Doc 9613: RNP (Required Navigation Performance) 2. EASA NPA 2014 -29 (D)(2): Learning Objectives (prospect) EASA ATPL/IR 3. EU 2016/539: Approved on April 6 th 2016, 5 th ammendment of EU 1178/2011, or EASA Air Crew Regulations

7. PBN Legal references: AIRCRAFT CERTIFICATION: • The FLIGHT MANUAL OF THE AIRPLANE is the SOLE REFERENCE that indicates whether or not an airplane is allowed to operate in RNP airspace and practice/execute RNP-approaches • A built-in, EASA certified GNSS system is always a requirement • Early GNSS-receivers were not SBAS (WAAS/EGNOS) (cap)able • Early Garmin 430 therefore are technically only able to perform an LNAV approach • As the early Garmin 430 did not take into account RNP-approach applications, Garmin 430 (early versions) is not explicitly approved for LNAV approaches (although technically able!)

7. PBN Legal references:

7. PBN Legal references: AIRCRAFT CERTIFICATION: • Mostly commercial aircraft (with MCP Mode Control panel, and ADC, Air Data Computer) have the LNAV/VNAV functionality (= LNAV + Barometric vertical assistance) • More recent/advanced GARMIN 430 (+WAAS/EGNOS) and GARMIN 1000 are SBAS-augmented • EASA certifies onboard systems for RNP-approaches • This is reflected specifically in the Aircraft’s flight manual

7. Training for PBN: AIR CREW: EU 1178/2011 ARTICLE 1 is ammended by EU 2016/539, with an extra Article 4 a and states the following about PBN: “Pilots may only fly in accordance with Performance-based Navigation (PBN) procedures after they have been granted PBN privileges as an endorsement on their instrument rating (IR)” “A pilot shall be granted PBN where he or she fulfils all of the following requirements: a) the pilot has successfully completed a course of theoretical knowledge including PBN in accordance with FCL. 615 of PART-FCL b) The pilot has successfully completed flying training including PBN, in accordance with FCL. 615 of PART-FCL”

7. Training for PBN: • A pilot must have received THEORETICAL TRAINING in PBN • A pilot must have received PRACTICAL TRAINING in PBN • “In accordance with FCL. 615 IR” = “Theoretical knowledge and flight instruction: “… at an ATO…” • This excludes all PBN training outside of an ATO, individual training FI-IR, or IRI, with a candidate individually • BCAA however requires proper training manuals (annex to IR training manual, or integrated in the training manual) prior to the start of the PBN training

7. Training for PBN: EU 1178/2011 ARTICLE 1 is ammended by EU 2016/539, with an extra Article 4 a and states the following about PBN: “A pilot shall be granted PBN where he or she fulfils all of the following requirements: c) The requirements of points (a) and (b) of paragraph 2 shall be deemed to have been fulfilled where the competent authority considers that the competence acquired, either through training or from familiarity with PBN operations, is equivalent to the competence acquired through the courses referred to in points (a) and (b), and the pilot demonstrates such competence to the satisfaction of the examiner at the proficiency check or skill test referred to in point (c). ” Ing. Jelle Vanderhaeghe PBN Implementation in training Belgian Civil Aviation Authority April 2016

7. Training for PBN: • The initial, basic PBN instructors in Belgian ATO will be FI-IR and IRI THAT CAN DEMONSTRATE OPERATIONAL TRAINING/ CHECKING AND EXPERIENCE, ONLY (IN EUROPE) • Acceptable proof: ATO/AOC signed document (signed by HT/TM) detailing the previous theoretical training received (+ dates), the type of approaches trained for and performed & total experience to be listed by the candidate instructor • A theoretical briefing will be organized by BCAA to all candidates for initial, basic PBN instructor (17/05, 07/06 & 01/07) • ATO HT/CFI also are invited to attend the BCAA PBN Symposium for theoretical briefing (to compose the PBN manual) • The BCAA theoretical GNSS & PBN briefing material will be freely made available to the aviation community

7. Training for PBN: • The initial, basic PBN instructors afterwards will perform theoretical and practical training in BCAA approved ATO, to STUDENTS, LICENSE HOLDERS and OTHER INSTRUCTORS • Other instructors, WITHOUT TRAINING/CHECKING/EXPERIENCE WITH AN OPERATOR (that do not qualify as initial, basic PBN instructors), should: Receive theoretical briefing in an ATO (1 day) Receive practical training in FNPTII (or on the airplane) Perform a prof check IR, with PBN (or PBN only) Receive endorsement in the logbook by the examiner: “RNP approved” and “RNP instructor approved” + Mention of the type of approaches performed (*) Whoever has attended the BCAA PBN-symposium is to be credited for Theoretical training in an ATO

7. Training for PBN: BCAA requests for practical training: • A minimum of 3 RNP approaches (1 using auto pilot, 1 manual, 1 with system errors or false instructions), UP TO PROFICIENCY • A combination of LNAV, LP and LPV is desirable, to demonstrate the different types of RNP-approaches • TRAINING may be performed entirely on approved simulators (FNTPII) • CHECKING may be performed entirely on approved simulators (FNTPII) Ing. Jelle Vanderhaeghe PBN Implementation in training Belgian Civil Aviation Authority April 2016

7. Training for PBN: • The initial, basic PBN Examiners will be designated by BCAA Licensing Directorate, provided they meet the following requirements: Theoretical training, practical training received with an operator, or an ATO and having performed an assessment (skill-test/prof check) Practical experience with an operator Attended BCAA Theoretical PBN briefing FI-IR/IRI privileges IRE (and/or) CRE privileges • PBN examiners may endorse PBN (+ instructor/examiner privileges to other license holders) in the logbook and sign-off IR/PBN skill test/prof check forms of other license holders, instructors and examiners

7. Training for PBN: • License holders without instructor privileges, but with operational experience with PBN at an operator, may be credited for PBN in the logbook, by BCAA PBN Examiners • This may be combined with Operator OPC/LPC

7. Exam for PBN: EU 1178/2011 ARTICLE 1 is ammended by EU 2016/539, with an extra Article 4 a and states the following about PBN: “A pilot shall be granted PBN where he or she fulfils all of the following requirements: c) The requirements of points (a) and (b) of paragraph 2 shall be deemed to have been fulfilled where the competent authority considers that the competence acquired, either through training or from familiarity with PBN operations, is equivalent to the competence acquired through the courses referred to in points (a) and (b), and the pilot demonstrates such competence to the satisfaction of the examiner at the proficiency check or skill test referred to in point (c). ” Ing. Jelle Vanderhaeghe PBN Implementation in training Belgian Civil Aviation Authority April 2016

7. Check for PBN: • A skill-test/prof check IR(A), or a separated PBN-check is mandatory for endorsement of PBN privileges, in the license holders’ logbook • All PBN approved license holders should ideally from then on demonstrate PBN-capabilities in every recurrent IR(A) prof check afterwards (1/year): the non-precision approach may be replaced by a PBN-approach • An annual logbook entry should NOT be made (one is sufficient), as long as the IR(A) + PBN Skill test/Prof check form is used (continually afterward) • From August 25 th 2020 ALL EASA compliant IR-checks will have to include the PBN part of the skill-test/prof check

7. Training for PBN: • Third country license holders may attend RNP-approach, in combination with ICAO (third country) to EASA conversion training • That combined conversion training may then be credited in full towards PBN-training, combined with a European IRrating, on a European license • All third country license holders should be converted by the April 8 th, 2017 (ammended date: original dat of April 8 th 2016 has been postponed with 1 year!)

8. Training for PBN: 1. RNP-approach training (LP – LNAV – LPV) is allowed on aircraft that in accordance to the flight manual are GNSS + SBAS ABLE & APPROVED (GNSS + WAAS/EGNOS mentioned in POH) 2. Training is allowed both in VMC/IMC, for BCAA Training Department, in GA in Belgian Airspace, from August 1 st 2016. 3. The responsibility is that of the PIC (as with all the other IRapproaches) 4. Taking a skill-test/prof check is allowed and the candidate may be legally signed-off for “PBN Approved” IN THE LOGBOOK + Mention of the types of approach performed (LP – LNAV/VNAV – LPV)

7. Training for PBN: 5. Training in ATO, approved for IR(A/H), only 6. “RNP Approach” training module = Annex to IR Training Manual, is to be included in standard EASA Training Manuals IR 7. Training with instructors that meet the initial, basic PBN instructors requirements 8. PBN Theory = 1 day of theoretical briefing (½ day GNSS + EGNOS, ½ day RNAV/RNP/PBN)

7. Training for PBN: 9. Training may be performed ENTIRELY ON AN AIRCRAFT, OR ENTIRELY ON A SIMULATOR (FNPTII), for already IR-rated candidates (= Holders of IR-rating), FI-IR/IRI and IRE/CRE(A) 10. PBN-training = 3 approaches minimum, UP TO PROFICIENCY: 1 automatic, 1 manual, 1 with failures or faulty instructions 11. Emphasis on failures and typical pre- and in-flight checks, related to RNP-approaches 12. PBN-Check: (1 RNP-approach, full procedure + Go-around followed by 2 nd full RNP-procedure, of either type of RNPapproach) on aircraft OR FNPTII, as an ADD-ON to the IR skill-test, or proficiency check, or a separate check, with an approved PBN-examiner

7. Training for PBN: 13. A note in the logbook (ONCE IS SUFFICIENT) mentioning “PBN approved”, “PBN Instructor approved”, or “PBN Examiner approved” to be legally “qualified” to fly RNP approaches and instruct (when possessing instructor privileges) on a certain type of aircraft 14. The note can be used as a credit for “difference training”, towards PBN-approaches on a different class (A<->H, SEP <-> Multi Pilot, Multi Engine Aircraft), or type (same class of aircraft but different type rating) Ing. Jelle Vanderhaeghe PBN Implementation in training Belgian Civil Aviation Authority April 2016

8. Training for PBN: • ATO are asked to upgrade FNPTII/aircraft (at least one on short notice) to OFFER THE FULL RANGE OF EXISTING PBN APPROACHES (LNAV, LP, LNAV/VNAV, LPV), at least LNAV and a PBN-approach with vertical guidance should be offered to students, for PBN-instruction • LNAV capability is insufficient to credit all PBN-approaches • The ATO must provide standard checking procedures (RAIM) and SOP’s specifically for GNSS-approaches in the GNSS/PBN training module (part of Instrument Rating) • Training & checking may be performed during the same day, the instructor and the examiner may be the same person Ing. Jelle Vanderhaeghe PBN Implementation in training Belgian Civil Aviation Authority April 2016

8. Preflight RAIM Check, prior to the flight: Minimum “integrity” level (ICAO Doc 9613, chapter 5. 3. 3): Chance of failure < 1/10 -5 per hour Ing. Jelle Vanderhaeghe PBN Implementation in training Belgian Civil Aviation Authority April 2016

8. Preflight Filing a flight plan is also affected by PBN S Equipment on board and serviceable J 6 CPDLC FANS 1/A SATCOM (MTSAT) A GBAS (landing system) J 7 CPDLC FANS 1/A SATCOM (Iridium) B LPV (APV with SBAS) K MLS C LORAN C L ILS D DME M 1 ATC RTF SATCOM (INMARSAT) E 1 FMC WPR ACARS M 2 ATC RTF (MTSAT) E 2 D-FIS ACARS M 3 ATC RTF (Iridium) E 3 PDC ACARS F ADF G GNSS. If any portion of the flight is planned to be conducted under IFR it refers to GNSS receivers that comply with the requirements of ICAO Annex 10, Volume I (see note 2) R PBN approved (see note 4) H HF RTF T TACAN I Inertial navigation U UHF RTF J 1 CPDLC ATN VDL Mode 2(see note 3) V VHF RTF J 2 CPDLC FANS 1/A HFDL W RVSM approved J 3 CPDLC FANS 1/A VDL Mode 4 X MNPS approved J 4 CPDLC FANS 1/A VDL Mode 2 Y VHF with 8. 33 KHZ channel spacing capability J 5 CPDLC FANS 1/A SATCOM (INMARSAT) Z Other equipment carried or other capabilities (see note 5) O P 1 -P 9 VOR Reserved for RCP

8. Preflight In the ICAO flight plan the following codes may be applied: • A: GBAS-sensor equiped • B: LPV-capability • G: GNSS-receiver equiped (certified/built-in) • R: PBN-approved

8. Preflight SYSTEM FUNCTIONALITY CHECK: • Often overlooked: “it’s not important”, “we’re only going to fly locally”, etc. -> No longer acceptable in GNSS/PBN-training • For GNSS/PBN-training and navigation by sole/main reference of satellite signals, the validity check and updates of the database ON THE AIRCRAFT IS ESSENTIAL • To avoid negative training, the databases on simulators should also be up-to-date (by preference)… Ing. Jelle Vanderhaeghe PBN Implementation in training Belgian Civil Aviation Authority April 2016

8. Preflight: PILOT CHECKS: • Presence of sufficient redundant navigation aids functional in the aircraft, in case of GNSS-system failure, to navigate to destination/ alternate • Ability to perform a missed approach, based on classic navigation aids (VOR/DME/NDB) • RAIM availability check (via NOTAM, or other means): in case of a prediction of more than 5 minutes of signal loss, the flight planning should be revised • Check NOTAMs regarding the planned RNP-approach Ing. Jelle Vanderhaeghe PBN Implementation in training Belgian Civil Aviation Authority April 2016

8. Preflight: SYSTEM CHECK • Also often overlooked: Interaction between the GNSS and the navigation tools: • Lateral CDI, Left Flag, Vertical CDI (GS), Vertical Flag on the HSI, RMI set? Ing. Jelle Vanderhaeghe PBN Implementation in training Belgian Civil Aviation Authority April 2016

8. Preflight • Number of satellites in sight, location accross the horizon (GDOP) • EPE = Estimated Position Error, DOP = Dilution of Precision, HUL = Horizontal Uncertainty Level Ing. Jelle Vanderhaeghe PBN Implementation in training Belgian Civil Aviation Authority April 2016

8. Preflight AIRCRAFT: • ACCURACY: Aircraft performance for PBN-training (ICAO Doc 9613, Chapter 5. 3. 3): Navigation accuracy must be within +/0, 3 NM off track in the final approach phase • INTEGRITY: Integrity monitoring required, able to verify the integrity is able to detect chance of failure below 1 per 10 -5 • CONTINUITY: In case of loss of integrity, the aircraft must be equipped with sufficient alternative navigation tools (VOR/ILS /DME) to resume navigation in case of GNSS-system failure • MONITORING & ALERTING: The pilot must be offered a means of verifying integrity and being warned of loss of integrity Ing. Jelle Vanderhaeghe PBN Implementation in training Belgian Civil Aviation Authority April 2016

8. Preflight GNSS-RECEIVER OF THE AIRCRAFT: • Ability to verify the validity of the database • Ability to load an entire navigation for a planned flight into the GNSS-receiver (the approach must be stored entirely in the Navigation database) • Ability to execute a “Direct to” • Ability to perform automatic track transitions, using “Direct to Fix” (DF), “Initial Fix” (IF), “Track to Fix” (TF) • Indication of GNSS-system receiver failure in the pilots’ primary area of view Ing. Jelle Vanderhaeghe PBN Implementation in training Belgian Civil Aviation Authority April 2016

8. Prior to approach 1. RAIM check, again when programming the approach 2. The approach is planned only IN FLIGHT, not prior to the flight, after ATIS & initial contact (teach the students the proper flight planning), unless for local (training) flights 3. The pilot should check the various waypoints in the approach (not load them him/herself), using a published approach plate 4. Verify/identify fly-by and fly-over points 5. Set the Airport barometric altimeter setting timely, when VNAV is applicable

8. Prior to approach: 6. multiple approach phases

8. Vectors: • Approach must be selected in its entirety (not built-up by the pilot in the FMS): • Either the approach is stored in the system, or to be considered NON-EXISTANT: a “home-built” procedures MAY NOT BE FLOWN • First the approach must be LOADED • Then only may a DCT (Direct to) be selected

8. Vectors: • Vectors may be accepted to (any of the IAF) • Vectors may be accepted to IF, IF THE COURSE CHANGE DOES NOT EXCEED 45° • Vectors directly to the FAF MAY NOT BE ACCEPTED!

erify 8. Vectors: • For Antwerp, vectors may be accepted to ANT (IAF), NIK, ARPUR and BEVRI (IF) • DCT BEVRI is only allowed when arriving within +/- 45° from the final approach course • Beyond BEVRI, no vectors may be accepted: • Otherwise the receiver will not switch to APPROACH MODE won’t System = accuracy is within 0, 3 NM (may stay within 1 NM)

8. EBAW • The “outbound”-procedure is designated “DTF” (Direct to Fix) • This portion for EBAW RW 11 is at 3. 000 ft = within EBBR TMA => Change over of ATC-frequency during the procedure is possible • The Brussels TMA was modified to the West to allow for this GNSSapproach

8. Approach: Go-around must be initiated when: 1. A NAV FLAG IS DISPLAYED 2. THE RAIM (UN)AVAILABLE WARNING lights up, or extinguishes: this is system dependent and should be trained differently for each system in the ATO 3. FTE (Flight Track Error) is excessive (more than half scale)

8. Approach: • 2 NM prior to the FAF, the pilot should check the GNSS-receiver switches to APPROACH MODE • For this reason the airplane must be established on the final approach course 2 NM prior to the FAF AT THE LATEST • Go-around must be initiated when 1. A NAV FLAG IS DISPLAYED 2. THE RAIM (UN)AVAILABLE WARNING LIGHTS UP/EXTINGUI-SHES (system dependent)

8. Approach • Beyond the FAF, the indication changes to TERM, • This means the aircraft is in the terminal area, with accuracy limits 1 NM left/right • RAIM check is within the limits, the approach may be continued

8. Approach • Indication of LNAV/VNAV, as an indication that the approach is selected and the RAIM check is valid • The aircraft is in the final area, lateral accuracy within 0, 3 NM • The approach may be continued to the minima

8. Approach • Indication of LPV, as an indication that the approach is selected and the RAIM check is valid • The aircraft is in the final area, lateral accuracy within 0, 3 NM • The approach may be continued to the minima

8. Approach • There seems to be unclarity with regards to DA(H)/MDA(H) • For Belgium, all LPV will be certified as NON-PRECISION APPROACHES • As a result, MDA(H) will be applicable: NO DESCENT BELOW MDA(H)! • Belgian ATO are requested to stimulate CDFA (Continuous Descent Final Approach), even with LNAV

8. Approach • ATO are requested to stimulate decision making “Go-around”/ “Continue” just prior to MDA and perform the first Go-around actions before reaching MDA in GNSS/PBN procedures. The MDA is considered an absolute minimum • As CDFA (Continuous Descent Final Approach) is to be trained, no descent to MDA and level-off until VDP (Visual Descent Point) should to be stimulated. • A go-around must be performed as published. Sufficient classic-navigation tools must be present and functioning in the airplane if the published go-around uses classic nav-tools

8. Standard Procedures REQUESTING AN RNP-APPROACH: “Antwerp Tower, OO-ABC, request RNP-approach RWY 11, via… (IAF designator)” ATC clearance for an RNP-approach: “OO-ABC, cleared RNP-approach, RWY 11, report… (IAF designator)” ATC may request (sequencing/situational awareness/separation): “OO-ABC, report established on final approach track” “OO-ABC, report 2 NM from final approach fix” “OO-ABC, report final approach fix”

8. Standard Procedures ATC may report known GNSS-problems as follows: “OO-ABC, GNSS reported unreliable” “OO-ABC, GNSS may not be available due to interference, vicinity of … (location/radius), between…(levels), from … to … (time)” If ATC suggest an RNP-approach and the airplane is not equipped, or the crew is not qualified: “Antwerp Tower, OO-ABC, unable RNP” If integrity (monitoring) is lost (“RAIM Unavailble”) “Antwerp Tower, OO-ABC, Loss of RAIM, (+intentions)” “Antwerp Tower, OO-ABC, RAIM Alert, (+intentions)”

8. Standard Procedures In case of loss of radiotelephony, the typical ICAO “Loss of communication procedures are valid (ICAO Annex 10): • VMC: 3. 6. 5. 2. 1 If in visual meteorological conditions, the aircraft shall: continue to fly in visual meteorological conditions; land at the nearest suitable aerodrome; and report its arrival by the most expeditious means to the appropriate air traffic services unit;

8. Standard Procedures In case of loss of radiotelephony, the typical ICAO “Loss of communication procedures are valid (ICAO Annex 10): IMC: d) proceed according to the current flight plan route to the appropriate designated navigation aid or fix serving the destination aerodrome and, when required to ensure compliance with e) below, hold over this aid or fix until commencement of descent; e) commence descent from the navigation aid or fix specified in d) at, or as close as possible to, the expected approach time last received and acknowledged; or, if no expected approach time has been received and acknowledged, at, or as close as possible to, the estimated time of arrival resulting from the current flight plan;

8. Standard Procedures In case of loss of radiotelephony, the typical ICAO “Loss of communication procedures are valid (ICAO Annex 10): IMC: f) designated navigation aid or fix; and g) specified in e) or the last acknowledged expected approach time, whichever is later.

8. Examples • Hybrid approach in EHAM (Schiphol, Amsterdam) • RNAV arrival with GNSSwaypoints • Followed by a classic ILS • FAF and OM are also GNSSwaypoints = Special case…

8. Examples • RNAV Reims: LNAV Only = Non-precision approach, high MDA, due to significant offset with the runway orientation • Vertical guidance table, with “recommended values” only • CDFA (Continuous Descent Final Approach) only = Preference for CDFA in Europe, please train only continuous descent (with distance vs altitude checks, if available)

8. Examples • RNAV Buochs: LNAV only • Very mountainous area, Pilatus aircraft only, 2 very elevated MSA’s right below the approach • “CAUTION: Non-standard approach angle” = Very special case, very high minima, shallow approach…

8. Examples • RNAV Frankfurt: LNAV & LNAV/ VNAV • NOTE: Explicit temperature limitation, as LVAV VNAV obtains its vertical level from barometric inputs (temperature sensitive!) • Correct BARO-reference of the airport is essential in this case! • Other PBN-approaches do not inherently have this temperature restriction • Holding located away from the

8. Examples • RNAV Lille: LNAV, LNAV/VNAV & LPV combined • The MSA’s are distributed over the approach chart, per sector, for clarity for the user • 3 IAF’s (RONOR, SUDAP, NEKEN) • 1 IF (NEKEN): Vectoring only acceptable until NEKEN, not directly to FAǾ 8 Y, or beyond

8. Examples • RNAV Charleroi: LNAV, LNAV/ VNAV & LPV combined • DTF (outbound), only with left turns (stay in Belgian airspace) • Similar design as EBAW RW 11 • IAF = GSY VOR, IF = REKPI • Published & Effective, not allowed to be flown yet (by NOTAM 2016), due to under staffing at Belgocontrol (EBCI ATC is not yet trained, due to shortage in GND/TWR-staff)

8. Symbols • RNAV Charleroi: LNAV, LNAV/ VNAV & LPV combined • LPV requires EGNOS reception • Minima -for the time being- are above CAT I (> 200 ft) • The “ARROW” symbol on the chart is typical for the final approach of an LPV

8. Symbols • RNAV Charleroi: LNAV/VNAV specifically • LNAV/VNAV does NOT require EGNOS reception • Minima are higher compared to the LPV-approach • NOTE: Temperature limitations! • The symbol that is typical for the final approach of an LNAV, is a also the STRAIGHT LINE

8. Symbols • RNAV Charleroi: LNAV • LNAV does NOT require EGNOS • Minima are higher compared to the LNAV/VNAV-approach • The pilot performs the altitude/ distance checks • The “arrow” symbol that is typical for the final approach of an LPV, is now a STRAIGHT LINE for an LNAV/VNAV-approach

8. Symbols • RNAV Charleroi: GLS Bremen • GLS requires SBAS • Minima are –actually- set to CAT I (200 ft) • A certified GBAS receiver must be installed in the aircraft • The “RECTANGLE” symbol is typical for the final approach of a GLS (GBAS approach)

8. Questions/Opinions?