Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 105 views

    12 02 RD252 Warning Note VDA Briefing

    Uploaded by

    snafu
    This document discusses issues with charting vertical descent angles (VDAs) for non-precision instrument approaches. A user complaint was filed about terrain being too low both on and above the published path for an RNAV approach. Flight inspections found obstacles penetrating the required 34:1 obstacle clearance surface. The FAA's assumptions about on-path obstacle clearance are challenged. Recommendations include revising VDA charting policies to prioritize obstacle clearance and stabilized approaches by increasing angles as needed rather than publishing angles that do not meet requirements.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    12 02 RD252 Warning Note VDA Briefing

    Uploaded by

    snafu
    105 views35 pages
    This document discusses issues with charting vertical descent angles (VDAs) for non-precision instrument approaches. A user complaint was filed about terrain being too low both on and above the published path for an RNAV approach. Flight inspections found obstacles penetrating the required 34:1 obstacle clearance surface. The FAA's assumptions about on-path obstacle clearance are challenged. Recommendations include revising VDA charting policies to prioritize obstacle clearance and stabilized approaches by increasing angles as needed rather than publishing angles that do not meet requirements.

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document discusses issues with charting vertical descent angles (VDAs) for non-precision instrument approaches. A user complaint was filed about terrain being too low both on and above the published path for an RNAV approach. Flight inspections found obstacles penetrating the required 34:1 obstacle clearance surface. The FAA's assumptions about on-path obstacle clearance are challenged. Recommendations include revising VDA charting policies to prioritize obstacle clearance and stabilized approaches by increasing angles as needed rather than publishing angles that do not meet requirements.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    105 views35 pages

    12 02 RD252 Warning Note VDA Briefing

    Uploaded by

    snafu
    This document discusses issues with charting vertical descent angles (VDAs) for non-precision instrument approaches. A user complaint was filed about terrain being too low both on and above the published path for an RNAV approach. Flight inspections found obstacles penetrating the required 34:1 obstacle clearance surface. The FAA's assumptions about on-path obstacle clearance are challenged. Recommendations include revising VDA charting policies to prioritize obstacle clearance and stabilized approaches by increasing angles as needed rather than publishing angles that do not meet requirements.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 35

    ACF-CG RD 12-01-252 Federal Aviation

    Administration

    Charting
    Vertical Descent Angle

    Presented to: Aeronautical Charting Forum


    By: William Geiser,
    Chief Pilot, Flight Inspection Services
    Date: October 2012
    Charting: Vertical Descent Angle

    • User Complaint
    • Industry Assumptions
    • Definitions
    • Background
    • Flight Inspection Actions
    • Recommendations

    Federal Aviation 2
    Administration
    • Birmingham:
    – RNAV (GPS) Rwy 36

    • User Complaint:
    – Too Low Terrain
    • On Path
    • Above Path

    Federal Aviation 3
    Administration
    KBHM: RNAV (GPS) Rwy 36

    Federal Aviation 4
    Administration
    3.04 Degrees from BERFY to TCH

    Federal Aviation 5
    Administration
    On Path / On Course

    On Path, On Course

    Federal Aviation 6
    Administration
    Federal Aviation 7
    Administration
    Federal Aviation 8
    Administration
    Federal Aviation 9
    Administration
    RNAV Rwy 36 with VDA and 34:1 Slope

    FAF

    3.04
    RWY 36 TCH 55

    34:1
    1293’ MSL
    1100’ MSL

    TCH 990’ MSL

    2 NM
    5 NM

    Federal Aviation 10
    Administration
    ~ 190 ft

    •34:1 Surface

    Federal Aviation 11
    Administration
    • Above Path
    – Too Low Terrain

    Federal Aviation 12
    Administration
    Fly Procedure as Designed

    Federal Aviation 13
    Administration
    On Path: 3.10 Degrees

    Federal Aviation 14
    Administration
    On Path: 3.20 Degrees

    Federal Aviation 15
    Administration
    On Path: 3.40 Degrees

    Federal Aviation 16
    Administration
    Industry Assumption Is:
    On Path / On Course Is Safe

    On Path, On Course

    Federal Aviation 17
    Administration
    Federal Aviation 18
    Administration
    Federal Aviation 19
    Administration
    Federal Aviation 20
    Administration
    Federal Aviation 21
    Administration
    Advisory Circular 90-107

    • Advisory Vertical Guidance


    – Vertical path deviation guidance indication that is
    generated by any means.
    – An aid provided by some manufacturers to help
    pilots meet altitude restrictions.

    Federal Aviation 22
    Administration
    Background Information

    • Commercial Aviation Safety Team (CAST)


    – Add advisory glide path
    – Operational Evolution Plan (OEP) Airports
    – Promotes stabilized approach
    – Applies to VOR & NDB coding
    – Going below MDA:
    • Pilot is responsible
    • No longer on the instrument approach

    Federal Aviation 23
    Administration
    Non Precision RNAV are
    published with VDA and TCH

    Federal Aviation 24
    Administration
    ~ 190 ft.

    •34:1 Surface

    Federal Aviation 25
    Administration
    Visual Segment Clear
    34 : 1

    Federal Aviation 26
    Administration
    Birmingham, AL

    Federal Aviation 27
    Administration
    ICAO Requirements
    FAF
    3.00
    TCH 55

    RWY 36

    Visual Segment Surface


    (VSS) = 1.88°
    TCH

    3.00 – 1.12° = 1.88°

    Federal Aviation 28
    Administration
    Flight Inspection Actions

    • Fly Advisory Vertical Guidance


    – One-dot below path
    – Does the path provide reasonable clearance from
    obstacles?
    • What is reasonable?
    • There is no criteria for the visual segment below MDA
    • Inspector’s judgment
    • What is unreasonable?
    • An EGPWS alert by proximity to terrain
    • Pilot has to destabilize aircraft to clear obstacles

    Federal Aviation 29
    Administration
    Flight Inspection Actions If:

    • Vertical Descent Angle (VDA) does not clear


    obstacles below MDA
    And / Or
    • Pilot has to destabilize aircraft to clear
    obstacles:
    – Raise angle to mitigate obstacles
    And / Or
    – VDA and TCH will not be charted

    Federal Aviation 30
    Administration
    Flight Inspection Actions

    • Procedure is not Unsatisfactory


    • FAA Order 8260.19E paragraph 8-57u:
    – Creates a conflict with policy
    – Memorandum has been created to support Flight
    Inspection Actions

    Federal Aviation 31
    Administration
    Recommendations

    • FAA Order 8260.19E


    – Revise VDA Charting Policy
    • Increase angle to avoid obstacles
    – Promotes stabilized approach
    • If 34:1 surface is penetrated
    – Do not publish VDA and TCH

    • Flight Standards
    – Issue a SAFO on use of Vertical Descent Angles
    with non-precision approaches
    – Publish articles in aviation publications

    Federal Aviation 32
    Administration
    Recommendations

    • Industry
    – Revise coding policy for non-precision approaches:
    • Do not code angle if 34:1 surface is not clear
    • Do not code angle if it is not provided

    Federal Aviation 33
    Administration
    Questions?
    Federal Aviation 34
    Administration
    TPP Definitions – Profile View

    Federal Aviation 35
    Administration

    You might also like