ICAO flight plans required for domestic RNAV direct

TangoWhiskey

TangoWhiskey

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
14,210
Location
Midlothian, TX
Display Name
Display name:
3Green
ftp://ftp.duats.com/pub/flyers/Flyer2008_73.pdf

OK, so now that we're past June 5th, have any of you had experience with this? Does the process of using DUATS or calling LM FSS to change? Do you have to read your "boxes" of information to them in a different order?

Effective June 5, 2008, the U.S. FAA Air Route Traffic Control
Centers (ARTCCs) will begin accepting ICAO flight plan formats
for domestic flight. The primary purpose is to automatically
assign preferential routes based on the equipment capability filed
in ICAO Flight Plan Form Item 10 (Equipment) in conjunction
with the Area Navigation (RNAV) value specified by the user in
ICAO Flight Plan Form Item 18 (Other Information). Use of the
ICAO Flight Plan Form for domestic routes will be required for
the following:

RNAV Standard Instrument Departure (SID),
RNAV Standard Terminal Arrival Route (STAR), and/or
RNAV Point-to-Point (PTP).

Pilots may still use the domestic flight plan form if they do not
desire the above preferential routes or do not meet the equipment
capabilities to file preferential routes.
Click to expand...
 
I ploughed through all that on flightplan.com last night when I was filing Troy, wow very confusing even with their instructions. It appears I need the serial number of the gns-xls on the CJ to figure out where we stand!
In the end I bet it all amounts to a hill of useless beans. :(
 
I think this is specifically so that ATC knows what sort of navigation performance they can expect from airliners, many of whom have inertial systems that give various levels of performance depending on what updates the inertial systems. A more modern airplane may have GPS and have 0.1 nm precision. Another may have DME/DME and have 0.3, 0.6, or 1.0 nm precision.

The good news is that if you can file /G you have the highest level of performance already and are good for everything except RNP approaches. I'll have to read it again, but I believe for most of us filing /G as always will still allow direct routing.
 
I thought that even filing an FAA flight plan /G wasn't good enough for RNAV SIDs and STARs; for that, you need the ICAO flight plan. Then again, that's not an issue I have to worry about, even though I've got enough equipment to file /G and mean it...
 
TMetzinger said:
The good news is that if you can file /G you have the highest level of performance already and are good for everything except RNP approaches. I'll have to read it again, but I believe for most of us filing /G as always will still allow direct routing.
Click to expand...
What sort of RNP approaches do you have in mind and why can't I fly them with GPS? Doesn't GPS provide the highest level of RNP in a terminal environment?

-Felix
 
TMetzinger said:
I think this is specifically so that ATC knows what sort of navigation performance they can expect from airliners, many of whom have inertial systems that give various levels of performance depending on what updates the inertial systems. A more modern airplane may have GPS and have 0.1 nm precision. Another may have DME/DME and have 0.3, 0.6, or 1.0 nm precision.

The good news is that if you can file /G you have the highest level of performance already and are good for everything except RNP approaches. I'll have to read it again, but I believe for most of us filing /G as always will still allow direct routing.
Click to expand...

All airliners have 2 IRS's. Everything built within the past 10-15 years has both VOR/DME and GPS updating. The VOR/DME updating is inhibited for RNP aproaches.
 
sba55 said:
What sort of RNP approaches do you have in mind and why can't I fly them with GPS? Doesn't GPS provide the highest level of RNP in a terminal environment?

-Felix
Click to expand...

In the US all RNP aproaches fall under the SAAAR category. So do many of the RNAV arivials and departures. Hope this helps
FB
 
part of the issue is rnp sids and stars which not all gps units can do.
 
F.Baum said:
In the US all RNP aproaches fall under the SAAAR category. So do many of the RNAV arivials and departures. Hope this helps
FB
Click to expand...
Makes sense. The only RNP approach I've seen so far was SAAAR. I didn't know all of the US RNP approaches were like that. I wonder why that is. It's not like flying a RNP approach is inherently more difficult.

Thanks,

-Felix
 
sba55 said:
Makes sense. The only RNP approach I've seen so far was SAAAR. I didn't know all of the US RNP approaches were like that. I wonder why that is. It's not like flying a RNP approach is inherently more difficult.

Thanks,

-Felix
Click to expand...

In my case the training had to do with configuring the box, learning how to use the RF legs, and changes to policy (Like use of the autopilot which became manditory for many approaches). The verticle guidance also involved alot of PT time. Most of our non precision stuff was flown in VS up to that point and of couse with RNP it is all VNAV. I had just come off of some older equipment so it was alot of new stuff for me.
FB
 
I went through and changed all the airplanes I fly on fltplan.com. Hopefully this will end the confusion with ATC about RNAV SIDS and STARS. Some of the airplanes I fly can do RNAV enroute and RNAV (GPS) approaches but no RNAV SIDS and STARS. Up to now there was no appropriate suffix to use for that situation so it seemed as if we were constantly being assigned, then having to refuse, these procedures. The "no RNAV SIDS and STARS" in the remarks section never did any good. We'll see what happens.
 
F.Baum said:
In my case the training had to do with configuring the box, learning how to use the RF legs, and changes to policy (Like use of the autopilot which became manditory for many approaches). The verticle guidance also involved alot of PT time. Most of our non precision stuff was flown in VS up to that point and of couse with RNP it is all VNAV. I had just come off of some older equipment so it was alot of new stuff for me.
FB
Click to expand...
Makes sense, thanks for the insight. Hopefully, these approaches will become more common place over time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top