# Presentation: 932191

## Developing Standard Instrument Approach Procedures

- Presentation to: 2006 FAA Partnership ConferenceBy:
- Ron Sanders, Manager, Fort Worth Flight Procedures Office
- Rodney Clark, Texas Airports Development Office
- Date: March 29, 2006

## Recent Changes to the Advisory Circulars

- AC 150/5070-6B, Airport Master Plans, dated July 29, 2005
- New ALP requirements defined in Appendix “F”
- 150/5300-13, Change 9, dated September 26, 2005
- Runway End Siting Requirements (Appendix 2)
- The glidepath angle and threshold crossing height can be altered instead of displacing the threshold.
- A combination of threshold displacement and altering the glidepath angle and threshold crossing height may also be used.
- Must have FAA approval before implementation.
- Glidepath Qualification Surface
- Departure Surface, only dependent upon whether or not instrument departures are being used or planned for that RW end.
- No longer have the three year moratorium to light/mark penetrations to avoid displacing the threshold.

## SIAP

- FAA Uses for the ALP
- Aeronautical studies of proposed construction, on and near the airport.
- Designation of land needed for aeronautical purposes and uses
- Siting of FAA facilities (ATCT’s, NAVAIDS, radar, etc.)
- Development of new and amended instrument approach and departure procedures.

## SIAP

- When Developing an ALP.
- What is the critical aircraft?
- What are the existing/planned approaches for the airport?
- This information will help to determine the appropriate surfaces for the ALP.

## SIAP

- Questions about the Category of surface to be used for category of aircraft.
- TERPS Information Letter (TIL) dated March 2, 2003
- Letter dated February 17, 2004
- Washington interpretation of Appendix 2 dated October 28, 2005
- Category 1 through 5, are for Category A and B aircraft.
- Category C, D and E aircraft must meet Category 6 or greater in Appendix 2.

## SIAP

## SIAP

## SIAP

## SIAP

- Penetrations to the TSS can be mitigated using one of the following actions.
- The object is removed or lowered to preclude the applicable TSS.
- The threshold is displaced.
- The GPA/TCH are modified or a combination of threshold displacement and GPA/TCH can be used (with FAA approval).
- Visibility minimums are raised.
- Night operations are prohibited unless the obstruction is lighted or an approved VGSI is used.
- A separate airspace study for each “stick” is submitted for review and potential approval by the Flight Standards Office.

## SIAP

- Based upon the changes to Appendix 2, we are proposing additional sheet(s) to the ALP set.
- Surfaces to be included on the additional sheet(s).
- Departure Surface
- Impact depends on
- Location
- Height

## SIAP

- Glideslope Qualification Surface

## SIAP

- Missed Approach Surface
- If applicable, depict the missed approach surface.

## SIAP

- TERPS Paragraph 251 surfaces
- Precision Approach would be the WXY surfaces.

## SIAP

- Each surface would be surveyed to provide precise obstruction data.
- The addition of the surfaces to the ALP set will:
- Decrease the amount of time needed to review the ALP during airspace.
- Decrease the amount of money required to survey for an ALP and an IAP. (One survey required versus one for the ALP and one for the proposed procedure.)
- Decrease the amount of time needed to develop a new IAP.

## SIAP

*Most important mainstream*
*In any town.”*
*-Norm Crabtree*

**SIAP**

- Identify the Process for Instrument Approach Development
- Identify Time Line for Approach Development
- 18 Months Out
- 12 Months Out
- Identify Required Information
- Construction Tolerances
- Threshold Siting Surfaces
- Surveys
- Airport Design Checklist
- Based Upon Appendix 16 of 150/5300-13
- Airport Data Checklist
- PAPI Checklist

## SIAP

- New Instrument Approach Procedures result from:
- New Airport Projects
- New airports
- Runway extensions
- Threshold displacements
- Overlays
- Facilities and Equipment Projects
- State Requests
- Sponsor requests

## SIAP

*Most important mainstream*
*In any town.”*
*-Norm Crabtree*

**SIAP**

- March 30, 2005: Meeting with the FTW FPO, TxADO and TxDOT
- The purpose of this meeting and resultant agreement is to ensure that all parties work within a planned schedule to ensure construction projects coincide with required revisions to instrument flight procedures.
- Timeline was identified highlighting the critical dates for the submission of information, to reduce the likelihood that TX airports will suffer loss of instrument access as a result of planned infrastructure changes.

## SIAP

- 18 Months Prior to the Planned Completion Date (PCD)
- TxDOT files a 7460-1 for planning purposes with the FAA.
- FAA Airports will initiate a Non-Rulemaking Action (NRA)
- The FPO will provide the basic IFR impact.
- If the planned project WILL NOT result in changes to the runway: length, width, threshold or touchdown zone elevations, or ARP; i.e, resurfacing project, then the FPO action will be limited to the appropriate IFR impact NOTAMS  per construction start date.

## SIAP

- 14 Months prior to the Planned Completion Date (PCD)
- TxDOT will make a request by memo to the FAA and provide construction plans and phasing/work schedule and if necessary a revised PCD.
- The FPO will provide development project in production schedule based upon the PCD. This now becomes the estimated chart date (ECD).
- TxDOT will provide planned airfield data changes to the TxADO.

## SIAP

- 14 Months prior to the Planned Completion Date (PCD), cont’d
- TxDOT submits Request package to the TxADO, which includes the FAA Airport Data and Design Forms

## SIAP

- 14 Months prior to the Planned Completion Date (PCD), cont’d
- Airport Design Form is based upon Appendix 16, from AC 1505300-13
- Standards for:
- ALP
- RW Length
- RW Markings
- Hold Position Signs and Markings
- RW Lighting
- Parallel TW
- Approach Lights
- Threshold Siting Surface
- Obstruction Surveys

## SIAP

- 14 Months prior to the Planned Completion Date (PCD), cont’d
- Airport Data Form
- Identifies all changes that will occur based upon the proposed project.

## SIAP

- 14 Months prior to the Planned Completion Date (PCD), cont’d
- Survey, from NGS or third party completed on the Instrument Data Survey Form

## SIAP

- 14 Months prior to the Planned Completion Date (PCD), cont’d
- Up-to Date Airport Layout Plan

## SIAP

- 12 Months Prior to the Estimated Completion Date
- TxADO will provide to the FPO and NFDC the finalized airport engineering report data to be used in instrument procedure devlopment/amendment.
- FPO will review data to ensure it meets the procedures criteria requirements.
- Construction tolerances – TERPS, Volume 3, Chapter 2, Paragrapgh 2.1

## SIAP

- 284 Days (Approximately 9 1⁄2 Months)
- FPO will complete the feasibility work and forward project development to the National Flight Procedures Office to meet the ECD.
- The data being used will be considered “final.”
- Any changes may result in a change to the proposed publication date.

## SIAP

- Five Days prior to beginning construction
- FPO is notified so that FDC NOTAMS identified in the NRA study 18 months earlier, can be prepared and issued on the provided start date and time.
- During construction, the FPO must be notified of any changes to the schedule or data so the FPO can determine if there is an impact to the ECD.
- Six Weeks prior to the ECD
- The FPO must be notified to identify if the project is or is not on target for the planned completion so the charting instructions can be finalized.
- Estimated Completion Date, New or revised instrument procedures are charted concurrent with reconfigured runway.

## FAA Website:www.faa.gov