# Presentation: 924653

## NAVIGATION DEVELOPMENTS IN EUROPE

**NAVIGATION DEVELOPMENTS IN EUROPE**

- Alex Hendriks
- Deputy Director ATM Strategies
- EUROCONTROL

**Notes:**
All NAV bands to be shared 
Agreements to be reached at ITU WRC in 2007 
No compatibility demonstrated with NAVIGATION systems demonstrated
All NAV bands to be shared 
Agreements to be reached at ITU WRC in 2007 
No compatibility demonstrated with NAVIGATION systems demonstrated

## Airspace Capacity Challenges - Total Departures

**Airspace Capacity Challenges - Total Departures**

## Airspace Capacity Challenges - Delays

**Airspace Capacity Challenges - Delays**

## Infrastructure Evolution Requirements

**Infrastructure Evolution Requirements**

**Strategic Objectives (cf. Navigation Strategy):**
***“******a total RNAV environment for all operations en-route and in TMA”****** ***
**and**** **
***“******a judicious deployment of space based navigation infrastructure and the ******rationalisation****** of ground navigation infrastructure”***
**Target:**** ****VOR and NDB withdrawn**** ****by 2020+ **

## European Navigation Solutions

**European Navigation Solutions**

**Navigation Strategy = central tool for Airspace Organization**
**Navigation Strategy is Performance Based**
**Enables closer route spacing=>Capacity benefit**
**Facilitates access into airports in complex environments – e.g.  high terrain**
**Responds to environmental requirements**
- =>Low noise routings
- =>Enabler for Continuous Descent Approaches (CDA)
- =>Provides repeatable, predictable track keeping
**Provides navigation performance benchmark**
- => Facilitates PAN-European and Global Harmonization
- => Reduces costs for operators

## European Challenges

**European Challenges**

**Multi-national flavour of service provision**
- Privatized / Corporatized / “...ized” ANSPs
- Competing airport interests
- Terminal Airspace design methodology differences
- Protective attitude with respect to national sovereignty – particularly regarding airspace limits (e.g. Terminal Airspace)
- Pan-European harmonisation for (Terminal) Airspace
**Competing operational interests**
- Airlines, GA/BA, Military,

## Conflicting Demands

**Conflicting Demands**

**Traffic increases**
- Especially demands from low cost airlines
- Airports peripheral to main hubs have significantly increased traffic
- Complex SID/STAR interaction due to growth of major terminal areas and regional airports
**Environmental Pressure**
- Often prevents optimum use of terminal airspace
**Fuel Costs**

## APV Implementation Benefits

**APV Implementation Benefits**

**HIGH PRIORITY **
**Safety**
- reduce the number of CFiT occurrences
**Economy **
- potential for lower minima
- More fuel efficient profiles** **
**Environmental**
- Lower noise (reduced thrust changes/aircraft higher than on step down approaches)
- Lower Fuel burn for CDA
**No mandatory implementation date**
**Target: all conventional and GPS non precision approaches will be replaced by CDA enabled by APV**

## European Objectives

**European Objectives**

**Maintain Safety Targets whilst :**
**- Meeting capacity requirements**
**- Taking account of environmental constraints**
**- Making the change cost-beneficial to implement (timing and detailed requirements) **
**- Ensuring maximum benefit to users**

## Aircraft P-RNAV Compliance (2006)

**Aircraft P-RNAV Compliance (2006)**

## RNAV an Non-RNAV Procedures Mix (Europe - 2006)

**Approach ****Procs**

**STARs**

**Airways****>FL90**

**Airways****<FL90**

**SIDs**

**RNAV an Non-RNAV Procedures Mix (Europe - 2006)**

## Where after P-RNAV ?

**Where after P-RNAV ?**

**P-RNAV made use of existing capability**
**RNP-RNAV (RTCA Do236/ED 75 1996)**
**Business Case under development**
**Additional airspace capacity**
**Potential reduced parallel route spacing**
**En-route and terminal airspace,**
**Integrity sufficient to enable RNAV as “sole means “of navigation**
**New System being delivered claim MASPS compliance**

## CFIT Vertical Data

**CFIT Vertical Data**

## EUROCONTROL Navigation Domain Aims

**EUROCONTROL Navigation Domain Aims**

**To enable all forms of APV**
**Develop standards and guidance material **
**Undertake safety studies**
**Support States as needed**
**Implementation depends upon Stakeholders**
**Airspace user equipage**
**Operational requirements**
**Navigation Domain will support all Stakeholders**

## Low visibility procedures in Europe

**Low visibility procedures in Europe**

**Satisfy a range of user requirements:**
**Maintain Cat II/II capability where exists today**
**Extend Cat II/III as traffic demand/meteo conditions demand**
**Maintain and extend Cat I capability for those airports/operators who do not need Cat II/IIII capability.**

## Eurocontrol Actions

**Eurocontrol Actions**

**Fulfil the ECAC requirements:**
**Seek to ensure CAT II/III maintained**
**Support States in enabling GLS **
**Investigate the impact of options:**
**Quantify the limitations of ILS**
**Identify how MLS/GLS can overcome limitations**
**Identify cost effective way meeting safety objectives**
**Identify any barriers to sole means and potential mitigations**

## Navigation Developments – RNAV En-route&TMA

**Navigation Developments – RNAV En-route&TMA**

- Safety
- – common requirements
- Support CDA
- – environment
-    economy

- Start equipment development
- - 7 years notice
- Start planning for
- airspace changes

- Capacity Benefits
- Improved CDA
- RNAV Primary means

- Infrastructure
- Optimization
- - needs Galileo
- and enhanced
- GPS

- VNAV/RTA

- 4D NAV?

## Navigation Developments – RNAV Approaches

**Navigation Developments – RNAV Approaches**

- Safety
- - Reduced CFiT
- Support CDA
- - environment
-   economy
- Lower Minima
- - capacity
-   economy

- Benefit extended to
- aircraft not able to carry out APV Baro VNAV
- Further reduction of Minima
-  - economy
-  - capacity

- Capacity Benefits
- Improved CDA
- RNAV Primary means
- For Cat I
- Infrastructure
- Optimization
- Needs Galileo
- and enhanced
- GPS

- RNAV can
- become
- primary means
- Improved safety
- Capacity etc

## Navigation Developments – Landing and Guided Take-Off

**Navigation Developments – ****Landing and Guided Take-Off**

- Improved capacity
- in LVP
- Backup to ILS

- Cat I ground system
- with Inertial on A/C
- Capacity Benefits
- to appropriately
- Equipped Aircraft

- Improved capability
- for all A/C
- Necessary step to sole
- service
- Needs Galileo and enhanced GPS

## Infrastructure Optimisation Steps

**Infrastructure Optimisation Steps**

_** **__**DME ground infrastructure optimisation**_** **
**support**** ****RNAV operations**
**synchronised with RNAV evolution **
_**1**__**st**__** VOR and NDB reduction step**_
**minimum mix by 2015 **
**synchronised with RNAV evolution **
**maintain safety & continuity en-route and in TMA **
_** **__**2**__**nd**__** VOR and NDB reduction step (withdrawal)**_
**complete by 2020 **
**Subsequent to mandating a new navigation capability; **
**Safety and continuity maintained by other means**

## RNAV Infrastructure Evolution

**RNAV Infrastructure Evolution**

## Precision Approach Infrastructure Evolution

**Precision Approach Infrastructure Evolution**

## NAVIGATION in ATM/CNS

**N****AVIGATION in ATM/C****N****S**

## What to do ?

**What to do ?**

## How to progress ?

**How to progress ?**

## NAVIGATION DEVELOPMENTS IN EUROPE

**NAVIGATION DEVELOPMENTS IN EUROPE**

- Alex Hendriks
- Deputy Director ATM Strategies
- EUROCONTROL

**Notes:**
All NAV bands to be shared 
Agreements to be reached at ITU WRC in 2007 
No compatibility demonstrated with NAVIGATION systems demonstrated
All NAV bands to be shared 
Agreements to be reached at ITU WRC in 2007 
No compatibility demonstrated with NAVIGATION systems demonstrated

## Evolution of Approach Procedures

**Evolution of Approach Procedures**

**TODAY**

**SHORT TERM**

**LONG TERM**

## Infrastructure Evolution Issues

**Infrastructure Evolution Issues**

**No clear agreement on next  RNAV step(s): ****    capability, functionality and its supporting avionics**
- P-RNAV optional; what comes after ? when?
- GPS-only approaches slow to pick up in Europe
**    ****Rationalisation impact: **
- Complete withdrawal of NDB and VOR creates a problem for many aircraft (i.e. a costly retrofit )
- DME/GNSS-based RNAV leaves GA aircraft without a fallback navigation solution
- Involves re-design of network (airways, TMA procedures): major effort for ANSP
- In order to avoid major difficulties in the transition, rationalisation is limited to a small scale (mostly local measures) at present
**Pressure to release spectrum for other uses/users **

## Infrastructure Evolution Benefits

**Infrastructure Evolution Benefits**

**feasible technically and operationally: **
**Cost effectiveness is achieved by synchronisation with RNAV development and gradual reduction. **
**Withdrawal is associated with substantial changes required by a new RNAV step which supports operational benefits. **
**Proposed rationalisation is in line with Navigation Strategy. **
**Proposed rationalisation is consistent with European States views, IATA, FAA. **

**Notes:**
All NAV bands to be shared 
Agreements to be reached at ITU WRC in 2007 
No compatibility demonstrated with NAVIGATION systems demonstrated
All NAV bands to be shared 
Agreements to be reached at ITU WRC in 2007 
No compatibility demonstrated with NAVIGATION systems demonstrated

## Lower Route Charges?

**Lower Route Charges?**

**VOR costs account for about 0.5% of ATM/CNS costs !**
** **would this % correspond to similar % reduction of route charges ?
-  how significant is this potential reduction to Airspace Users ?
-  would ALL Airspace users benefit from such a reduction ?
**Note**: Costs is previous slides do NOT include equipage costs !
-  could they benefit more significantly from reductions elsewhere in the system ?
**VOR withdrawal **
- – does not imply immediate removal from board for all aircraft  (other regions may still require it)
- – requires carriage of dual RNAV boxes
- – how can equipage costs be minimised ?
- 	 	– natural evolution ?

## Issues affecting Cost-efficiency

**Issues affecting Cost-efficiency**

- Specific Issues
-  Coverage and frequency planning (coordination)
-  Non-optimum location of aids (duplication, non-RNAV)
- Common Issues
- Fragmented planning
- Piecemeal procurement
- Sub-optimal scale maintenance and in-service development
- Unsynchronized or inconsistent technological changes
- Training and administrative costs