PERFORMANCE BASED NA

PBN NAS

VIGATION

NAVIGATION STRATEGY 2016

Since the Roadmap’s publication, together we have 

established and flown thousands of Area Navigation 

(RNAV) and Required Navigation Performance (RNP) 

procedures throughout the NAS, resulting in safety, 

access, capacity, efficiency and environmental benefits. 

We have learned a great deal over the last 10 years, 

and we also recognize that as the NAS continues to 

evolve, so too must our navigation strategy. 

Therefore, I am pleased to present the “PBN NAS 

Navigation Strategy 2016.” It builds on the progress 

of the past decade and refocuses our priorities and 

milestones to transition to a truly PBN-centric NAS, 

that is, a NAS where PBN is used as the basis for daily 

operations. It charts a course that will allow the public 

and private sectors to advance the NAS collaboratively 

and constructively for the benefit of all aviation 

stakeholders, including aircraft operators, the traveling 

public, as well as new entrants such as unmanned 

aircraft systems and commercial space vehicles.

This strategy document describes a pathway to this 

vision, linking together many interdependent elements 

necessary to deliver PBN, and includes commitments 

that will:

• Leverage evolving aircraft capabilities; 

• Enable new operations;

• Enhance decision support tools;

• Engage surrounding communities; and

• Reduce dependence on legacy 

navigational infrastructure.

This strategy document is divided into near-, mid- and 

far-term objectives over the next 15 years. In the near 

term, we will focus on increasing the utilization of RNAV 

and RNP procedures that are in place and develop 

new criteria, policies and standards to allow for more 

advanced applications of PBN. In the mid term, we will 

build on newly available PBN operations to increase 

access, efficiency and resiliency across the system. 

From the Administrator

Michael P. Huerta

New PBN operations and procedures will provide the 

predictability and repeatability necessary to facilitate 

the transition to the Next Generation Air Transportation 

System (NextGen), including integration of Data 

Communications (Data Comm) and improvements to 

traffic flow management. Finally, the far-term strategies 

to 2030 and beyond focus on leveraging time- and 

speed-based air traffic management to increase 

system predictability. 

The FAA is taking the necessary steps to enhance 

community involvement in our decision-making 

processes. These include updating the FAA Community 

Involvement Manual, and accepting and implementing 

industry recommendations contained in the NextGen 

Advisory Committee’s 2014 “Blueprint for Success to 

Implementing Performance Based Navigation” relative 

to community outreach and airport involvement.

The following strategy document is the product 

of collaboration between the FAA and aviation 

stakeholders, and has benefited greatly from the 

input of the NextGen Advisory Committee and the 

Performance Based Operations Aviation 

Rulemaking Committee. 

A successful transition to a PBN-centric NAS will 

require a sustained, long-term focus on collaboration 

across aircraft operators, manufacturers, airport 

operators and the communities that surround airports. 

Balancing the interests of these groups will be a 

challenge, but there is much common ground, and we 

must take on these challenges if we are to advance the 

system to the benefit of all aviation stakeholders. The 

PBN NAS Navigation Strategy will be a living document, 

and it will be revisited every two years to confirm 

that the priorities it contains continue to address the 

navigation needs of an evolving world. 

Thank you for your continued support and active 

participation in ensuring that the most complex 

airspace in the world remains unsurpassed in safety. 

Ten years ago, the FAA and aviation stakeholders 

embarked on a path to modernize navigation in the 

National Airspace System (NAS). As part of this activity, 

the FAA and aviation stakeholders developed and 

published a report called “Roadmap for PerformanceBased Navigation (PBN).” 
Table of Contents

3

4

6

6

8

8

10

11

13

16

18

22

23

24

26

28

31

32

33

34

Introduction

Background

Today’s Navigation

Building on PBN Accomplishments

Evolving NAS Operations

Increasing Use of PBN Procedures

Airport and Community Outreach

Navigation Strategy Overview

Navigation Service Groups

PBN Evolution

2016–2020 Timeframe

2021–2025 Timeframe

2026–2030 Timeframe

Resiliency

Minimum PBN Capabilities

Related Efforts

Appendix A: Summary of FAA Goals and Commitments by Vision Area 

Appendix B: Navigation Service Group Definitions

Abbreviations, Acronyms and Initialisms

References
www.faa.gov 3

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has deployed 

thousands of Performance Based Navigation (PBN) 

procedures and routes throughout the National Airspace 

System (NAS), and aviation stakeholders are realizing the 

benefits. It is now possible for aircraft to leverage PBN during 

all phases of flight, navigating free from the constraints 

previously imposed by the physical locations of groundbased navigation infrastructure. PBN services are laying the 

foundation for the NAS of the future by enabling many Next 

Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) operational 

improvements, capabilities and initiatives.

For example, the PBN framework enables a safer and more 

efficient design of airspace and procedures within the nation’s 

complex airspace by:

• Segregating traffic between airports, arrival and 

departure paths, and routes in close proximity; 

• Increasing efficiency of sequencing, spacing and merging 

when integrated with communication, surveillance and 

controller decision support tools; 

• Allowing for reduced divergence between departure 

operations, resulting in increased departure throughput;

• Providing safe access to airspace near obstacles 

and terrain;

• Improving access to airports during poor weather 

conditions, especially for general aviation 

(GA) operations;

Introduction

• Reducing pilot-controller voice communication by using 

text-based messages, allowing controllers more time to 

plan or handle emergencies and abnormal situations; 

• Providing pilots with vertical guidance, resulting in more 

stabilized approaches and landings;

• Reducing flight track distance, fuel burn and emissions 

due to more direct flight paths and optimized vertical 

 descent profiles;

• Improving predictability to better inform airline operators 

for schedule and gate management; and 

• Reducing reliance on and investment in ground-based 

navigational aids and the conventional procedures 

dependent on them.

The needs of the NAS continue to evolve based upon 

technological, economic and societal drivers. With this 

evolution, the FAA and aviation stakeholders need to 

periodically review the state of the system, assess the current 

vision and associated strategies, and update them to provide 

a framework for moving forward. 

This updated “PBN NAS Navigation Strategy 2016” provides 

a compelling view of a future that builds upon past PBN 

accomplishments. It also provides the context for defining 

and refining implementation plans and resource requirements 

necessary to fully transition to a PBN-centric NAS.
4 PBN NAS Navigation Strategy 2016

1 Aircraft navigate in the en route environment primarily using Air Traffic Service (ATS) routes. The conventional version of these routes includes Jet Routes for high-altitude navigation and Victor airways for lowaltitude navigation. The PBN equivalents are Q-Routes and T-Routes, for high- and low-altitude navigation, respectively.

HISTORY

In 2003, the FAA introduced its PBN strategy in the 

“Roadmap for Performance-Based Navigation.” The 

Roadmap outlined possible benefits using capabilities 

in modern aircraft. FAA initiatives helped to establish the 

necessary policy, processes and tools to meet early PBN 

objectives. The initiatives also helped the FAA and aviation 

industry better understand many of the technical challenges 

associated with this transformation. 

The FAA’s early initiatives included the introduction of 

Q-Routes and T-Routes1 for en route navigation and Area 

Navigation (RNAV) departure and arrival procedures for busy 

airports or airports with busy surrounding airspace. These 

procedures were typically designed as overlays of historical 

vector patterns and existing conventional ground-based 

procedures to accelerate the availability of published 

PBN procedures. 

Additionally, the 2003 Roadmap included the introduction 

of Required Navigation Performance (RNP) procedures 

— which grew out of the need for access to the terrainchallenged airports of Alaska — into operational use in the 

lower 48 states. The July 2006 update to the “Roadmap 

for Performance-Based Navigation” served as a call to action 

for the FAA and industry by continuing to focus on the wide 

propagation of PBN routes and procedures throughout 

the NAS. 

Background

By 2010, established PBN procedures were in place at 

the nation’s busiest airports. Based on several years of 

operational experience, operators and controllers had built 

a deeper understanding of PBN and a mutual awareness of 

how PBN could best be leveraged. The joint focus became 

obtaining additional flight-efficiency benefits, especially by 

minimizing the number and duration of level-offs below top 

of descent for arrival procedures at busy terminal areas. 

This goal has been realized since 2011 through the holistic 

perspective and collaborative efforts of the FAA’s 

Metroplex program. 

PBN EXPLAINED

PBN comprises RNAV and RNP and describes an aircraft’s 

ability to navigate in terms of performance standards. RNAV 

enables aircraft to fly on any desired flight path within the 

coverage of ground- or space-based navigation aids, within 

the capability of the aircraft equipage or a combination 

of capabilities. 

RNP is RNAV with the addition of onboard performance 

monitoring and alerting capability. A defining characteristic 

of RNP operations is the ability of the aircraft navigation 

system to monitor the navigation performance it achieves 

and inform the pilot if the requirement is not met during 

an operation. The performance requirements of PBN for a 

particular airspace are conveyed to pilots through navigation 

specifications published in navigation charts. Common PBN 
www.faa.gov 5

specifications include RNAV 1, RNAV 2, RNP 0.3, RNP 1, 

as well as RNAV (GPS) and RNAV (RNP) approaches. Figure 

1 summarizes the major RNAV and RNP operations that 

are described in this strategy document and includes some 

operations for which specifications are in development. 

The appropriate PBN procedure to meet a specific need is 

based on the operating environment in which it will 

be deployed:

• Departure/Arrival Operations: The default PBN 

procedure in the terminal environment for departures 

is the RNAV 1 Standard Instrument Departure (SID) 

and for arrivals is the RNAV 1 Standard Terminal Arrival 

(STAR). If traffic density or other airspace constraints 

require higher levels of performance, an RNP 1 SID or 

STAR would be used in the future, as discussed in this 

strategy document;

• Approach Operations: In the approach environment, 

the default PBN procedure is the RNAV (GPS) approach. 

Advanced-RNP functions provide more capability than 

default PBN procedures. Advanced-RNP functions 

include radius-to-fix (RF) legs, parallel offsets, RNAV 

holding, scalable RNP, fixed radius turns (FRT) and 

Time of Arrival Control. (An RF turn is a segment of a 

procedure with a defined curved path that the aircraft 

must follow.) If airspace requires reduced obstacle, 

terrain or airspace separation, an RNAV (RNP) approach 

would be used. In the current NAS, RNP Authorization 

Required (AR) procedures are used to meet these 

needs. PBN may be coupled with an Instrument Landing 

System (ILS) as a hybrid procedure. At airports with a 

Ground Based Augmentation System (GBAS), GBAS 

Landing System (GLS) procedures may be used; and

• En Route Operations: In the en route environment, the 

default performance requirement is RNAV 2. Based 

on the specific need, it may be implemented either 

as a fixed route or operationally through the use of 

strategically placed waypoints, allowing for flexible 

navigation. In oceanic and other unmonitored airspace, 

RNP procedures normally would be used. 

Figure 1 - Various PBN procedures are used at each phase of flight.
6 PBN NAS Navigation Strategy 2016

This strategy document discusses how the FAA and industry 

are building upon the significant progress made in the 

development and implementation of PBN over the past 

12 years. It was developed with consideration for changes 

in the structure and operation of the NAS, the availability 

of technologies and avionics and the relationship of PBN 

initiatives to other NextGen modernization efforts. 

BUILDING ON PBN ACCOMPLISHMENTS

Many of the capabilities described in the 2006 PBN 

Roadmap for the 2006–2015 timeframe are now 

operationally available across the NAS.

PROCEDURE IMPLEMENTATION 

A total of 2,684 airports in the FAA’s National Plan of 

Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS) in the NAS have at least 

one published standard Instrument Approach Procedure 

(IAP).2 Of these airports, 95 percent have at least one PBN 

IAP and 25 percent have only PBN IAPs with no conventional 

IAP.3 From 2009–2016, the number of published RNAV 

approaches increased from 3,659 to 5,795. Over the same 

period, published RNP approaches increased threefold, from 

125 to 391.

Since 2009, an additional 264 RNAV STAR (Figure 2) 

procedures were implemented, resulting in a total of 355 

2 Terminal procedure counts from digital Terminal Procedures Publication, using December 2008 and March 2016 data.

3

 The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) has established a global goal to implement “approach procedures with vertical guidance (APV) (baro-VNAV and/or augmented Global Navigation Satellite 

System [GNSS]) for all instrument runway ends, either as the primary approach or as a backup for precision approaches by 2016.” See “Navigation Strategy Overview” section for FAA commitments related 

to this ICAO goal.

Today’s Navigation

Figure 2 – Progression toward a PBN-centric NAS.

RNAV SID/STARs Q-Routes and T-Routes
www.faa.gov 7

RNAV STARs at NPIAS airports. Also since 2009, 338 

RNAV SID procedures were implemented, bringing the 

total at NPIAS airports to 549. For the 77 Aviation System 

Performance Metrics (ASPM77) airports4, 80 percent now 

have RNAV SIDs or STARs. 

Recent procedure implementations for metroplexes, such 

as Houston, North Texas, Washington, D.C., and Northern 

California, benefited from using the collaborative Metroplex 

process, working with all stakeholders to ensure that effective 

and efficient procedures were developed on an expedited 

timeline. A metroplex includes one or more commercial 

airports with shared airspace that serves at least one 

major city. Many community concerns today involve PBN 

procedure projects and reflect increased community 

sensitivity to potential environmental impacts generally 

focused on noise. The FAA recognizes that we must enhance 

community involvement practices to more effectively identify 

and address community concerns. To that end, the FAA has 

renewed its focus to provide information to the community 

and solicit aviation user and citizen input when developing 

procedures. This helps us ensure that proposed airspace and 

air route adjustments consider aviation system safety and 

efficiency, as well as community impact.

The conventional Jet route and Victor airway structure has 

been augmented with their PBN equivalents, Q-Routes and 

T-Routes, respectively. As of March 2016, a total of 146 

Q-Routes and 101 T-Routes are in the NAS5

. These routes, 

when combined with existing RNAV SID, STAR and PBN 

approach procedures, enable properly equipped aircraft 

the ability to fly a PBN-based route end-to-end between 

many airports. In addition, RNAV capability is routinely used 

to conduct off-route, point-to-point operations in the NAS, 

providing more direct navigation than Jet routes. 

This strategy document describes the continued 

development and optimization of the ATS route structure to 

complete the transition to PBN. 

REDUCED OCEANIC SPACING

Over the Atlantic and the Pacific, non-radar track separation 

was reduced from 100 nautical miles (nm) to 30 nm laterally 

and longitudinally using RNP 4 procedures (Figure 3).

NEW CRITERIA

The FAA has established criteria that leverages PBN to 

improve NAS performance:

• Parallel Runway Operations: New criteria allow a 

reduction in the lateral spacing required between parallel 

runways to run simultaneous independent operations 

when using PBN or ILS approach procedures. Previously 

when using PBN, the spacing between runways had 

to be greater than 4,300 feet, but this requirement was 

reduced to 3,600 feet. More airports can now use PBN 

to operate in their most efficient runway configurations. 

PBN use at these more closely spaced runways 

also increases resiliency by providing a backup to 

conventional precision approach navigation. 

• Equivalent Lateral Spacing Operations (ELSO): ELSO 

revises separation standard criteria by leveraging the 

predictability of PBN procedures to safely allow 10 

degrees or more divergence after takeoff. Compared with 

the non-ELSO standard requiring a minimum 15-degree 

divergence, this extra flexibility now allows for additional 

departures that increase throughput, as is the case in 

Atlanta (Figure 4 on page 8).

TRAINING AND GLOBAL HARMONIZATION

The FAA has developed and deployed PBN training to 

field facilities and to the pilot community. The FAA has 

published advisory circulars (ACs) for every type of PBN 

operation, including detailed information on procedure 

design, phraseology, system-specific procedures, general 

operating procedures, use of automation and contingency 

Figure 3 – Reduced spacing has substantially increased the capacity of non-radar oceanic environments.

4 The ASPM77 airports are listed here: aspmhelp.faa.gov/index.php/ASPM_Airports.

5 En route procedure counts are from the Instrument Flight Procedures Inventory Summary.
8 PBN NAS Navigation Strategy 2016

procedures. The FAA also has published a broad range 

of information concerning PBN and satellite-based 

navigation considerations in the Aeronautical Information 

Manual (AIM) and Instrument Procedures Handbook. The 

FAA is engaged in global aviation forums such as ICAO 

to ensure standardization and consistency in training 

and the associated safety benefits in domestic and 

international operations.

EVOLVING NAS OPERATIONS

NAS operations continue to evolve as aircraft capability levels 

rise, traffic demand profiles change and new entrants access 

controlled airspace.

INCREASING OPERATOR CAPABILITIES

Table 1 on page 9 summarizes fleet capability levels within 

the NAS. About 97 percent of the U.S. 14 Code of Federal 

Regulations (CFR) Part 121 (Air Transport) fleet is estimated 

to be RNAV 1 capable, with this percentage predicted to 

increase to almost 100 percent in 2020. The FAA estimates 

that 88 percent of the air transport fleet is capable of RNP 

Approach (APCH) approaches.6

 Additionally, 35 percent 

of the air transport fleet is approved for RNAV (RNP) 

procedures, and this number could increase to an estimated 

62 percent given additional investment in pilot training and 

company procedures needed for approval. General aviation, 

air taxi and military operators are also well-equipped with 

Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) navigation and 

continue evolving toward additional PBN capabilities. Table 

2 summarizes the air transport capability levels forecast for 

2020 and 2025, assuming all available options are exercised 

on new delivery aircraft (actual capabilities on new delivery 

aircraft may be somewhat lower). RNP 4, RNP 1 with RF and 

GLS capabilities are forecast to increase during the next 10 

years. Some air transport operators are analyzing whether 

to incorporate Localizer Performance with Vertical Guidance 

(LPV) into their fleets by leveraging Wide Area Augmentation 

System (WAAS)-based solutions to comply with the 

Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) 

Out requirement.

TRAFFIC CONCENTRATION AT MAJOR HUBS

Previous editions of the PBN Roadmap were driven by 

expectations of increased traffic. However, recent trends in 

demand are different: Airlines are increasingly operating a 

constant number of flights from year to year, accommodating 

increased passenger demand with tighter schedule linkages 

and larger aircraft. While this reduces airline operating costs 

and environmental impact, it makes the effect of disruptions 

more severe, so predictability of service is increasingly vital to 

maintaining system performance.

Despite the recent trend of airlines operating a constant 

annual number of flights, the 2013 Terminal Area Forecast7

estimated that the number of enplanements at the large 

hub airports would increase 46 percent by 2030.8 If the total 

number of passengers continues to rise, aircraft operations 

will also increase. Forecasts for the large hub airports show 

an overall average increase of 28 percent in operations by 

2030. Overall operations at non-hub and medium-sized hubs 

in the NAS are also expected to increase, but at lower levels: 

about 23 percent at the medium-sized hubs and about 6 

percent at the non-hub airports. 

The effects of concentrated growth at hub airports could be 

mitigated through reduced conflicts between airport traffic 

flows, reduced spacing between aircraft or by allowing 

for operations closer to terrain, but only if safety can be 

maintained. Similarly, access to airspace currently unavailable 

with conventional navigation procedures during bad weather 

can improve capacity to help meet growing demand. The 

high predictability and accuracy of aircraft positions when 

they are operating on PBN procedures has the potential to 

allow all these possibilities while maintaining or 

enhancing safety.

As traffic concentrates at the major hubs, airspace in their 

vicinity must be highly structured. Predictable and reliable 

trajectories reduce workload for pilots and controllers during 

peak demand and allow for efficient flows in and out of 

metropolitan areas. Conversely, in parts of the system where 

demand is below peak capacity, it may be more appropriate 

to provide a network of PBN-based en route navigation 

options rather than a rigid structure.

INCREASING USE OF PBN PROCEDURES

Aviation stakeholders are benefiting from the progress made 

in the development and implementation of PBN during 

6

 RNP APCH is described in the Performance Based Navigation (PBN) Manual, ICAO Doc 9613, 4th Edition. It includes RNAV (GPS) and RNP 0.3 approaches. 

7 Terminal Area Forecast Summary Fiscal Years 2013-2040.

8

 Tampa International Airport and busier airports are considered large hubs. A full listing of the hub designations is available after in the FAA’s 2015-2019 National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS) Report.

Figure 4 – In 2011, Atlanta implemented ELSO which reduced the 

divergence requirement from 15 to 10 degrees and enabled the FAA to clear 

more flights for departure. 
www.faa.gov 9

Operational Capability Air Transport

(US 14 CFR 

Part 121)

Air Taxi

(US 14 CFR 

Part 135)

General Aviation

(US 14 CFR 

Part 91)†

Department 

of Defense‡

RNP 4 45%a 49%a 50%a ,b Data not 

available

RNAV 1 97% 98% 79% 32%

RNAV 2 98% 98% 79% 32%

RNP APCH 88% 98% 79% 19%

RNP 1 with Radius-to-Fix (RF) 59% 8% 4%b Data not 

available

RNP AR APCH 62% 

(35% approved) 5% 3% <0.5%

Vertical Navigation (VNAV) 

Approach

87% 

(44% approved) 30% 8%b Data not 

available

Localizer Performance with Vertical 

Guidance (LPV) Approach <1% 32% Data not available <1%

GLS 4% 5% 1.5%b <1%

Table 1 – Percent of Equipped Capable Fleet*

* Unless otherwise noted, the table data are derived from IFR flight plans for the period between July 2014 and June 2015. 

a

 This indicates oceanic capability, and percentage represents equipage for aircraft seen operating over oceanic airspace.

b The majority of general aviation aircraft file a legacy NAS flight plan. Pilots can file these capabilities only in the newer ICAO flight plan, and thus reported equipage may be lower than actual capability levels. 

†

 Dual certificated (US 14 CFR Part 91 and 135) aircraft are accounted for in the Part 135 group. Part 91 includes turbojet and turboprop aircraft, and the turbojet fleet is generally more highly equipped.

‡ Data provided by the DoD is based on a 2012 analysis. These values were not produced in the same fashion as for civil aircraft in this table.

Operational Capability 2015 2020 Forecast 2025 Forecast

RNP 4 45%a 69%a 81%a

RNAV 1 97% 99% 99%

RNAV 2 98% 99% 99%

RNP APCH 88% 94% 95%

RNP 1 with RF 59% 76% 82%

RNP AR 62% 68% 71%

VNAV Approach 87% 86% 85%

LPV Approach <1% 9% 13%

GLS 4% 38% 47%

Table 2 – Equipped Capable Air Transport (US 14 CFR Part 121) Forecast

Note: Values represented indicate an upper bound of forecasted equipage. It assumes that all capabilities available as options on new delivery aircraft are exercised. 

a This indicates oceanic capability, and percentage represents equipage for aircraft seen operating over oceanic airspace.

the last 15 years. However, in some locations, air traffic 

control (ATC) and operators are not using the available PBN 

procedures as often as was expected when the procedures 

were originally proposed. Increasing PBN procedure 

utilization is an important component in the transition to a 

PBN-centric NAS that:

• Provides benefits to NAS stakeholders by taking 

advantage of investments in advanced 

navigation capabilities;

• Improves systemwide efficiency by increasing the 

homogeneity of NAS operations; and

• Supports pathways to future traffic 

management capabilities.

Lessons learned from early PBN implementations reveal 

several important factors to maximize procedure utilization:

• Balance the objectives of operational stakeholders: 

Collaboration between users and service providers is 
10 PBN NAS Navigation Strategy 2016

key to the development, implementation and proper 

use of PBN procedures and provides substantive 

benefits. Continued participation by facility personnel 

in all aspects of PBN development and deployment 

is necessary. Collaboration with the ATC workforce is 

essential to success, but represents a challenge when 

critically staffed facilities or unavailable funding result 

in reduced participation in key design, development, 

training and implementation activities. To support the 

NAS described in this strategy document, a sustained 

focus on addressing facility staffing, work group funding 

requirements, community involvement in procedure 

design, and operator participation is required; 

• Integrate appropriate ATC decision support tools: 

Consistent use of PBN procedures during periods of 

high traffic demand is necessary to maintain the operator 

efficiency that PBN affords. Ensuring consistent use 

requires that controllers have access to and training on 

appropriate decision support tools and automation;

• Conduct comprehensive ATC and pilot training: 

While training materials are available that describe PBN 

procedures, comprehensive training on effectively using 

PBN for ATC and pilots could help increase procedure 

utilization and operational efficiency;

• Reduce the time to develop, implement and amend 

procedures: Streamlining PBN procedure development, 

deployment and amendment, along with the reduction 

of conventional procedures, will expedite the transition 

to a PBN-centric NAS and increase the FAA’s ability to 

provide procedures that leverage new capabilities and 

meet emerging needs in a timely manner;

• Leverage capabilities to model and simulate airframe 

and avionics variations: Variations in onboard avionics, 

such as the Flight Management System (FMS), can 

cause aircraft to fly the same procedure in different ways 

while still meeting minimum performance specifications. 

Procedure designers may account for these variations 

in ways that reduce efficiency and benefits. For complex 

implementations, modeling and simulation can inform 

design decisions. However, in the longer term, a uniform 

application of FMS performance standards will be the 

most effective mechanism to reduce flight trajectory 

variability; and 

• Modify criteria and policies to make advanced 

concepts and services operationally available: PBN 

is the foundation for numerous advanced navigation 

concepts and services that will increase safety, efficiency, 

access and capacity. Leveraging these concepts and 

providing these services as part of normal operations 

require proposing, analyzing and implementing relevant 

criteria and policies while concurrently scrutinizing, 

modifying and removing outdated policies as necessary.

While the FAA is currently pursuing several efforts to align 

these objectives, this strategy document also represents 

the aspiration of the FAA and stakeholders to continue to 

address these challenges in innovative and 

collaborative ways.

AIRPORT AND COMMUNITY OUTREACH 

Successfully moving to a PBN-centric NAS requires 

balancing the objectives of all stakeholders, including airport 

operators and the surrounding communities. Recent PBN 

implementation efforts illustrate the importance of airport 

and community involvement to ensure that community 

concerns are adequately addressed and that projects 

progress on schedule. The FAA has traditionally followed the 

National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) process when 

designing and implementing procedures. However, in recent 

years, we recognize that more community involvement is 

necessary, especially when flight paths are being changed 

as a result of PBN implementations. The FAA is committed 

to enhancing our community involvement practices to more 

effectively identify and address community concerns. We 

have increased public engagement throughout our process 

in order to more effectively inform our decision-making. 

Community involvement does not guarantee outcomes that 

satisfy everyone. However, decisions that take community 

input into consideration are more likely to reflect the collective 

public interest, receive broader community acceptance, and 

experience fewer implementation and postimplementation problems.

The FAA has updated our Community Involvement Manual, 

which offers practices, tools, resources and techniques 

that can guide FAA practitioners in tailoring community 

involvement to their specific efforts. In addition, we are 

developing a plan to enhance community involvement 

techniques and more proactively address concerns 

associated with PBN projects. The plan is being refined 

and coordinated across the FAA. We have incorporated 

all industry recommendations contained in the NextGen 

Advisory Committee’s 2014 “Blueprint for Success to 

Implementing Performance Based Navigation” relative to 

community outreach and airport involvement. We are also 

actively engaging airport and local community groups, 

such as noise roundtables, which provide opportunities for 

continuous, open dialogue between the FAA 

and communities. 

Increasing public awareness of the changes that PBN 

procedures bring to individual communities, regions and 

the nation as a whole is a shared responsibility across all 

stakeholders. Continued success will require the early, active 

and sustained outreach by the FAA to airport operators and 

the surrounding communities in PBN procedure design and 

implementation processes. Airport operators understand 

the local interests, sensitivities and expectations of the 

communities they serve, having built relationships over many 

decades. Their insights can help the FAA proactively address 

community concerns regarding PBN procedures during 

the design process and engage local communities more 

effectively during outreach efforts.
www.faa.gov 11

The continued evolution to a PBN-centric NAS requires 

deploying and supporting the use of appropriate PBN 

procedures to enhance safety, efficiency, access and 

capacity. This strategy document is the result of collaborative 

FAA and industry efforts during the past 10 years and 

outlines commitments and achievements needed to 

complete the transition to a PBN-centric NAS in the following 

focus areas:

• Operating with PBN throughout the NAS, using the right 

procedure to meet the need;

• Using navigation structure where beneficial and flexibility 

where possible;

• Shifting to time- and speed-based air 

traffic management;

• Delivering and using resilient navigation services;

• Modernizing the FAA navigation service delivery to 

reduce implementation time;

• Enabling lower visibility access; and

• Innovating and continuously improving.

Each of these focus areas has associated strategy elements, 

which are explained in further detail below.

RIGHT PROCEDURES

To implement PBN with the right procedure to meet a 

specific need requires that all stakeholders share a clear 

understanding of the national strategy, the purpose 

and benefits of a selected procedure and the operating 

environment in which it will be deployed. The type of 

procedure deployed will safely and efficiently address the 

operational needs. 

Success requires that procedures be used as intended. The 

FAA is committed to encouraging an increased harmonization 

in fleet navigation capability, as well as developing, 

fostering and maintaining an environment in which ATC can 

consistently assign flights to the new procedures and aircraft 

can consistently fly the procedures as intended. This will 

require advances in decision support tools, ATC and pilot 

training programs and involvement of aircraft and 

avionics manufacturers. 

ROUTE STRUCTURE 

In complex airspace, route structure provides a mechanism 

for controllers to manage the safe and efficient separation 

of aircraft. In less-complex airspace or in conditions where a 

degree of adaptability is necessary to minimize operational 

disruptions, PBN can be used to provide flexible routing 

options that balance user preferences with maintaining 

system-level efficiencies. This strategy document describes 

a PBN structure concept that uses route structure where 

beneficial and PBN-based flexibility elsewhere. 

TIME- AND SPEED-BASED MANAGEMENT

Schedule predictability is a key priority for air carriers, air 

transport operators and the general aviation community. 

Navigation Strategy Overview
12 PBN NAS Navigation Strategy 2016

PBN arrival, departure and approach procedures will 

provide a defined lateral path and support trajectory 

predictability, though ATC-issued heading, altitude and speed 

instructions will still be supported. Using Time Based Flow 

Management (TBFM) capabilities (Figure 5), traffic flows can 

be managed more effectively compared with the use of traffic 

management initiatives that are less targeted in their effects 

on the NAS, such as miles-in-trail restrictions. The result will 

be more predictability, smoother flows and better use of 

airport capacity. 

RESILIENT SERVICES

Resiliency is the ability of the NAS to maintain safety and 

an acceptable level of service when a system fails or facility 

is degraded, and to prevent or mitigate impact to air traffic 

operations. Within the timeframe of this strategy, the FAA 

will retain and expand the Distance Measuring Equipment 

(DME) infrastructure as necessary to support continued 

PBN operations in the event of GNSS service disruptions 

(Figure 6). Non-PBN operations will be supported through 

a rationalized network of other ground-based navigation 

equipment to ensure safety for all NAS users.9

FASTER SERVICE DELIVERY 

A key to the PBN NAS evolution is streamlining the NAS 

to be more agile and adaptable to emerging and changing 

needs. Timely development and delivery of the right services 

is predicated on efficient programmatic mechanisms to 

replace conventional procedures with new PBN procedures 

and deploy new criteria to the areas that will benefit. 

Automated tools to support the review and maintenance 

of procedures will reduce recurring costs and free up 

resources to support new development. Automated design 

tools will reduce the time to move criteria from approval to 

deployment, accelerating the delivery of benefits to the NAS 

from developments in navigation technologies and standards. 

LOW-VISIBILITY ACCESS

Updating criteria will facilitate leveraging the capabilities of 

PBN to provide increased access to more runway ends 

during low-visibility conditions (Figure 7 on page 13). These 

criteria updates will enable a safe way to maintain capacity 

and enable more consistent use of end-to-end PBN services. 

It may also encourage aircraft owners to upgrade capabilities 

to take advantage of these new opportunities. 

Figure 5 – With time- and speed-based air traffic management, aircraft 

fly predictable paths and adhere to an optimized schedule to produce 

consistent airport throughput.

9

 VOR, ILS, and Tactical Air Navigation are examples of ground-based navigation equipment.

Figure 6 – Resilient PBN will be achieved through satellite- and ground-based navigation systems.
www.faa.gov 13

CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT

Technological improvements and increases in operator 

equipage will continue to enable new PBN applications in 

the NAS. The transition from conventional procedures to 

PBN procedures increases predictability, reliability and flight 

efficiencies while continuing to ensure safe operations. As 

PBN capabilities evolve and emerging advancements in 

surveillance and communication become widely available 

in the NAS, it is vital that the FAA and aviation stakeholders 

continue to innovate and integrate navigation technologies. 

NAVIGATION SERVICE GROUPS

Navigation services (Figure 8) will be delivered within the 

NAS according to the guiding principle of providing the 

appropriate PBN tool to meet a specific operational need. 

The mechanism for determining the services provided at NAS 

locations is the Navigation Service Group (NSG) concept. 

Associated with each NSG are the navigation services that 

will potentially be available at the airports within each group. 

In some cases, a particular service will be made automatically 

available at an airport, while for other services, additional 

criteria must be met before the service would be made 

available. In these cases, the additional criteria help to ensure 

PBN services are appropriately applied to satisfy specific 

operational needs associated with safety, efficiency, capacity 

or access. For example, an RNAV STAR may be available 

to a moderately busy airport only if there are airspace 

complexity issues or constraints due to nearby terrain, 

while at the busiest airports, the most advanced navigation 

services would be available without meeting 

additional criteria.

The role an airport plays in the NAS is used as the primary 

basis for its assignment to one of the six NSGs. These roles 

are aligned with the categories used by the FAA’s NPIAS 

report. Additionally, an airport’s traffic levels and proximity 

to Large Hub airports help in determining an airport’s 

appropriate NSG. 

Figure 7 – PBN approaches will increasingly provide greater airport access 

during low-visibility conditions.

Figure 8 – PBN services depicted across Navigation Service Group airports represent the standard in the far term, 2026–2030.
14 PBN NAS Navigation Strategy 2016

10 The FAA is required to provide Congress with an updated NPIAS report every two years. The NPIAS contains all commercial service airports and selected general aviation airports. With changes in passenger 

enplanements and general aviation trends, an airport’s categorization and role can be adjusted.

11 Transitioning from RNAV to RNP STARs and SIDs necessitates criteria for the RNP procedures, authorization to use DME/DME as a method of RNP 1 navigation and expanded DME/DME coverage 

for resiliency.

The Department of Defense (DoD) and joint-use airports are 

considered in this framework, and the FAA will coordinate 

with the DoD on service requirements for individual airports. 

(Refer to Government Aircraft Operations text under the PBN 

Evolution section). As the NAS evolves and user demand 

shifts, an airport’s role may change, resulting in a change to 

its NPIAS categorization and requiring its NSG assignment to 

be adjusted.10 The following describes the key differences in 

the range of PBN services anticipated at the NSGs:

• NSG 1 is reserved for the busiest Large Hub airports that 

would likely benefit from common aircraft performance 

capabilities to maximize capacity. It now comprises 

about 15 airports, which include the top 10 Large Hub 

airports by operations as well as clusters of Large Hub 

airports in close proximity that, taken together, result in a 

high number of operations. Together, these airports make 

up about 30 percent of U.S. Instrument Flight Rules 

(IFR) operations and 45 percent of U.S. enplanements. 

RNP SIDs and STARs will be used to organize flows to 

and from en route airspace. NSG 1 airports will also be 

provided with additional non-PBN navigation services for 

redundancy. DME/DME coverage without the need for 

an Inertial Reference Unit (IRU) will be provided at NSG 1 

airports to maintain acceptable capacity during a GNSS 

disruption.11 During a GNSS disruption, departures may 

need to receive an initial heading to altitude, while arrivals 

will use the ILS to land.

• NSG 2 captures the remaining Large Hub airports, all 

Medium Hub airports, and other airports with annual 

operational counts greater than the lowest Medium Hub 

airport. In total, NSG 2 comprises about 60 airports, 

which make up about 45 percent of U.S. IFR operations 

and 39 percent of U.S. enplanements. These airports will 

also be provided with a broad range of PBN services. 

RNAV SIDs and STARs will be provided unless there is an 

operational need for RNP to avoid terrain or obstacles, or 

if airspace/procedure considerations necessitate RNP. As 

a second source of RNAV, DME/DME coverage without 

the need for an IRU will be provided down to altitudes 

based on site-specific evaluations and may not be 

provided at altitudes as low as at NSG 1 airports. During 

a GNSS disruption, departures may need to receive an 

initial heading to altitude, while arrivals will use an ILS 

to land.

• NSG 3 captures Small and Non-Hub airports (excluding 

those assigned to NSG 2 due to having high annual 

IFR operations) and comprises more than 300 airports. 

It differs from NSG 2 in that arrival and departure 

operations generally require less structure and therefore 

may not require RNAV SIDs and STARs. No new FAA 

Category (CAT) I ILS procedures would be established. 

For these airports, DME/DME coverage may be provided 

if required to maintain acceptable capacity during GNSS 

disruptions. During a GNSS disruption, departures may 

need to receive an initial heading to altitude, while arrivals 

will be vectored to an ILS to land.

• NSG 4 consists of more than 500 airports, including 

national and regional GA airports. Major differences 

from previous NSGs are that these airports are less 

likely to require RNAV SIDs and STARs, and at these 

locations, CAT I ILS and localizer-only approaches will be 

considered for removal as part of the ILS rationalization 

initiative. CAT I ILS approaches at Very High Frequency 

Omnidirectional Range (VOR) Minimum Operational 

Network (MON) airports will be preserved. 

• NSG 5 is made up of local and basic GA airports 

and includes about 2,400 airports. These airports will 

continue to have RNAV approaches (or may become 

eligible to receive them), and existing CAT I ILS and 

localizer-only approaches will be considered for removal.

• NSG 6 generally comprises non-NPIAS airports, which 

number in the thousands. The FAA has no intent to add 

PBN services at these airports.

Tables 3–5 on page 16 and 17 provide three key pieces 

of information for NSGs 1-5. The first is to list the range of 

PBN operations available across the NSGs by the far-term 

timeframe. The second is to show the NSGs where PBN 

operations are expected to be implemented by the far term. 

This includes whether a given PBN operation will be required 

or optional, and whether availability of the operation will be 

phased in, reduced or remain unchanged over the next 15 

years. Finally, the tables list the ICAO PBN manual navigation 

specifications associated with the PBN operation to show the 

alignment to the global interoperability standards for aircraft 

eligibility and operational acceptance. These tables represent 

a high-level summary of planned activities across the NSGs; 

additional details are provided in the three five-year

timeframe sections.

GLS is a non-federal system that exists as a service at some 

airports in the NAS. Table 4 indicates that GLS approach 

criteria are available for CAT I and are being developed for 

CAT II and III, while the availability of GBAS systems will be 

based on airport investment decisions. 

The FAA is developing a cost-benefit analysis to determine 

the viability of FAA acquisition of GBAS as a federal system. 

In the interim, as more airports make individual GBAS 

investments and more aircraft are entering service with GLS 

capability, the FAA will support the delivery of benefits from 

the operation of the non-federal GBAS facilities by approving 

new facilities, developing and publishing GLS approach 

procedures, training controllers and providing flight inspection 

services. The FAA is also supporting the development and 
www.faa.gov 15

PBN Operation Near

2016–

2020†

Mid

2021–

2025

Far

2026–

2030

Minimum ICAO Nav 

Spec to Qualify for 

PBN Operation 

(Allowable aircraft 

and operator 

qualification)

NSG 1‡ NSG 2 NSG 3 NSG 4 NSG 5

RNAV (GPS) with 

LNAV minima > > >

A-RNP or RNP 

APCH A Provided at qualifying runway ends*

RNAV (GPS) with LP minima > RNP APCH B LP added where beneficial; new criteria will allow 

many to be replaced with LPV

RNAV (GPS) with LNAV/

VNAV minima ^ ^ >

A-RNP or RNP 

APCH A Provided at qualifying runway ends 

RNAV (GPS) with 

LPV minima ^ ^ > RNP APCH B Provided at qualifying runway ends

RNAV (GPS) to RWY XX 

(RF and Scalable RNP) N/A ^ ^ A-RNP May provide

RNAV (RNP) to RWY XX 

(0.3 or lower needed) ^ > > RNP AR APCH May provide

RNAV (GPS) to RWY XX 

(RF outside FAF**) ^ ^ ^ A-RNP or RNP 

APCH A May provide

RNP (RF) initial and 

intermediate as part of an 

ILS approach procedure

^ ^ ^ RNP AR or A-RNP 

or RNP APCH

Recommended (NSG 1) 

May provide (NSG 2-5)

ILS (CAT I) > N/A May provide

No new 

ILS 

(CAT I)

Considered 

for reduction

ILS (CAT II, III) > > > N/A Meets APS1 criteria

(considers operations and weather)

LOC only approach > N/A Only if ILS does not qualify 

for vertical

Considered 

for reduction

VOR approach N/A Maintained only if there is no ILS and is also a 

VOR MON airport

Table 3 – Availability of Approach Services Across Navigation Service Groups

†

Definitions for the notations in the near, mid and far columns are as follows: N/A = Not yet available, ^ = increasing availability, = decreasing availability and > = stable availability.

‡

Definitions for notation in the NSG columns are as follow: 

“Shall provide” = the NSG shall provide the service in accordance with time phasing shown.

“May provide” = the NSG is not obligated to provide the service but if it does it will be in accordance with the time phasing. 

*Qualifying runway ends are those that meet the criteria (for example, length, obstacle clearances and parallel taxiway) and are jointly agreed by FAA (ATO/AVS/ARP) and the airport sponsor as a designated 

instrument runway. 

**Final Approach Fix.

PBN Operation Near

2016–

2020†

Mid

2021–

2025

Far

2026–

2030

Minimum ICAO Nav 

Spec to Qualify for 

PBN Operation 

(Allowable aircraft 

and operator 

qualification)

NSG 1‡ NSG 2 NSG 3 NSG 4 NSG 5

GLS (CAT I) A A A N/A Airport Investment Decision – not a federal system

GLS (CAT II, III) N/A A A N/A Airport Investment Decision – not a federal system

Table 4 – Availability of Non-Federal Approach Services Across Navigation Service Groups

†

Definitions for the notations in the near, mid and far columns are as follow: A = Available for use, N/A = Not yet available.
16 PBN NAS Navigation Strategy 2016

approval of CAT II/III GLS capability, which is expected to 

be available late in the near term. Until the FAA’s investment 

decision is made, GLS services will be available only where 

funded, provided and installed by an airport operator or 

other qualified non-federal navigation system sponsor and 

approved through the FAA’s non-federal system program. 

Table 5 indicates that RNP STARs and SIDs will be provided 

at NSG 1 airports. Transitioning from RNAV to RNP STARs 

and SIDs necessitates criteria for the RNP procedures, 

authorization to use DME/DME as a method of RNP 1 

navigation, and expanded DME/DME coverage for resiliency. 

In the interim, RNAV STARs and SIDs will be retained at 

NSG 1 airports.

PBN EVOLUTION

The evolution to a PBN-centric NAS is divided into three 

timeframes depicted in Table 6: near term (2016–2020), 

mid term (2021–2025) and far term (2026–2030). The focus 

for each timeframe’s activities, goals and commitments by 

operational domain, as well as operator requirements, is 

described in more detail in the following subsections. Goals 

and commitments organized by the navigation strategy vision 

areas are provided in Appendix A. 

The key activities required to transition today’s NAS to a 

PBN-centric NAS are:

• Establishing navigation service needs through the far 

term that will guide infrastructure decisions. Ensure 

funding to manage and transition these systems 

and procedures;

• Identifying operational and integration connections 

between navigation and surveillance, air-ground 

communications and automation tools that maximize the 

benefits of RNAV and RNP;

• Deploying ATC decision support tools that account for 

aircraft navigation system variations and provide the 

functional equivalent to traditional controller techniques 

for maintaining throughput during busy operations, such 

as vectors, level offs and speed assignments;

• Ensuring necessary emphasis on human factors, 

especially on training and procedures in ATC and 

aircraft operations;

• Aligning criteria development with new PBN concepts to 

enable their timely application and use;

• Maintaining consistent and harmonized global standards 

for RNAV and RNP operations; 

• Harmonizing Outside the Conterminous United States 

(OCONUS) criteria and standards with those applicable 

to the Conterminous United States (CONUS).

• Incorporating IFR helicopter operations into the lowaltitude PBN procedure infrastructure; and

• Supporting DoD requirements through the development 

of policies, procedures and tools needed to 

accommodate the unique missions and capabilities of 

military aircraft operating in the NAS.

HELICOPTER OPERATIONS

Heliports and helicopter operations fill important roles in the 

United States. As the NAS transitions to PBN, it will become 

increasing important to consider the integration of helicopter 

operations. The focus area will be de-conflicting low altitude 

N/A = Not yet available, ^ = increasing availability, = decreasing availability and > = stable availability

‡

Definitions for notation in the NSG columns are as follow: 

“Shall provide” = the respective NSG shall provide the service in accordance with time phasing shown.

“May provide” = the respective NSG is not obligated to provide the service, but if it does, it will be in accordance with the time phasing. 

PBN Operation Near

2016–

2020

Mid

2021–

2025

Far

2026–

2030

Minimum ICAO Nav 

Spec to Qualify for 

PBN Operation 

(Allowable aircraft and 

operator qualification)

NSG 1‡ NSG 2 NSG 3 NSG 4 NSG 5

RNP STAR (RF) N/A ^ ^ A-RNP or RNP 1 Shall 

provide May provide

RNP SID (RF) N/A ^ ^ A-RNP or RNP 1 Shall 

provide May provide

RNAV STAR ^ ^ >

A-RNP or RNP 1 

or RNAV 1

Provide 

RNP 

when 

available

Provide 

unless 

RNP 

needed

May provide

RNAV SID ^ ^ >

A-RNP or RNP 1 

or RNAV 1

Provide 

RNP 

when 

available

Provide 

unless 

RNP 

needed

May provide

Table 5 – Availability of Arrival and Departure Services Across Navigation Service Groups
www.faa.gov 17

airspace shared among multiple aircraft types through the 

publication of helicopter IFR routing and PBN approaches to 

heliports. While this strategy document does not extensively 

discuss heliports and helicopters, the FAA continues to 

develop the PBN strategy in this area, with details to be 

included in subsequent versions of the document.

GOVERNMENT AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS

Moving to a PBN-based navigation system for the NAS 

will provide significant opportunities for improved safety, as 

well as operational and flight efficiencies for civil and military 

operators. This evolution requires a continued advancement 

of aircraft and avionics to meet current and future airspace 

performance requirements. The FAA is committed to working 

with the DoD and other governmental bodies to ensure 

that they are able to fulfill their roles in providing for national 

defense, search and rescue, transport and other missions 

critical to U.S. interests.

2016–2020 TIMEFRAME

In the near term, efforts will continue to focus on ensuring 

that the NAS infrastructure provides the appropriate 

navigation services at airports and throughout the NAS. 

particularly RNAV STARs. At larger airports, the focus will be 

on increasing use of existing PBN procedures, continuing 

implementation at major metroplex sites, optimizing the 

procedures that are already in place and ensuring resilient 

navigation infrastructure is available in the event of GNSS 

service disruptions. At smaller airports, the focus will be on 

Table 6 – Summary of FAA Goals and Commitments

Near Term (2016–2020) 

Increase Utilization

Mid Term (2021–2025) 

Streamline Service Delivery

Far Term (2026–2030) 

A Streamlined NAS

Approach/Terminal

 ̈ Implement RNAV (GPS) with LPV and LNAV/VNAV 

approaches at qualifying runways meeting current 

Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS) criteria

 ̈ Criteria to increase the number of runways 

qualifying for vertically guided approaches

 ̈ Expand use of Established on RNP (EoR) 

at first site

 ̈ Expand use of Equivalent Lateral Spacing 

Operations (ELSO) at first two sites

 ̈ Criteria for low-visibility access with LPV

 ̈ Use of PBN approaches with visual 

separation standards

 ̈ Expand development of PBN special helicopter 

approaches to hospitals

 ̈ Policy for Enhanced Flight Vision Systems (EFVS) 

operation to touchdown

 ̈ Policy for Synthetic Vision Guidance System (SVGS) 

to qualifying approaches

 ̈ Demonstrate A-RNP at first site

 ̈ Initiate expanded DME/DME coverage for 

Navigation Service Group 1 and 2 airports

 ̈ Continue replacing conventional approaches, SIDs 

and STARs with PBN procedures

 ̈ Implement Optimized Profile Descents (OPD) at 

airports using RNAV STARs

 ̈ Enhance community involvement

Approach/Terminal

 ̈ Implement Vertically guided RNAV (GPS) 

approaches at runways meeting new 

TERPS criteria

 ̈ Expand use of RNAV (GPS) approaches 

(with LPV and LNAV/VNAV) with RF

 ̈ Expand use of EoR at sites supported by 

cost-benefit analysis

 ̈ Expand use of ELSO at sites supported by

cost-benefit analysis

 ̈ Leverage A-RNP at key sites

 ̈ DME/DME coverage expanded for 

Navigation Service Group 1 and 2 airports 

based on site-specific evaluations

 ̈ Continue replacing conventional 

approaches, SIDs and STARs with 

PBN procedures

Approach/Terminal

 ̈ Vertically guided RNAV (GPS) approaches 

at qualifying airports with an IAP

 ̈ A-RNP procedures at sites supported by 

cost-benefit analysis

 ̈ Complete the transition to PBN 

procedures

Oceanic

 ̈ Transition to dynamic UPRs where 

supported by operator capability

NAS Operations

 ̈ NAS transitioned to time- and speedbased management

En Route

 ̈ Transition to improved PBN-based

point-to-point navigation

 ̈ Replace Jet routes and Victor airways with 

PBN routes where structure is needed

Oceanic

 ̈ Leverage reduced separation standards to 

further expand UPRs

NAS Operations

 ̈ Expanded time- and speed-based 

management services for key airports En Route

 ̈ Class A airspace is covered by DME/DME (IRU not 

required) redundancy

 ̈ Shorten development and implementation time for 

new ATS routes by removing 

rulemaking requirement

 ̈ Initial transition to improved PBN-based point-topoint navigation

Oceanic

 ̈ Expand User Preferred Routes (UPRs) for 

navigation between North America and Asia

 ̈ Implement reduced separation climb/descend

requirements for RNP 4 capable aircraft

 ̈ Transition from Minimum Navigation Performance 

Specification (MNPS) to PBN in the ICAO North 

Atlantic (NAT) Region

 ̈ Analyze further reduced RNP-based 

separation standards
18 PBN NAS Navigation Strategy 2016

providing additional safety by implementing PBN approaches 

with vertical guidance, which is LPV and Lateral Navigation/

Vertical Navigation (LNAV/VNAV) lines of minima to every 

qualified runway end.12

KEY NEAR-TERM FOCUS

Throughout the near term, the FAA will focus on increasing 

the use of PBN procedures, particularly RNAV STARs. 

This will require providing ATC with decision support tools 

that support the use of PBN procedures and account for 

aircraft performance variability. It will also require training the 

controller workforce as appropriate on state-of-the-art PBN 

procedures, TBFM capabilities and best practices.

Operator and pilot training will also play a key role in ensuring 

that the most efficient procedures available are used routinely 

and safely. In the near term, the FAA is committed to: 

• Emphasizing pilot training and accountability in proper 

use of phraseology during PBN operations;

• Developing Airmen Certification Standards that 

consolidate Practical Test Standards with pilot 

knowledge requirements and risk management 

strategies. (Updates to material regarding PBN and 

satellite-based navigation operations are included as part 

of this effort);

• Developing guidance to address vulnerabilities in the 

pilot’s management of path automation based on 

recommendations provided by the Air Carrier Training 

Aviation Rulemaking Committee (ACT ARC) Flight Deck 

Automation Working Group; and 

• Continuing to update ACs, the AIM and other guidance 

materials related to PBN operations as warranted. These 

updates will continue throughout the near term 

and beyond.

The entire aviation community contributes to increasing the 

use of PBN procedures. Harmonizing and updating aircraft 

avionics to take advantage of PBN procedures will reduce 

ATC complexity, allowing equipped users to derive benefits 

more often. 

As new traffic management and avionics capabilities become 

available and are integrated into the fabric of the NAS, the 

system as a whole will become more efficient and individual 

users will see benefits, including increased predictability and 

more opportunities to fly efficient trajectories.

APPROACH

In the approach phase of flight, near-term initiatives will focus 

on increasing safety and improving throughput during lowvisibility conditions. Commitments include:

• Continuing replacement of current conventional 

approach procedures with PBN procedures. 

Replacement of these procedures will reduce costs and 

training requirements; 

• Implementing RNAV (GPS) approaches with LPV and 

LNAV/VNAV lines of minima at runways that qualify 

according to the current Terminal Instrument Procedures 

(TERPS) criteria. Providing vertical guidance increases 

safety by supporting a stabilized approach. These 

approach procedures will be developed to support 

participation by aircraft in as many approach categories 

(categories A, B, C and D) as possible. Furthermore, 

revision to the TERPS criteria will increase the number of 

runways that qualify for an LPV approach; 

• Revising criteria allowing LPV approaches to Special 

Authorization CAT I/1800 Runway Visual Range (RVR) 

minima and for CAT II minima. This will expand access 

during low visibility to aircraft with WAAS capabilities; 

• Developing and implementing an operational capability 

that leverages the predictability and repeatability of PBN 

instrument approach procedures and the efficiency 

of visual separation standards. This will be achieved 

through updating standards, phraseology and training, 

and will not require new IAPs. This combination is 

expected to result in enhanced safety and efficiency 

during visual conditions without the added complexity of 

multiple approach procedures;

• Implementing Established on RNP (EoR) operations and 

routine use at a key site by the end of the near term. 

EoR enables controllers to clear aircraft on an RNP 

approach while on the downwind to the airport without 

the need to use the standard 1,000 feet of vertical or 3 

nm lateral separation when the aircraft turns to align with 

the runway centerline (Figure 9 on page 19). This change 

to separation standards allows aircraft to turn to align 

to the runway much closer to the field, reducing track 

miles, fuel burn and noise. EoR provides safety, reliability 

and efficiency benefits in the NAS while improving 

customer service and minimizing delays en route and on 

the ground. The FAA recently completed a safety study 

using EoR with Track-to-Fix (TF) legs rather than RF legs, 

paving the way to significantly increase the number of 

aircraft eligible to participate in EoR; 

• Developing PBN special helicopter approaches where 

needed to ensure safe arrival to hospitals for emergency 

medical service operations. Where hospitals are located 

near major metropolitan areas and airports, it may 

be challenging to develop these procedures due to 

the constraints of nearby airport IAPs. As with other 

procedure projects, these will rely on early engagement 

with all affected stakeholders; 

• Providing operational credit on qualifying approaches 

with Synthetic Vision Guidance Systems (SVGS). The 

FAA will issue an updated policy to enable head-down 

SVGS to be used in lieu of a Head Up Display (HUD) for 

12 Qualified runway ends are those that meet the criteria (e.g., length, obstacle clearances and parallel taxiway) and are jointly agreed on by the FAA (ATO/AVS/ARP) and the airport sponsor as a designated 

instrument runway. Most, but not all, airports in the NPIAS will have an IAP to at least a single runway end for reliable, safe access.
www.faa.gov 19

reduced-visibility operations to qualifying 

approaches (Figure 10); 

• Expanding operational credit13 using Enhanced Flight 

Vision Systems (EFVS) on PBN approaches during low 

ceiling and low-visibility conditions. Currently, EFVS 

can be used only for continued operation between 

the Decision Altitude/Minimum Descent Altitude (DA/

MDA) and 100 feet height above touchdown (HAT) zone 

elevation (Figure 11 on page 20). The FAA will issue 

updated regulations and guidance material to enable 

EFVS operations through the entire visual segment, 

from 100 feet HAT to touchdown. The new regulations 

leverage vision technology and pilot training to enable 

dispatch, arrival and approach operations in low ceiling 

and low-visibility conditions; and

• Reducing circling approaches (circling lines of minima 

and circling-only procedures)14 in accordance with criteria 

developed in collaboration with aviation stakeholders. A 

minimum number of circling approaches will be retained 

at designated airports to meet current requirements 

for pilot training, airport access and resiliency. These 

circling approaches would be phased out as training 

requirements are updated and user demand for circling 

approaches subsides. 

TERMINAL

In the terminal domain, near-term focus areas include 

completing implementation of optimized procedures at 

the first round of metroplex sites, leveraging new reduced 

divergence departure standards and paving the way for 

innovative PBN concepts, such as A-RNP. 

Commitments include:

• Continuing use of the metroplex process to bring 

collaborative PBN improvements to major metropolitan 

areas, as well as a process for making quicker PBN 

improvements at less-complicated sites (Figure 12 on 

page 20);

• Continuing implementation of Optimized Profile 

Descents (OPD) using RNAV STARs for airports outside 

major metropolitan areas. Aircraft burn less fuel with 

OPDs because they can begin a smooth glide from 

high altitude airspace using minimal engine power 

instead of approaching the airport in a less-efficient 

stair-step fashion;

• Continuing replacement of current conventional arrival 

and departure procedures with PBN procedures. 

Replacing these procedures with effective PBN 

alternatives will reduce maintenance cost, training 

requirements and increase PBN procedure utilization;

• Implementing ELSO at a minimum of two sites; 

• Demonstrating initial site for A-RNP. A-RNP eliminates 

separate operator approval processes for several 

PBN procedures allowing for greater containment and 

precision, including the following navigation accuracies: 

1 nm for en route, arrival and departure; 2 nm for 

oceanic; and 0.3 nm for approach phase of flight; and

• Pursuing authorization for the use of DME/DME coverage 

without IRU to maintain RNP 1 operations in the event of 

GNSS unavailability or disruption.

Figure 9 – EoR operations using approaches with RF legs have provided a 

shorter final approach for equipped flights at Denver International Airport.

13 Operational credit is approval for properly equipped aircraft to operate in specific conditions.

14 A circling approach is a component of a procedure that instructs the pilot how to bring the aircraft into position for landing when the aircraft is not lined up with the arrival end of the runway.

Figure 10 – SVGS combine flight guidance display technology and highprecision position assurance monitors. SVGS provide pilots with a dynamic 

perception of position, trend and motion.

Image courtesy of Honeywell Aerospace
20 PBN NAS Navigation Strategy 2016

EN ROUTE

The focus in the en route domain in the near term 

is to shift to a PBN-based service environment, and 

to increase the agility with which these services 

can be provided to balance emerging operator and 

systemwide needs. Commitments include: 

• Designating Class A airspace above approximately 

FL290 as “RNAV 2 only.” En route navigation above this 

altitude will be contingent on RNAV 2 capability, allowing 

airspace and procedures to be optimized without the 

need to account for less-efficient conventional routes 

within the same volume of airspace;

• Transitioning to a PBN-based flexible navigation solution 

in the en route domain. Conventional Jet routes 

(Figure 13 on page 21) and many Victor airways will 

begin to be removed and replaced with a PBN route 

structure where needed. Elsewhere, PBN-based pointto-point navigation will be used. The RNAV waypoints 

within the Navigation Reference System (NRS) grid that 

Figure 11 – EFVS can increase situational awareness at night and during low-visibility weather conditions.

Figure 12 – This map shows Metroplex Segment 1 sites in the NAS. 
www.faa.gov 21

are currently being used or are expected to have future 

utility will be retained and renamed to be more usable. 

The rest may be removed to simplify en route navigation 

charts and conserve FMS memory capacity; and

• Updating policy to remove the notice of proposed 

rulemaking requirement for ATS routes in the en route 

domain. Removing this requirement will reduce the 

time it takes to develop and implement new ATS 

routes. As always, the FAA will conduct an appropriate 

environmental review for any new procedures.

OCEANIC

In the near term, the oceanic domain will expand the PBNbased service environment and complete implementation of 

optimized services. Commitments include:

• Continuing use of PBN-based reduced separation 

standards predicated on RNP 10 and RNP 4;

• Expanding the use of User Preferred Routes (UPRs) as 

the primary means of navigation for flights operating 

between North America and Asia;

• Implementing reduced separation climb/descend 

standards applied between maneuvering and blocking 

aircraft pairs with RNP 4 capability to allow more oceanic 

flights to achieve operator-preferred cruising altitudes 

(Figure 14); 

• Transitioning from Minimum Navigation Performance 

Specification (MNPS) to PBN in the ICAO North Atlantic 

(NAT) Region. The FAA will revise flight standards, air 

traffic and other documentation that currently references 

NAT “MNPS Airspace.” MNPS does not conform 

to the ICAO policies and guidance specified in the 

“Performance-based Navigation (PBN) Manual” 

(Doc 9613). 

The transition from MNPS to PBN operations will 

allow the FAA and other NAT Air Navigation Service 

Providers (ANSPs) to harmonize with the global ICAO 

PBN implementation efforts. This also will facilitate new 

PBN oceanic procedures and separation standards that 

optimize airspace efficiency; and

• Pursuing reductions in RNP-based separation standards.

OPERATOR ADOPTION 

In the near term, navigation in Class A airspace above 

approximately FL290 will require RNAV 2 capability, which 

is currently supported by GNSS and DME/DME with IRU. 

The FAA will expand DME infrastructure to allow RNAV 

Figure 13 – Network of Jet routes for CONUS.

Figure 14 – User Preferred Altitude in Oceanic Airspace.
22 PBN NAS Navigation Strategy 2016

operations to continue in Class A airspace in the event of 

GNSS disruption without requiring IRU, allowing more aircraft 

to participate. The PBN resiliency strategy is discussed 

further in the Resiliency section on page 24, and operator 

performance goals are described in the Minimum PBN 

Capabilities section on page 26.

2021–2025 TIMEFRAME

In the mid term, navigation within the NAS will become 

increasingly PBN-centric, more resilient against GNSS 

service disruptions, and be supported by agile processes 

and tools for deploying and maintaining PBN procedures. 

Implementation of criteria and plans developed in the near 

term will begin to significantly shape the operation of the 

NAS, and the rationalization of ground-based navigation 

infrastructure will reduce the number of VOR facilities and, to 

a lesser extent, the number of Category I ILSs.

KEY MID-TERM FOCUS

The focus of the mid-term timeframe will be to expedite the 

delivery, use and subsequent maintenance of PBN services. 

Commitments include: 

• Developing procedure-design tools and processes 

that accelerate the ability to move from criteria to 

implemented procedures. This is accomplished by 

syncing criteria, data and design automation software;

• Completing the transition to digital delivery of chart 

data. This continued modernization of how procedure 

information is delivered to operators will improve 

coordination and reduce the time required to introduce 

procedure changes to the NAS. Collaboration with DoD 

will ensure a chart delivery option that accommodates 

the capabilities of military aircraft operating in the NAS; 

• Completing development of an automated tool for 

periodic review of procedures, which will reduce the 

resource requirements to maintain procedures; and

• Facilitating aircraft qualification and operator approvals 

for A-RNP, applicable to oceanic, en route, terminal and 

approach PBN operations.

APPROACH

In the mid term, the FAA will continue to enhance safety, 

access and efficiency by expanding vertically guided 

approaches to newly qualifying runway ends and building 

upon near-term safety studies and criteria changes to provide 

advanced navigation capabilities that more operators are 

equipped to fly. Commitments include: 

• Building upon TERPS criteria revised in the near term by 

providing vertically-guided RNAV (GPS) approaches at 

qualifying runways meeting new TERPS criteria;

• Expanding the use of RNAV (GPS) approaches with RF 

legs. Based on the current limitations of many aircraft 

operating across the NAS, use of TF legs will exist as 

needed to support the migration to RF legs. Over the 

next 15 years, the strategy requires the transition from TF 

to RF, rendering TF legs the exception and RF legs the 

norm at NSG 1 and 2 airports. Approaches with RF legs 

are preferred at NSG 1 and 2 airports as these provide 

higher track predictability and better support for time and 

speed-based traffic management than TF legs. Based 

on operator equipage rates, the use of TF legs may 

provide for higher procedure utilization and result in a 

more beneficial operation in the short term. RNAV (RNP) 

approaches will be retained where necessary;

• Continuing the application of EoR operations at sites 

supported by cost-benefit analysis; and

• Continuing to replace current conventional approach 

procedures with PBN procedures. 

TERMINAL

In the terminal environment, the FAA will begin leveraging 

A-RNP at key sites that have constraints, such as terrain 

or proximity to busy, complex traffic flows. The FAA will 

increasingly leverage reduced separation standards, such 

as ELSO, at sites supported by cost-benefit analysis. The 

FAA also will continue to replace conventional arrival and 

departure procedures with PBN procedures.

EN ROUTE

In the en route environment, the FAA will focus on continuing 

efforts initiated in the near term to provide additional PBN 

ATS routes and point-to-point navigation where operationally 

beneficial, and to remove most conventional ATS routes. 

Commitments include: 

• Replacing conventional Jet routes with Q-Routes (or 

non-rulemaking equivalent) where route structure 

continues to be needed and with a PBN-based point-topoint navigation solution elsewhere;

• Implementing T-Routes (or non-rulemaking equivalent) 

where beneficial, typically to provide access for GA 

aircraft to transition through or around Class B or Class 

C airspace; and

• Eliminating Victor airways, except where needed in 

mountainous regions and areas without radar coverage 

as operationally required.

OCEANIC

In the oceanic environment, the FAA will continue to pursue 

further reductions in RNP-based separation standards, 

including exploring the use of RNP 2. These reductions are 

dependent on advances in surveillance and communication 
www.faa.gov 23

capabilities. The FAA will also leverage reduced separation 

standards to expand the implementation of UPRs.

OPERATOR ADOPTION 

The mid-term commitments include changes to methods of 

IFR navigation throughout the NAS. Early in the mid term, 

all IFR aircraft are expected to meet RNAV 2 and RNAV 1 

performance requirements supported by GNSS. By the end 

of the mid term, all IFR aircraft are expected to have RNAV 

(GPS) approach capability (with LNAV at a minimum). Aircraft 

without the following capabilities may not be able to efficiently 

access NSG 1 airports:

• RNAV (GPS) approach with LNAV/VNAV or LPV;

• RNP 1;

• DME navigation; and

• RF. 

2026–2030 TIMEFRAME

By 2030, PBN procedures and flexible routing will be the 

standard method of navigation throughout the NAS during 

normal operating conditions. The number of VORs and ILSs 

in the NAS will be reduced as a result of rationalization, and 

VORs that remain in the MON will be re-evaluated within the 

new system context.

Due to increased and evolving training on PBN procedures 

and the evolution of decision support tools (for example, 

path stretch within TBFM) for the ATC and pilot community, 

automation tools and operations will be tightly integrated. 

Using the predictability of PBN routing, Trajectory Based 

Operations (TBO) enhanced by time-based metering 

capabilities will accurately predict the aircraft’s 4-D trajectory, 

which will support higher throughput and more efficient 

flows for terminal and en route operations, fully using airport 

runway capacity (Figure 15). FMS standardization efforts will 

help to ensure that aircraft fly procedures more consistently, 

improving the efficacy of metering applications and helping 

ATC better manage traffic flows on optimized 

PBN procedures.

Airspace will be optimized for PBN procedures and decision 

support tools, increasing the flexibility with which aviation 

user preferences can be accommodated while ensuring 

system level efficiencies are maintained. Preferential routing 

will be adjusted dynamically to accommodate predicted 

demand or route aircraft away from weather to maintain 

system capacity. 

KEY FAR-TERM FOCUS

The far-term strategy focuses on completing the majority of 

programs initiated in the near-term and mid-term timeframes, 

culminating in the conclusion of ground-based infrastructure 

rationalization and the achievement of a streamlined PBNcentric NAS. With this focus, the FAA’s far-term strategy 

includes the following priorities:

• Transitioning the NAS to time- and speed-based 

management, with aircraft using and staying on an endto-end network of PBN procedures and PBN-based 

point-to-point routing;

• Reducing separation standards for aircraft flying PBN 

procedures in Instrument Meteorological Conditions 

(IMC), moving as close as feasible to the capacity 

achieved today in Visual Meteorological 

Conditions (VMC);

• Supporting implementation of standardized FMS 

functionality with increased functional integration of data 

communication and surveillance services that results in 

aircraft flying procedures in a more consistent, adaptable 

and flexible manner; and

• Harmonizing OCONUS criteria and standards with the 

evolving NAS standards.

APPROACH

New TERPS criteria completed in the near term will result in 

an increase in the number of runways that qualify for vertically 

guided approaches. The FAA will prioritize the continued 

implementation of vertically guided RNAV (GPS) approaches 

for qualified runways at airports with an IAP. CAT III ILS will 

still be supported in this timeframe for resiliency and lowvisibility conditions. 

TERMINAL

The design flexibility that PBN provides will support safer, 

more-efficient operations. In the far term, FAA 

priorities include:

Figure 15 – Trajectory Based Operations describe an environment where 

traffic is managed based on where aircraft are and where they will be located 

as they progress along their respective flight paths.
24 PBN NAS Navigation Strategy 2016

• Completing the transition from conventional arrival and 

departure procedures to PBN procedures;

• Leveraging A-RNP aircraft capabilities at sites where 

supported by a cost-benefit analysis; and 

• Ensuring that RNAV/RNP SIDs and STARs are aligned 

with future en route concepts. For example, arrival 

procedures may not extend as far into the en route 

domain to allow for greater routing flexibility.

EN ROUTE

Transitioning from ATS routes that require rulemaking will 

enable a more dynamic PBN route delivery process. In 

addition, the FAA will be able to provide operators with a 

PBN-based point-to-point navigation capability consisting 

of strategically located RNAV waypoints to traverse highaltitude airspace. As paper charts are migrated to digital 

delivery in the mid term, Data Communications (Data Comm) 

messaging capabilities are rolled out, and PBN tools become 

available for use on the ground and in the flight deck, 

operators and controllers will be able to work more efficiently 

to accommodate dynamic demand (Figure 16). 

Additionally, controllers will have the ability to more efficiently 

route aircraft away from inclement weather while maintaining 

system capacity. The FAA will undertake high-altitude 

airspace design optimization based on these new capabilities 

and emerging operator and NAS-wide needs. 

OCEANIC

In the oceanic domain, the FAA will implement further 

reduced separation standards where supported by 

navigation, surveillance and communications capabilities. 

Navigation will transition away from fixed ATS routes to 

dynamic UPRs where supported by operator capability. The 

FAA will develop a more robust communication capability that 

allows automated coordination between the FAA’s en route 

and oceanic automation systems for seamless 

PBN operations. 

OPERATOR ADOPTION

By the end of this timeframe, all IFR aircraft will be required 

to be LNAV/VNAV or LPV capable. At NSG 1 airports, Time 

of Arrival Control (TOAC) guidance and automation may 

be required to support 4-D TBO. Dual Frequency, MultiConstellation (DFMC) deployment and receiver adoption 

including Advanced Receiver Autonomous Integrity 

Monitoring may improve robustness and provide approaches 

to lower minimums.

RESILIENCY

The FAA is committed to ensuring that the NAS navigational 

infrastructure remains secure, sustainable and resilient.15 A 

key component of the navigational infrastructure is a resilient 

position, navigation and timing capability independent of 

GNSS that will ensure safety while minimizing the impact 

of a GNSS disruption. To sustain the GNSS-independent 

navigational infrastructure, the FAA will ensure that those 

elements needed for safety, recovery and continued 

operations are maintained. To this end, programs and 

initiatives, such as the VOR MON, ILS Rationalization, 

NextGen DME, the PBN Route Structure (PBN RS) concept 

and the National Procedure Assessment (NPA), provide 

a means to determine the need for legacy navigational 

infrastructure as part of the FAA’s evolution toward a future 

PBN-centric NAS. 

Navigation service requirements and capabilities have 

transitioned beyond the historic reliance on a VOR-based 

NAS. The VOR MON program will reduce the legacy 

VOR infrastructure during the near-term and mid-term 

timeframes by about one-third, with the remaining VORs 

providing needed resilience to a subset of NAS users. 

Complementary to VOR removal, the PBN RS concept will 

eliminate unnecessary ATS routes and institute new ones 

only where needed, offering flexible point-to-point routing 

options everywhere else. The NPA activity will do the same 

for unnecessary PBN arrival, departure and 

approach procedures. 

The NextGen DME program will expand DME coverage 

in the en route and terminal domains to provide a resilient 

15 The 2013 Presidential Policy Decision 21 on Critical Infrastructure Security and Resilience (PPD-21) defines “resilience” as “the ability to prepare for and adapt to changing conditions and withstand and 

recover rapidly from disruptions. Resilience includes the ability to withstand and recover from deliberate attacks, accidents or naturally occurring threats or incidents.”

Figure 16 – The combination of PBN and Data Comm will allow air traffic 

control to dynamically reroute aircraft around severe weather.
www.faa.gov 25

complementary system to support PBN operations in the 

event of a GNSS disruption without the need for an IRU. 

As PBN operations are expanded, the ground-based 

infrastructure including facilities and conventional instrument 

flight procedures will be reduced. The FAA has established 

teams to work across lines of business to rationalize the 

legacy ground-based infrastructure to ensure the necessary 

safety backup capability will always be maintained.

NEAR TERM

By the end of the near term, the NAS will remain resilient 

with PBN services throughout Class A airspace provided 

by phasing in DME RNAV coverage down to 18,000 feet 

above mean sea level (MSL). The exception is areas in the 

Western Mountainous Region, where terrain severely limits 

line-of-sight coverage at altitudes below 24,000 feet MSL. 

DME coverage will exist without the need for an IRU, though 

operators without IRU may need to confirm critical DMEs 

are not out of service in the terminal area. Class A airspace 

will require DME/DME positioning for operators needing to 

access the airspace during a GNSS service disruption.16 

Operators equipped with only a single FMS, and thus only 

a single DME/DME navigation source, will be allowed to use 

VOR (non-RNAV) or Tactical Air Navigation as an authorized 

second form of navigation to continue to dispatch during 

the disruption.

Once the PBN infrastructure is complete in particular 

locations or regions, the option will exist for the 

decommissioning of procedures and ground infrastructure, 

over time, where they are not required for system resiliency. 

As a result:

• No additional Non-Directional Beacon (NDB) approaches 

will be published, and NDB approaches used for training 

by the DoD or other private entities will not be included 

in the NAS;

• As part of the VOR MON, a program designed to change 

the purpose of VORs from providing a route structure to 

being a resilient method of navigation for non-DME/DME 

aircraft during a GNSS disruption, the discontinuance 

of approximately 70 of the current VOR stations will be 

completed by the end of the near term;

• The need to retain current ILSs at each individual location 

and runway will be assessed by the FAA’s ongoing ILS 

rationalization effort. Rationalization activities will be 

confined to CAT I ILSs at NSG 4 and 5 airports; and

• Increasing situational awareness of GNSS disruption 

events and the ability to quickly communicate information 

to the affected parties is an essential capability needed 

throughout the NAS to ensure effective and timely 

use of resilient infrastructure. In the near term, the 

FAA will define requirements for a Satellite Operations 

Coordination Concept (SOCC) position at the FAA’s Air 

Traffic Control System Command Center to manage realtime information on the NAS navigation status.

MID TERM

By the end of the mid term, the resilience of the NAS will be 

increased further with the following FAA commitments:

• DME/DME coverage, providing RNAV 1 navigation, will 

be extended down to NSG 1 and 2 airports to facilitate 

a conventional approach, as required (for example, 

1,500 feet height above airport). This coverage will 

require the installation of additional DME facilities. Note 

that for departures, DME/DME may not provide needed 

coverage to support all PBN departures due to the 

aircraft computer processing delay that exists after 

receiving DME ground transponder signals. To maintain 

acceptable departure operations during a GNSS 

disruption, local facilities will have to develop contingency 

plans. DME/DME equipment will be required for those 

operators needing to access the airspace during a GNSS 

service disruption; and

• The SOCC will begin operations in the mid term, 

providing the real-time, system-level view of NAS 

navigation resiliency and coordinating mitigation to 

service disruptions.

The provision of DME/DME RNAV coverage in Class A 

airspace in the near term and at the selected airports during 

the mid term will constitute a resilient position and navigation 

service for the NAS. The FAA will continue to evaluate 

alternatives for position and navigation as technologies and 

capabilities advance. 

Improvements in navigation resiliency will allow for continued 

reduction of aging ground infrastructure and associated 

approach procedures. Thus:

• All NDB approaches will be discontinued in CONUS;

• ILS rationalization will continue at NSG 4 and 5 

airports; and

• About 200 more current VOR facilities will 

be discontinued. 

FAR TERM

In the far term, the FAA will focus on the completion of legacy 

infrastructure divestment, making PBN the standard method 

of navigation. Conventional navigation will exist to ensure 

the resiliency of non-DME/DME operations, low-visibility 

approaches and DoD requirements. The FAA will be able to 

complete programs to recapitalize and divest from additional 

16 The FAA recognizes the capabilities of specific public aircraft fleets and potential effects these have on the operation within the en route domain. Refer to Government Aircraft text within Navigation Strategy 

Overview section.
26 PBN NAS Navigation Strategy 2016

ground-based infrastructure. Priorities for the 2026–2030 

timeframe include:

• Completing ILS rationalization at NSG 

4 and 5 airports;

• ILS rationalization analysis for NSG 1, 2 and 3 airports 

(With rationalization of ILS equipment at NSG 4 and 5 

airports achieved, the FAA will evaluate the remaining 

airports for the possibility of equipment recapitalization); 

• Re-evaluating remaining VOR facilities within the far-term 

system context; and

• Continuing research into Alternative Position, Navigation 

and Timing (APNT) capabilities.

BEYOND 2030

As the near- and mid-term solutions are implemented, DME 

and VOR will serve into the far-term timeframe. During the far 

term and moving out into the 2030 timeframe and beyond, 

the FAA will continue to research the best methods for APNT. 

These methods will allow aviation operations to continue in 

the event of a GNSS interference event or outage in a way 

that maintains safety and security, maintains a reasonable 

level of capacity and efficiency and minimizes economic 

impact. All solutions researched and implemented will be for 

all aviation stakeholders with harmonization throughout the 

international community. These future efforts will use existing 

system infrastructures as well as explore more 

precise systems.

MINIMUM PBN CAPABILITIES

The minimum PBN avionics capabilities that support the 

transition to a PBN-centric NAS are summarized in Table 7. 

These capabilities represent the minimum set expected for 

routine operation at the listed NSG airport or domain. Aircraft 

without these capabilities may not be able to efficiently 

access the airport or domain.

This strategy reinforces the commitment to deploying 

PBN where it provides measurable operational benefits, 

which should incentivize voluntary operator equipage with 

upgraded avionics. While GNSS provides the most capability 

during nominal operations, operators should also consider 

equipping with a DME/DME (IRU not required) navigation 

capability to maintain PBN operations in the event of a GNSS 

service disruption.17

The FAA can provide DME infrastructure and supported 

procedures, but aircraft equipage is the responsibility of the 

aircraft owner. While multi-sensor flight management systems 

common to air transport and business aircraft often have 

DME/DME capability, many smaller aircraft do not. Operators 

of these aircraft should assess their need to take advantage 

of RNAV procedures supported by DME/DME positioning 

Note: The FAA recognizes the capabilities of specific public aircraft fleets and potential effects these have on the operation within the en route domain. 

Refer to Government Aircraft text within “Navigation Strategy Overview” section.

*As conventional navigation is reduced in the far term and beyond, the lowest available minimums may be achieved with an LPV capability.

Table 7 – Minimum PBN Capabilities

Near Term (2016–2020) Mid Term (2021–2025) Far Term (2026–2030)

Class A Airspace 

Above FL290

 ̈ GNSS and DME/DME navigation

Class A Airspace 

Below FL290

Navigation Service 

Group 1

 ̈ GNSS and DME/DME navigation

 ̈ RNAV (GPS) approach capability 

(LNAV/VNAV or LPV)

 ̈ RNP 1 capability

 ̈ RF capability

 ̈ Time of Arrival Control 

guidance and automation

Navigation Service 

Group 2

 ̈ GNSS and DME/DME navigation  ̈ RNAV (GPS) approach 

capability (LNAV/VNAV 

or LPV) 

 ̈ RF capability

All IFR Operations  ̈ Early in the mid term, RNAV 2 and 

RNAV 1, supported by GNSS

 ̈ RNAV (GPS) approach capability (LNAV 

at minimum)

 ̈ RNAV (GPS) approach 

capability (LNAV/VNAV 

or LPV)*

 ̈ RNAV 2, supported by 

GNSS or DME/DME

 ̈ RNAV 2, supported by 

GNSS or DME/DME

17 FAA AC 90-100A provides current operational and airworthiness criteria for use of GNSS or DME/DME or DME/DME/IRU to fly RNAV 2 and RNAV 1 procedures. Besides GNSS, this AC cites use of DME/

DME/IRU from the existing DME infrastructure perspective, which existed at the time of publication. 
www.faa.gov 27

during a period of GNSS unavailability. At larger NSG airports, 

performance requirements may be established where mixed 

equipage cannot be supported, though rulemaking could be 

avoided with sufficient voluntary aircraft equipage. 

For this strategy, it is expected that future industry 

development of avionics capabilities will be more 

standardized and consistent with the criteria of the RNP 

system and equipment standards produced by the RTCA’s 

Standards of Navigation Performance committee 

(Special Committee 227). 

The result will be aircraft and avionics performance for PBN 

and instrument operations with greater reliability, repeatability 

and predictability in their lateral, vertical and time-based 

performance. Additionally, these avionics will be highly 

integrated with Data Comm and surveillance technologies to 

enable more advanced operations, including dynamic RNP in 

the far term. 

This complex functional and operational integration will 

necessitate improved FAA/industry processes for oversight 

and coordination to ensure the desired outcomes are 

achieved across the communications, navigation, surveillance 

and air traffic management domains.
28 PBN NAS Navigation Strategy 2016

This strategy document provides a framework by which 

key related NextGen programs and initiatives will enable the 

evolution of today’s NAS to future NAS states in a near term 

(2016–2020), mid term (2021–2025), and far term (2026–

2030) timeframe. Historically, these programs and initiatives 

have been planned and executed independently. However, by 

implementing processes that ensure close communication, 

coordination and collaboration across the community of 

stakeholders, the FAA is seeking to align its overall vision of a 

modernized NAS foundationally enabled by PBN concepts, 

capabilities and technologies.

DECISION SUPPORT TOOLS

Fundamental to the successful implementation and 

operation of PBN across the NAS is the need to advance 

the development, deployment and use of decision support 

tools essential to ensuring more-efficient traffic flows that fully 

leverage available system capacity. These controller merging 

and spacing tools must be specifically developed to support 

the PBN operational environment and to enhance traditional 

controller techniques of vectors, level-offs and speed 

assignments for optimizing capacity. With current TBFM 

capabilities, disparate aircraft performance can still create 

challenges for efficient NAS operations. The next steps will 

include integration of advanced merging and spacing tools 

for terminal spacing and Ground-based Interval Management 

- Spacing (GIM-S) that combine near-airport approach 

sequencing with en route flow management to allow planning 

and execution of flow strategies well before top of descent. 

The PBN strategy aligns with the application of expanded 

and advanced TBFM capabilities (Figure 17). To maintain or 

increase system throughput in a PBN environment, efforts will 

focus on providing the following capabilities: 

• Integrated and adaptable gate-to-gate metering;

• Spacing well before top of descent and continuing to 

the runway;

• Stream blending;

• Spacing and sequencing curved paths with 

standard approaches;

Figure 17 – Terminal Sequencing and Spacing is an example of a decision 

support tool to improve the effectiveness of TBFM. This graphic depicts a 

notional ATC display in which an arriving aircraft is shown to be ahead of 

schedule as indicated by the “slot marker.”

Related Efforts
www.faa.gov 29

• Adaptability to airport specific route configurations and 

abnormal routing scenarios (such as route closure and 

weather avoidance);

• Integration of winds aloft data with trajectory modeling;

• Surface flow functionality; and

• Functionality across multiple facility platforms and 

aircraft equipage.

In addition to TBFM, enhancements to the En Route 

Automation Modernization (ERAM) and the Standard 

Terminal Automation Replacement System (STARS) will be 

necessary to maximize effective use of PBN procedures. 

By increasing the information available to controllers, these 

capabilities should allow aircraft to remain on the efficient 

PBN procedures more often.

These capabilities will lay the foundation for successful PBN 

initiatives. The FAA is committed to funding, testing, and 

implementing these tools in the NAS as soon as possible, 

recognizing that implementation may need to be staged to 

reflect unique operational needs at individual airports and 

ATC facilities.

SURVEILLANCE

ADS-B capability is enabled through the use of precision 

position, navigation, and timing services provided by GPS 

and WAAS. With the ADS-B Out equipage mandate for most 

controlled airspace set to take effect in 2020, operators can 

also achieve the benefits of operating in a PBN-centric NAS 

when incorporating a GPS/WAAS system into their FMS or 

navigation system. 

COMMUNICATIONS

Currently, nearly all communication between the flight deck 

and controllers is done via audio radio channels. This has 

served pilots and controllers well for many years. However, 

with the growing number of flights expected to fly PBN 

procedures, changes in the way pilots and controllers 

communicate are needed to support an improved and more 

robust information exchange without impacting either pilot or 

controller workload. 

The Data Comm program will provide data communications 

services between pilots and air traffic controllers, as 

well as enhanced air traffic control information to airline 

ERAM is the new FAA computer system used to control high altitude air traffic.
30 PBN NAS Navigation Strategy 2016

operations centers (Figure 18). Data Comm will provide 

a direct link between ground automation and flight deck 

avionics for safety-of-flight clearances, instructions, traffic 

flow management, pilot requests, and reports. Data Comm 

is critical to the success of far-term PBN goals, enabling 

efficiencies impossible with the current voice system. 

Data Comm services will enhance safety by reducing 

communication errors and increase controller productivity 

by reducing communication time between controllers and 

pilots. While PBN’s role in airborne reroutes does not require 

Data Comm, its full potential will not be realized until Data 

Comm is operational and allows uploading of lengthy route 

messages, making it practical to issue point-to-point routes 

as an alternative to less-efficient playbook routes. 

CYBERSECURITY

In addition to facilitating ADS-B surveillance, resilient 

navigation and digital air-to-ground communications, 

cybersecurity is needed to ensure that the PBN-centric 

NAS remains safe and secure. In the near term, the FAA will 

promote the development of a digital data communications 

authentication standard to be implemented in the mid and far 

term to ensure that navigation, position data, information or 

requests from the cockpit and direction and clearances from 

ATC can be authenticated. 

Figure 18 – Operational changes with Data Communications.

IN FLIGHT

PRE-FLIGHT TAXI TAKEOFF

CLIMB

CRUISE

DESCENT

LAND TAXI

WEATHER

WEATHER DISRUPTIONS

Ground automation estimates 

aircraft speed and altitude changes

Nearly half of all pilot-controller 

radio calls used for routine aircraft 

sector entry check-in and 

departure transfer

VOICE COMMUNICATIONS DATA COMMUNICATIONS

Downlink of aircraft performance 

and projection data from FMS used 

by FAA automation to improve 

demand predictions

Digital transfer of messages will 

greatly reduce routine radio chatter

Airborne reroutes must be simple 

when delivered by voice

Increased chance for read-back 

and hear-back errors 

Pilots manually enter reroutes

into FMS

VOICE COMMUNICATIONS DATA COMMUNICATIONS

Controllers quickly send multiple, 

revised clearances

Pilots receive, confirm, accept, and load 

revised clearance into FMS electronically

Enables more complex reroutes providing 

added routing options

Controllers read revised pre-departure clearances to pilots over the 

radio when needed due to 

changing conditions

Controllers verbally communicate 

taxi route clearances

Controllers visually monitor 

taxi conformance

VOICE COMMUNICATIONS DATA COMMUNICATIONS

Revised departure 

clearances sent electronically reduce delays and 

prevent aircraft gridlock

Digital taxi instructions 

prevent miscommunication 

and facilitate added taxi 

conformance monitoring

Aircraft are manually vectored off 

of arrival and departure routes 

when an airspace constraint 

blocks the published route

Vectors result in less optimal 

arrival and departure routes

VOICE COMMUNICATIONS DATA COMMUNICATIONS

Automation provides controllers 

with more dynamic and optimal 

arrival and departure routes that 

can be sent electronically and 

loaded into the FMS

PRE-DEPARTURE DESCENT AND LANDING

1300 1600 1900 2200 0100 1400 0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Demand

Time

Tower

Tower

DEPARTURE

ARRIVAL
www.faa.gov 31

APPENDIX A: SUMMARY OF FAA GOALS AND COMMITMENTS BY FOCUS AREA

Table A-1. This table contains the strategy documents described in the Navigation Strategy Overview section, organized by the focus areas. Right Procedures Route Structure Shift to Time and Speed- Based Management Resilient Services Faster Service Delivery Lower Visibility Access

Continuous Improvement

Near-Term (2016-2020) Mid-Term (2021-2025) Far-Term (2026-2030)

RNAV(GPS) with LPV and LNAV/VNAV approaches at qualifying runways meeting current TERPS criteriaRevised TERPS criteria to increase number of qualifying runways for vertically guided approachesExpand use of ELSO at first two sitesExpand use of EoR at first siteDemonstrate A-RNP at first site

Expand trans-Pacific User Preferred RoutesUse of PBN approaches with visual separation standardsImplement OPDs at airports using RNAV STARs

Transition from Minimum Performance Specification to PBN in the ICAO North Atlantic RegionTransition from Minimum Performance Specification to PBN in the ICAO North Atlantic Region

Continue replacing conventional approaches, SIDs, and STARs with PBN proceduresInitial transition to improved PBN-based point-topoint navigationDME/DME coverage expanded for NSG 1 and 2 airports based on site-specific evaluationsClass A airspace is covered by DME/DME (IRU not required) redundancyShorten development and implementation time for new ATS routes by removing rulemaking requirementUpdate regulations to allow heads down SVGS for qualifying approachesUpdate regulations to allow EFVS operations to touchdown

Criteria for SA CATI/1800 RVR and SA CATII for LPV

Avionics evolution and performance requirements are described in Table 7.

Vertically guided RNAV(GPS) approaches at runways meeting new TERPS criteria

ELSO at sites supported by cost-benefit analysisEoR at sites supported by cost-benefit analysis

Leverage A-RNP at key sites

Leverage reduced separation standards to further expand UPRs

Expand use of RNAV (GPS) approaches (with LPV and LNAV/VNAV) with RF

Continue replacing conventional approaches, SIDs, and STARs with PBN proceduresTransition to PBN-based point-topoint navigationReplace conventional Jet routes and Victor airways where structure is neededKey airports transitioned to time and speed-based managementDME/DME coverage expanded for NSG 1 and 2 airports based on site-specific evaluations

Develop integrated procedure design toolsDigital delivery of navigation chart dataDevelop automation for periodic review of procedures

Vertically-guided RNAV (GPS) approaches at qualifying airports with an IAPA-RNP procedures at sites supported by cost-benefit analysisTransition to dynamic UPRs where supported by operator capabilityComplete the transition to PBN procedures

NAS transitioned to time and speed-based managementRe-evaluation of need for remaining VOR facilitiesILS rationalization complete at NSG 4 and 5 airportsILS rationalization analysis for NSG 1, 2, and 3 airportsLeverage avionics to modify separation standards to move IMC rates toward VMC

Update plans for community involvement when developing PBN procedures
32 PBN NAS Navigation Strategy 2016

APPENDIX B: NAVIGATION SERVICE GROUP DEFINITIONS

The Navigation Service Group (NSG) concept is a mechanism 

for determining the services provided at NAS locations. The 

criteria used to distinguish each NSG are meant to provide 

logical, general groupings of airports based on their roles 

in the NAS. 

Airports are subject to variability among NSGs because 

an airport’s role in the NAS may evolve over time. Due to 

annual variation, an airport would need to satisfy the criteria 

for several consecutive years in order to move into a new 

group. The groupings are primarily based on the 2015-2019 

National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS), and also 

factor in the airport’s traffic levels and its proximity to NPIAS 

Large Hub airports.18 The FAA updates the NPIAS every two 

years, and the most recent report was released in 

September 2014.

The following definitions describe the criteria that an airport 

must satisfy for each NSG: 

• NSG 1 comprises about 15 airports, which includes 

the top 10 Large Hub airports by operations, as well as 

clusters of three or more Large Hub airports within 

100 nm of one another. 

• NSG 2 comprises all Medium Hub airports as well as 

the remaining Large Hub airports not included in NSG 1. 

Additionally, NSG 2 includes all airports with an annual 

itinerant IFR operational count greater than that of the 

lowest Medium Hub airport and also not in NSG 1.

• NSG 3 comprises the Small and Non-Hub airports, 

excluding those in NSG 2 due to high annual IFR 

operational counts. 

• NSG 4 comprises the National and Regional airports, 

excluding those in NSG 2 due to high annual IFR 

operational counts.

• NSG 5 comprises NPIAS airports not meeting the 

conditions of Groups 1-4. These airports are primarily 

Local and Basic airports.

• NSG 6 generally comprises non-NPIAS airports. 

18 Airports designations use the definitions in the 2015-2019 NPIAS document. These include: Large Hub, Medium Hub, Small Hub, and Non-Hub in the primary category; and National, Regional, Local, and 

Basic airports in the non-primary category.
www.faa.gov 33

ABBREVIATIONS, ACRONYMS, AND INITIALISMS

AC

ACT

ADS-B

AIM

ANSP

APCH

APNT

AR

ARC

A-RNP

ASPM

ATC

ATS

CAT

CFR

CONUS

DA

Data Comm

DME

DoD

DFMC

EFVS

ELSO

EoR

ERAM

FAA

FAF

FANS

FMS

GA

GBAS

GIM-S

GLS

GNSS

GPS

HAT

HUD

IAP

ICAO

IFR

ILS

IMC

Advisory Circular

Air Carrier Training

Automatic Dependent Surveillance–Broadcast

Aeronautical Information Manual

Air Navigation Service Provider

Approach

Alternate Positioning, Navigation, and Timing

Authorization Required

Aviation Rulemaking Committee

Advanced-Required Navigation Performance

Aviation System Performance Metrics

Air Traffic Control

Air Traffic Service

Category

Code of Federal Regulations

Conterminous United States

Decision Altitude

Data Communications

Distance Measuring Equipment 

Department of Defense

Dual Frequency, Multi-Constellation

Enhanced Flight Vision Systems

Equivalent Lateral Spacing Operations

Established on RNP

En Route Automation Modernization

Federal Aviation Administration

Final Approach Fix

Future Air Navigation System 

Flight Management System

General Aviation

Ground Based Augmentation System

Ground-based Interval Management - Spacing

GBAS Landing System

Global Navigation Satellite System

Global Positioning System

Height Above Touchdown

Head Up Display

Instrument Approach Procedure

International Civil Aviation Organization

Instrument Flight Rules

Instrument Landing System

Instrument Meteorological Conditions

Inertial Reference Unit

Lateral Navigation

Localizer

Localizer Performance with Vertical Guidance

Minimum Decision Altitude

Minimum Navigation Performance Specifications

Minimum Operational Network

Mean Sea Level

National Airspace System

North Atlantic

Non-Directional Beacon

Next Generation Air Transportation System

Nautical Miles

National Procedure Assessment

National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems

Navigation Reference System

Navigation Service Group

Outside Conterminous United States

Optimized Profile Descent

Performance Based Navigation

Radius-to-Fix

Area Navigation

Required Navigation Performance

Route Structure

Runway Visual Range

Standard Instrument Departure

Satellite Operations Coordination Concept

Standard Terminal Arrival

Standard Terminal Automation 

Replacement System

Synthetic Vision Guidance System

Tactical Air Navigation

Time Based Flow Management

Trajectory Based Operations

Terminal Instrument Procedures

Track-to-Fix

Time of Arrival Control

User Preferred Routes

Visual Meteorological Conditions

Vertical Navigation

Very High Frequency Omnidirectional Range

Wide Area Augmentation System

IRU

LNAV

LOC

LPV

MDA

MNPS

MON

MSL

NAS

NAT

NDB

NextGen

nm

NPA

NPIAS

NRS

NSG

OCONUS

OPD

PBN

RF

RNAV

RNP

RS

RVR

SID

SOCC

STAR

STARS

SVGS

TACAN

TBFM

TBO

TERPS

TF

TOAC

UPRs

VMC

VNAV

VOR

WAAS
34 PBN NAS Navigation Strategy 2016

REFERENCES

Federal Aviation Administration, “Advisory Circular 90-100A. U.S. Terminal and En Route Area Navigation 

Operations,” 2015

Federal Aviation Administration, “Advisory Circular 90-105A. Approval Guidance for RNP Operations and Barometric 

Vertical Navigation in the U.S. National Airspace System,” 2016

Federal Aviation Administration, Congressional report, “National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS) 

Report,” 2014

Federal Aviation Administration, “Aeronautical Information Manual. Official Guide to Basic Flight Information and ATC 

Procedures,” 2014

Federal Aviation Administration, “Instrument Procedures Handbook,” FAA-H-8083-16A, 2015

Federal Aviation Administration, “Roadmap for Performance-Based Navigation. Evolution for Area Navigation (RNAV) and 

Required Navigation Performance (RNP) Capabilities 2006-2025,” Version 2, 2006

International Civil Aviation Organization, “Performance-based Navigation (PBN) Manual,” Doc 9613 AN/937, 

Fourth Edition, 2013

RTCA, “Blueprint for Success to Implementing Performance Based Navigation,” Document Number 

APBN-1, 2014

RTCA, “SC-227 Standards of Navigation Performance,” 

Available online: www.rtca.org/content.asp?pl=108&sl=78&contentid=78

The White House Office of the Press Secretary, “Presidential Policy Directive 21 – Critical Infrastructure Security and 

Resilience,” February 12, 2013. Available online: www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/02/12/presidential-policydirective-critical-infrastructure-security-and-resil 

Federal Aviation Administration, “Pilot/Controller Glossary,” June 25, 2015, www.faa.gov/Air_traffic/Publications/

Federal Aviation Administration, “Instrument Procedures Handbook,” FAA-H-8083-16A, 2015.
PERFORMANCE-BASED NAVIGATION

PBN

2016

800 Independence Avenue, SW

Washington, DC 20591