Publication: Magyar Közlöny
Issue: MK-2009-104 (Year: 2009, Number: 104)
Era: 2004-2010
Section: 
Paragraph Index: 2808

f) the designator of the runway for which the procedure is designed. 6.1.2 The basic indicator shall be the name or name-code of the significant point where the approach procedure begins. 6.1.3 The validity indicator shall be a number from 1 to 9. 6.1.4 The route indicator shall be one letter of the alphabet. The letters “I” and “O” shall not be used. 6.1.5 The designator of the runway shall be in accordance with Annex 14, Volume I, 5.2.2. ANNEX 11 ATT A-1 1/11/01 ATTACHMENT A. MATERIAL RELATING TO A METHOD OF ESTABLISHING ATS ROUTES DEFINED BY VOR (Paragraph 2.7.1 and Section 2.12 refer) 1. Introduction 1.1 The guidance material in this Attachment results from comprehensive studies, carried out in Europe in 1972 and the United States in 1978, which were in general agreement. Note.— Details of the European studies are contained in Circular 120 — Methodology for the Derivation of Separation Minima Applied to the Spacing between Parallel Tracks in ATS Route Structures. 1.2 In applying the guidance material in 3 and 4, it should be recognized that the data on which it is based are generally representative of navigation using VOR meeting the full requirements of Doc 8071 — Manual on Testing of Radio Navigation Aids, Volume I. Any additional factors, such as those due to particular operational requirements, frequency of aircraft passings or information available regarding the actual track-keeping performance of aircraft within a given portion of airspace should be taken into account. 1.3 Attention is also invited to the basic assumptions in 4.2 and to the fact that the values given in 4.1 represent a conservative approach. Before applying these values, account should therefore be taken of any practical experience gained in the airspace under consideration, as well as the possibility of achieving improvements in the overall navigation performance of aircraft. 1.4 States are encouraged to keep ICAO fully informed of the results of the application of this guidance material. 2. Determination of VOR system performance values The large variability of the values which are likely to be associated with each of the factors that make up the total VOR system, and the limitation of presently available methods to measure all these effects individually with the required precision, have led to the conclusion that an assessment of the total system error provides a more realistic method for determining the VOR system performance. The material contained in 3 and 4 should be applied only after study of Circular 120 especially with respect to the environmental conditions. Note.— Guidance material on overall VOR system accuracy is also contained in Annex 10, Volume I, Attachment C. 3. Determination of protected airspace along VOR-defined routes Note 1.— The material of this section has not been derived by means of the collision-risk/target level of safety method. Note 2.— The word “containment” as used in this section is intended to indicate that the protected airspace provided will contain the traffic for 95 per cent of the total flying time (i.e. accumulated over all aircraft) for which the traffic operates along the route in question. Where, for example 95 per cent containment is provided, it is implicit that for 5 per cent of the total flying time traffic will be outside the protected airspace. It is not possible to quantify the maximum distance which such traffic is likely to deviate beyond the protected airspace. 3.1 For VOR-defined routes where radar or ADS-B is not used to assist aircraft in remaining within the protected airspace, the following guidance is provided. However, when the lateral deviations of aircraft are being controlled with the aid of radar or ADS-B monitoring, the size of the protected airspace required may be reduced, as indicated by practical experience gained in the airspace under consideration. 3.2 As a minimum, protection against activity in airspace adjacent to the routes should provide 95 per cent containment. 3.3 The work described in Circular 120 indicates that a VOR system performance based on the probability of 95 per cent containment would require the following protected airspace around the centre line of the route to allow for possible deviations: — VOR routes with 93 km (50 NM) or less between VORs: ±7.4 km (4 NM); — VOR routes with up to 278 km (150 NM) between VORs: ±7.4 km (4 NM) up to 46 km (25 NM) from the VOR then expanding protected airspace up to ±11.1 km (6 NM) at 139 km (75 NM) from the VOR. 22/11/07 No. 45 Annex 11 — Air Traffic Services Attachment A 1/11/01 ATT A-2 Figure A-1 3.4 If the appropriate ATS authority considers that a better protection is required, e.g. because of the proximity of prohibited, restricted or danger areas, climb or descent paths of military aircraft, etc., it may decide that a higher level of containment should be provided. For delineating the protected airspace the following values should then be used: — for segments with 93 km (50 NM) or less between VORs, use the values in line A of the table below; — for segments with more than 93 km (50 NM) and less than 278 km (150 NM) between the VORs use the values given in line A of the table up to 46 km (25 NM), then expand linearly to the value given in line B at 139 km (75 NM) from the VOR. For example, the protected area for a route of 222 km (120 NM) between VORs and for which 99.5 per cent containment is required should have the following shape: Figure A-2 3.5 If two segments of a VOR-defined ATS route intersect at an angle of more than 25 degrees, additional protected airspace should be provided on the outside of the turn and also on the inside of the turn as necessary. This additional space is to act as a buffer for increased lateral displacement of aircraft, observed in practice, during changes of direction exceeding 25 degrees. The amount of airspace added varies with the angle of intersection. The greater the angle, the greater the additional airspace to be used. Guidance is provided for protected airspace required at turns of no more than 90 degrees. For the exceptional circumstances which require an ATS route with a turn of more than 90 degrees, States should ensure that adequate protected airspace is provided on both the inside and outside of such turns. 3.6 The following examples have been synthesized from the practices of two States which use templates to facilitate the diagramming of airspace for planning purposes. Design of the turning area templates took into account factors such as aircraft speed, bank angle in turns, probable wind velocity, position errors, pilot delays and an intercept angle of at least 30 degrees to achieve the new track, and provides at least 95 per cent containment. 3.7 A template was used to establish the additional airspace required on the outside of turns to contain aircraft executing turns of 30, 45, 60, 75 and 90 degrees. The simplified figures below represent the outer limits of this airspace with the fairing curves removed to allow easy construction. In each case, the additional airspace is shown for aircraft flying in the direction of the large arrow. Where routes are used in both directions, the same additional airspace should be provided on the other outside boundary. 3.8 Figure A-3 illustrates the application of two segments intersecting at a VOR, at an angle of 60 degrees. Figure A-3 3.9 Figure A-4 illustrates the application for two segments meeting at a VOR intersection at an angle of 60 degrees beyond the point where boundary splay is required in order to comply with 3.3 and Figure A-1. Percentage containment 99.5 A (km) (NM) ±7.4 ±4.0 ±7.4 ±4.0 ±8.3 ±4.5 ±9.3 ±5.0 ±10.2 ±5.5 ±11.1 ±6.0 B (km) (NM) ±11.1 ±6.0 ±11.1 ±6.0 ±12.0 ±6.5 ±12.0 ±6.5 ±13.0 ±7.0 ±15.7 ±8.5 Attachment A Annex 11 — Air Traffic Services ATT A-3 1/11/01 Figure A-4 3.10 The following table outlines the distances to be used in sample cases when providing additional protected airspace for route segments at and below FL 450, intersecting at a VOR or meeting at a VOR intersection not more than 139 km (75 NM) from each VOR. Note.— Refer to Figures A-3 and A-4. 3.11 Figure A-5 illustrates a method to construct the required additional protected airspace on the inside of turns for turns of 90 degrees or less: Locate a point on the airway centre line, equal to the radius of turn plus the along-track tolerance prior to the nominal turning point. From this point, drop a perpendicular line to intersect the edge of the airway on the inside of the turn. From this point on the inner edge of the airway, construct a line to intersect the airway centre line beyond the turn at an angle of half of the angle of turn. The resulting triangle on the inside of the turn depicts the additional airspace which should be protected for the change of direction. For any turn of 90 degrees or less, the extra space on the inside will serve for aircraft approaching the turn from either direction. Note 1.— Criteria for the calculation of the along-track tolerance are contained in PANS-OPS (Doc 8168), Volume II, Part III, Appendix to Chapter 31. Note 2.— Guidance on the calculation of radius of turn is provided in Section 7. Figure A-5 3.12 For turns at VOR intersections, the principles of construction for extra airspace on the inside of a turn as described in 3.11 can be applied. Depending on the distance of the intersection from one or both VORs, one or both airways may have a splay at the intersection. Depending upon the situation, the extra airspace may be inside, partially inside, or outside of the 95 per cent containment. If the route is used in both directions, the construction should be completed separately for each direction. 3.13 Measured data for routes longer than 278 km (150 NM) between VORs are not yet available. To determine protected airspace beyond 139 km (75 NM) from the VOR, the use of an angular value of the order of 5 degrees as representing the probable system performance would appear satisfactory. The following figure illustrates this application. Figure A-6 Angle of intersection 30° 45° 60° 75° 90° VOR *Distance “A” (km) (NM) *Distance “B” (km) (NM) Intersection *Distance “A” (km) (NM) *Distance “B” (km) (NM) *Distances are rounded up to the next whole kilometre/nautical mile. Note.— For behaviour of aircraft at turns, see Circular 120, 4.4. Annex 11 — Air Traffic Services Attachment A 1/11/01 ATT A-4 4. Spacing of parallel routes defined by VORs Note.— The material of this section has been derived from measured data using the collision-risk/target level of safety method. 4.1 The collision risk calculation, performed with the data of the European study mentioned in 1.1 indicates that, in the type of environment investigated, the distance between route centre lines (S in Figure A-7) for distances between VORs of 278 km (150 NM) or less should normally be a minimum of:

Source: https://magyarkozlony.hu/hivatalos-lapok/1f7c6b0e16b4b71a92e5ad24416008bbe2e26aab/dokumentumok/710811d1f7f958a2990684d0cbf918e84f5497e5/letoltes