Publication: Magyar Közlöny
Issue: MK-2007-70 (Year: 2007, Number: 70)
Era: 2004-2010
Section: Melléklet a 2007. évi XLVI. törvényhez
Paragraph Index: 3677

c) VOR pilotage element (Ep). The value taken for this element is that used in PANS-OPS (Doc 8168) for pilot tolerance. Note.— A measurement error also exists, but in a generalized discussion of errors may be considered to be absorbed in error valu 3.7.3.2 Since the errors in a), b), and c), when considered on a system basis (not any one radial) are independent variables, they may be e Therefore, the following formulae are derived: VOR aggregate error = Eg + Ea Eg + Ea VOR system use error = .7.3 ples will derive ly the VOR system use error but calculations can also be made to ete in if desired. By u e of these formulae, the impact on the system of improvement or egradation of one of more error elements can be assessed. of plus or in f the VOR stem (see, however, 3.7.3.5). This figure corresponds to the following component errors: + Ep .3 The following exam on d rm e VOR aggregate error, s d Note.— All figures for VOR radial signal error are related to radials for which no restrictions are published. 3.7.3.4 Subject to the qualifications indicated in 3.7.1, it is considered that a VOR system use accuracy m us 5 degrees on a 95 per cent probability basis is a suitable figure for use by States planning the application o sy ATT C-53 23/11/06 2007/70/II. szám Annex 10 — Aeronautical Communications Volume I 23/11/06 ATT C-54 VOR radial signal error plus or minus 3° (95 per cent probability), a value readily achieved in practice. VOR airborne equipment error plus or minus 3q (95 per cent probability), system characteristics value (see 3.6.2). VOR pilotage element plus or minus 2.5q (95 per cent probability), in accordance with PANS-OPS (see also 3.7.3.8). 3.7.3.5 While the figure of plus or minus 5 degrees on a 95 per cent probability basis is a useful figure based on broad practical experience and used by many States, it must be noted that this figure may be achieved only if the error elements which make it up remain within certain tolerances. It is clear that, if the errors attributable to the VOR system elements are larger than the amounts noted, the resulting VOR system use error will also be larger. Conversely, where any or all of the VOR system error elements are smaller than those used in the above computation, the resulting VOR system use error will also be smaller. 3.7.3.6 The following examples, also derived from practical experience, provide additional planning guidance for States: A.— VOR radial signal error plus or minus 3.5q (95 per cent probability), used by some States as the total ground system error. VOR airborne equipment error plus or minus 4.2q (95 per cent probability), recognized in some States as the minimum performance figure for some classes of operations. VOR pilotage element plus or minus 2.5q (95 per cent probability), in accordance with PANS-OPS (see also 3.7.3.8). Calculated VOR system use accuracy plus or minus 6q (95 per cent probability). B. — VOR radial signal error plus or minus 1.7q (95 per cent probability), based on extensive flight measurements conducted in one State on a large number of VORs. VOR airborne equipment error plus or minus 2.7q (95 per cent probability), achieved in many airline operations. VOR pilotage element plus or minus 2.5q (95 per cent probability), in accordance with PANS-OPS (see also 3.7.3.8). Calculated VOR system use accuracy plus or minus 4q (95 per cent probability). 2007/70/II. szám Attac ment C Annex 10 — Aeronautical Communications 3.7.3.7 More realistic application of the VOR system may be achieved by assessing the errors as they actually exist in articular circumstances, rather than by using all-embracing generalizations which may give unduly optimistic or pessimistic sults. e to utilize a system use accuracy value less than plus or minus 5 degrees airborne error contributions, expressed in ngular terms, are for all practical purposes constant at all ranges, it is necessary when considering the overall system use Guidance on the establishment of changeover points on ATS routes defined by VORs is contained in Annex 11, Attachment A. 4. Precision approach radar system igures C-14 to C-18 illustrate certain of the Standards contained in Chapter 3, 3.2. p re In individual applications, it may be possibl if one or more of the error elements are smaller than the values used to compute the plus or minus 5 degrees. Conversely, a system use accuracy value greater than plus or minus 5 degrees will be necessary where it is known that radials are of poor quality or significant site errors exist, or for other reasons. However, in addition to this advice a warning is also essential regarding the use of lower values of individual elements in the system (for example, the radial signal error) on the assumption that an overall improvement in system accuracy will occur. There is considerable evidence that this may not be the case in some circumstances and that lower system accuracy values should not be applied without other confirmation (e.g. by radar observation) that an actual improvement in overall performance is being achieved. 3.7.3.8 It is to be noted that in angular systems such as the VOR, the pilotage element error, expressed in angular terms, will be greater as the aircraft nears the point source. Thus, while ground system and a accuracy figures to take into account the larger pilotage element error occurring when the aircraft is near the VOR. However, these larger pilotage element errors do not result in large lateral deviations from course when near the facility. 3.8 Changeover points for VORs F Figure C-14. Minimum set-back of PAR with respect to touchdown for offset of 120 m (400 ft) when aligned to scan plus or minus 10 degrees on DR of runway Stop end 120 m (400 ft) 915 m Touchdown point Approach end (3 000 ft) 150 m (500 ft) PAR 10° 10° 5° 5° ATT C-55 23/11/06 2007/70/II. szám Annex 10 — Aeronautical Communications Volume I Stop end 1 5 m (600 ft) PA Touchdo n point 1 200 m (4 000 ft) 150 m (500 ft) Approach end 5° 5° Figure C-15. Minimum set-back of PAR with respect to touchdown for offset of 185 m (600 ft) when aligned to scan plus or minus 10 degrees on DR of runway Stop end 120 m (400 ft) PA Touchdo n point 6 5 m (2 250 ft) 150 m (500 ft) Approach end 5° 5° Figure C-16. Minimum set-back of PAR with respect to touchdown for offset of 120 m (400 ft) when aligned to scan 5 degrees and 15 degrees on DR of runway Stop end 1 5 m (600 ft) PA Touchdo n point 915 m (3 000 ft) 150 m (500 ft) Approach end 5° 5° Figure C-17. Minimum set-back of PAR with respect to touchdown for offset of 185 m (600 ft) when aligned to scan 5 degrees and 15 degrees on DR of runway 23/11/06 ATT C-56 2007/70/II. szám Attac ment C Annex 10 — Aeronautical Communications Standard ecommended Practice 3 000 (10 000) 2 400 ( 000) 1 00 (6 000) 1 200 (4 000) (2 000) 1 .5 km (10 NM) 37.1 km (20 NM) 55.6 km (30 NM) 0.5 of elevation 1.5 of elevation 20 of elevation 30 of elevation 37.1 km (20 NM) 46.3 km (25 NM) Metres (feet) Figure C-18. SRE of precision approach radar system — vertical coverage on a 15 m2 echoing area aircraft 5. Specification for 75 MHz marker beacons (en-route) 5.1 Marker beacon antenna arrays 5.1.1 General. The following describes types of marker antenna arrays that are frequently used in current practice. These types are the simplest forms meeting normal requirements; in special cases, arrays having a better performance (see Note to 5.1.4) may be required. 5.1.2 marker beacons

Source: https://magyarkozlony.hu/hivatalos-lapok/7e70cec03f34e3c2efd8610b865b65591eafd701/dokumentumok/a55dc160549d57fa4db0035e37c6a6a98dd1a0b9/letoltes