NATCA Bookshelf

• PCPSI Terms of Reference (TOR) – Kathy Abbott, PCPSI Co-Chair, gave a briefing on the workgroups TOR and asked for recommendations by the next meeting regarding any changes to the language based on the various issues the workgroup is involved in. • Rules for Issuing Instrument Approach Clearances – Gary McMullin (SWA) gave a presentation using Nashville Airport (KBNA) and the special RNAV visual approach RWY 20L and RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 20R. He provided information and examples where under VMC conditions applying 7-4-4 of 7110.65, aircraft can be flying these two procedures simultaneously using 7110.65 7-4-4 (approaches to multiple runways). However, under IMC conditions they are not allowed to fly the RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 20L and RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 20R IAPs simultaneously and would like to see these rules and regulations amended. During his presentation, he explained that the rules and regulations in use today came from previous studies identifying independent and dependent operations. At KBNA, those runways are treated as simultaneous dependent approaches and 5-9-6 of 7110.65 applies. • DataComm Program Office Update – An update with DataComm and CPDLC was given by Chad Geyer (NATCA) and Jesse Wintjes (FAA). • P56 Incursion Mitigations & Charting a Reference Waypoint – Brian Townsend (AAL) gave a presentation based on the close proximity of P-56 when departing from Washington National Airport (KDCA) using RNAV SIDS, and the USSS wanting assurance that aircraft will remain outside of this airspace. He provided information that most, if not all airlines, would be adding this standalone waypoint where they would add a one NM range ring around it. By doing this, it could be displayed on the aircrafts FMS, allowing pilots to know exactly where they are in regard to boundary of P-56 since all FMS don't display the actual boundaries of P-56. He also requested feedback as to whether this waypoint should become public and published on low/high charts. Majority of the group indicated it should not become public and published on the low/high charts. • When is the Speed Yours? – Based on discussions at the most recent PCPSI WG meeting, there is still confusion occurring between pilots and controllers concerning cancelation of speeds when on either climb or descend via clearance. A similar topic was discussed earlier in the year concerning SIDS/STARS without published speeds when a controller has assigned a speed to maintain, then issues a climb or descend via. What is the pilot expected to do and what does the controller believe will occur? During the discussions, we identified that FAA Order JO 7110.65 does not match the Aeronautical Information Manual (AIM) and requires an update. The FAA 7110.65, Section 5-7-1 c and d language became effective on February 28, 2019. 7110.65 5-7-1 c, states "At the time approach clearance or a climb via/descend via clearance is issued, previously assigned speeds must be restated if required." 7110.65, 5-7-1 d, states "Approach clearances or climb via/descend via clearances cancel any previously assigned speeds. Pilots are expected to make their own speed adjustments to fly the approach, SID, or STAR unless assigned speeds are restated." During the general discussions, we also talked about aircraft climbing via or descending via then vectoring off the procedure or issuing a direct routing to a downstream waypoint/fix. Is the pilot required to maintain their current speed as published speed on the SID/STAR or can they adjust their speeds at their discretion? Both the FAA 7110.65 and AIM state that a controller must issue an altitude to an aircraft when vectored off a SID/STAR after a climb or descend via clearance has been issued but neither document addresses the speed concerns/issue. Since the aircraft is no longer on the SID/STAR based on the vector, how could an aircraft comply with published speeds or what speed they should be maintaining? The intent has been when an aircraft is vectored off a

• Cover
• SAFETY AND TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT