NATCA Bookshelf

procedure or given a direct routing, an altitude must be issued and if a speed is required, controllers would assign a speed. Absent a speed assignment, pilots could adjust speeds and fly at a speed of their choosing. Over the next few weeks, we will be discussing changes concerning speeds within the 7110.65 and AIM. Our goal is to have a final draft of those changes for the April 11 th /12 th PCPSI WG meeting. The changes would then be sent out to the field for the 45-day comment period, and if no issues or concerns are identified, an SRMP will be held in hopes of having the changes completed for the January 2020 7110.65 update. • SID/STAR Enroute Transition Assignments – The background on this change is when a SID or STAR is involved, flight management systems (FMS) only display the downstream fixes for the transition an aircraft has been cleared to fly. When the need arises to clear an aircraft to a different transition on the same procedure, specific phraseology must be used. This alerts pilots to look to the transitions page of the FMS to find the fix on the new transition they are being cleared to, and program the FMS appropriately. This 7110.65 change was slated to become effective on February 28, 2019, however, due to concerns and issues with another section within the 7110.65, a decision was made to postpone this change until both sections could be updated together. We hope this will occur during the January 2020 publication. • Phraseology Subgroup Update – Michael Cipriano (UAL) and I were the co-leads for this subgroup but he was promoted to Captain and unable to continue working with the subgroup. Brian Swain (DAL) was then asked and accepted the role but can no longer participate due to other work within Delta. So, we will continue to move forward evaluating and discussing the differences between phraseology used within the FAA and ICAO concerning climb and descend via, looking for possibilities of harmonizing if appropriate. Our next meeting for both the PCPSI WG and Phraseology Harmonization SG will be held in Dallas, April 11-12. PARC NAV WG – We met in Dallas on Feb. 5-7 where the following information was discussed: • Final to missed transition OCS – Mike Cramer (Mitre) opened the discussion by explaining that the final recommendation would be reviewed and then the DEN application of the change would be demonstrated by Tim Lovell (Mitre). The recommendation was previously sent to the WG for review. o Review final recommendation – The OCS harmonization was reviewed and differences in OCSs for RNP AR and LNAV/VNAV procedures are caused by OCS slope differences to the flat surface (LNAV/VNAV slope 23.80:1 and VEB slope 20.76:1), and the termination point of the flat surface (length defined by 15 seconds of flight at TAS plus 10 KT). These differences may cause some limited procedural differences based on obstacles being included in one OCS and not the other. An example of this is shown below. o Application to Denver RNP AR Procedures: Results – Lovell presented the revised criteria with DEN RNP Z RWY35R SIAP. With limited obstacles, this procedure was able to have the HAT for the 0.30 line of minima reduced to 250' from 332'. He further explained that many of the lines of minima in the NAS below 0.30 may be able to be removed with a proposed change. The question of how to proceed was broached and this leads back to the NAV WG needing a more detailed (lower level) "roadmap" than PBN Strategy to guide our efforts. The WG would like the change enacted as soon as possible. Cramer proposed that the WG define the work that needs to be done to implement this change in criteria and supporting software to evaluate the timeline and to identify any

• Cover
• SAFETY AND TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT