NATCA Bookshelf

interim methods that might be used to begin implementation in the NAS and took the action to begin this process. In addition to enacting the change, the WG wants the proposed change evaluated at two sites with terrain issues: Reno (RNO) and Maui (PHOG), along with considering how to harmonize this with A- RNP criteria. There is major support for allowing both AR and advanced RNP mins on the same chart from the operators. This will involve database and charting considerations. • STAR Terminus Altitudes: Status – Cramer explained that the Star Terminus Altitude recommendation had been sent to the Steering group two weeks prior and was briefed by Ron Renk (UAL) on Friday, Feb. 8. Once accepted, it proceeds to AVS-1. • Windows on Departure: Briefing on Research Findings – Karl Meyer (MITRE) briefed the WG on research into the prevalence of block altitudes on SIDs in the NAS and conformance to the block restrictions. MITRE's research tasking came from Donna Creasap (FAA-AJV-14) and mirrored a request Bennie Hutto (NATCA) and Josh Haviland (NATCA) made. There is a total of 45 waypoints with block altitudes on 28 SIDs in the NAS. Of these 45 waypoints, 23 are not regularly used, and 10 on LAS/HND procedures were not included due to current procedural work with LAS Metroplex. The remaining 12 waypoints on 10 procedures were reviewed for conformance to the constraints. The results are listed below: Conformance Quantity Usually met 6 Usually not met 4 Occasionally met 1 Rarely met 1 Discussion on the individual SID results showed that restrictions are generally related to several factors including criteria requirements, airspace, and crossing flows. Some of the windows are related to old criteria, which is related to ATC altitude restrictions. MITRE will compile the comments received during the discussion and will communicate the feedback to Hutto, Haviland, and Creasap for further action as needed. • TF overlay for RF: Status Review (Swain, Cramer) – Brian Swain (DAL) reviewed the subgroups work to date. They have selected four airports for consideration (RSW, GSO, LAS, ATL), and DFW was listed as an alternate. The Fort Myers airport (KRSW) was selected because existing special RNAV visual procedures could be turned into concurrent operations. The Greensboro airport (KGSO) was selected because of the high volume of General Aviation (GA) operations and they don't have any RNP AR procedures. The Las Vegas airport (KLAS) was selected because similar procedures are already designed but not treated (and packed in data) as concurrent as well as the facility being familiar to this type of work. The Atlanta airport (KATL) was selected because similar procedures (not concurrent, but TF overlay of RF) have been tested in the past and we have performance data from those tests. The purpose is to demonstrate that the concept is valid and designed procedures will be evaluated via simulation. The workflow will be to create procedure designs using Radius to Fix (RF) with Track to Fix (TF) overlays having separate teams for each location; to create ARINC424 database where two databases for testing can be done as single database for operational use creates hurdles that need to be explored; to create loadable NAV databases; to create charts based on the WGs desired charting recommendations, and to present to the Instrument Flight Procedures Panel (IFPP) and

• Cover
• SAFETY AND TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT