A publication of the National Air Traffic Controllers Association
Issue link: http://natca.uberflip.com/i/716610
FAA 7400.2K, paragraph 20 - 5 - 3, the basic width of an RNAV route is 8 NM (4 NM on each side of the route cent erline). We are working with the FAA to determine why the criteria is written this way when aircraft using these routes must be o perating under RNAV 2 criteria. Under AC - 100A, RNAV 2 requires a total system error of not more than 2 NM for 95 percent of the total flight time and the aircraft must correct to centerline as soon as they start to drift, so protecting 4 NM either side o f the route doesn't make sense. We hope to have a resolution on this soon. Digital Approach Procedure Initiative About a year ago , we conducted Phase 1 of the " Digital ATIS RNP Advertisement " where six airports were selected and they advised on the ATIS that RNAV approaches were available upon request. The six airports in this study were ABQ, BNA, DCA, ELP, PDX, and RIC , and each ai rport had RNP AR approaches with RF legs. The results of this study proved to be inconclusive because it was just data and did not include the nuts and bolts of what really occurs , and we had no means to really know if advertising that RNAV RNP approaches are available upon request increased pilots asking for them w ithout reviewing all the tapes. However, we did reach out the FacReps from those facilities, but only two responded. The ELP F acRep stated, " I personally think that advertisement does increase us age, however, training may sometimes have an impact on their usage because many new controllers are being trained to u se vectors instead of the PBN. As far as my own controlling , I immediately clear capable pilots on the approach and they are always prepar ed due to the advertisement. " The P80 FacRep stated, " I think advertising the approaches on the ATIS does help to some degree initially. It at least puts the thought into their mind for that approach to be a possible option. What a ffects the rate increasin g on the approach usage is our abi lity to approve that request. I f the approach continually gets denied , they will stop requesting to do the approach thinking they won't get the approach anyway, regardless if it's on the ATIS or not. Most the time these ap proaches are approved during slow traffic times and not at moderate or heavy , due to the increased workload of trying to figure out where they will fit in the sequence with other aircraft not capable of or willing to fly the approach. When we get to the po int where we can do these approaches simultaneously to parallel runways with reduced separation on the curved portions is when we will see a huge increase in them." Going into the Phase 1 test, we did not believe that by just advertising that RNAV RNP appr oaches were available upon request would make a difference, but at some location s it did and others it did not. We are now looking at Phase 2 where the primary approach that would be advertised on the ATIS would be the RNAV (GPS) at those facilities where the majority of aircraft can fly this type of procedure and RNAV (RNP) approaches at locations where the majority of aircraft can fly this type of procedur e. We are looking at SJC and SMF on the west coast with NCT being the Approach Control Facility and IAD and RIC on the east coast with PCT being the Approach Control Facility and also looking at a d ding PHL. We are looking at start ing Phase 2 on or after Oct. 1, 2016 , and it lasting for 120 days . At this time, we are in the proc ess of reaching out to the various FacReps and the ATMs to ensure they can support this phase of the project as well as to ensure we are aware of any issues or concerns before moving forward. UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS (UAS ): Steve Weidner (ZMP) is the NA TCA Art icle 48 Representative for UAS. Jeff Richards (ZAU) is assisting Mr. Weidner on this project due to the workload and activity associated with it. Below is the update for the membership.