A publication of the National Air Traffic Controllers Association
Issue link: http://natca.uberflip.com/i/913906
setting" and did not accurately reflect what a pilot would experience in actual, real world operations. Mitigations were suggested (inferred) such a s; consider further proliferation of ATC Minimum Safe Altitude Warning Systems (MSAW) to include altitudes normally inhibited today due to nuisance alerts, terrain avoidance warning systems are not available during non precision approaches (Specifically gl ideslope deviation alerts, ATC monitoring only provides lateral guidance for collision), flight crews operating non VNAV equipped aircraft prefer vertically guided procedures over non - vertically guided procedures, and majority of mainline airlines have VNA V capability (RJ aircraft are LNAV only). So, what happens now? In response to the concerns, NextGen Integration Performance Based Navigation Working Group (NIWG PBN WG) is looking into the issues, developing a data driven dialogue to address concerns, wh ich includes asking for objective basis for challenges noted. While this activity is going on, the desire is to keep moving forward and not bring the evolution of PBN to a halt. Are there other means to provide vertical guidance while flying RNAV EoR style procedures? Of course! RNP to IL S. On Oct. 17, AVS - 1 requested PARC look into RNP to ILS procedures and operations in order to leverage RNAV procedures to an ILS approach. This was given to the PARC Navigation Working Group (PARC NAV WG) through a letter , which basically stated, "based on recent concerns raised by industry regarding pilot workload and the availability of vertical guidance when conducting simultaneous approaches, we request that the PARC Navigation Working Group review operational consider ations that mitigate operational risk to ensure aircraft can safely transition from RNP to xLS guidance. Factors that may be elevated include, but are not limited to, the availability and necessity of vertical guidance, pilot workload required to transfer between guidance modes, potential benefits of a longer straight final approach segment, and risks associated with dual/parallel operations." Moving forward, the PARC NAV WG will review and provide a ToR for PARC SG, which may recommend an Action Team or Ot her PARC assets, and WGs may be leveraged, as this is a high priority tasking. 4. Speed Cancellation Guidance - Recent concerns have been raised by controllers pertaining to current guidance in the 7110.65 regarding the issue of speed termination a previo usly issued speed assignment when a Descend Via (DV) clearance has been issued and the STAR has no speed restrictions. Based on the guidance contained within the FAA 7110.65, Paragraph 5 - 7 - 4 Speed Termination states: "Advise aircraft to "resume normal spee d" when ATC - assigned speed adjustments are no longer required and no published speed restrictions apply." The Airmen's Information Manual (AIM), Paragraph 5 - 5 - 9 Speed Adjustments, subparagraph 5(a) also has language that is similar to the language in the F AA 7110.65, which states how a controller will terminate ATC - assigned speed adjustments when no longer required; "Instructs pilots to "resume normal speed" when the aircraft is on a heading, random routing, charted procedure, or route without published spe ed restrictions." However, new language was recently added to the AIM under paragraph 4 - 4 - 12, which states; "A climb via or descend via clearance cancels any previously issued speed restrictions and, once established on the depicted departure or arrival, to climb or