Brussels blocking UK from using EGNOS for LPV - and selection of alternates, and LPV versus +V

It’s amazing how this way of « everyone his own mess » lets the UK stuck with NDBs and DIY approaches while the world goes to LPV200

I don’t think 30m$ get you an SBAS from scratch in UK? EGNOS is 3bn$ as project

I don’t believe for a moment EGNOS cost €3BN of “genuine” money. After all, America had it a long time before and everybody knew exactly how to do it. What I can believe is that 3BN was soaked up in “research grants”

Gallelio+EGNOS is 10bn?

Very possibly, actually probably a lot more, and probably way more still by the time it is all up and working, but Galileo is pointless. And there is an agreement with the US to shut it down if there is a serious national security issue, so as a hedge against that often-touted risk it is worthless.

lets the UK stuck with NDBs and DIY approaches while the world goes to LPV200

Not quite because the UK has GPS approaches which, like all others in Europe, are based on the US GPS system. Maybe some airliner avionics uses Galileo but nothing I have seen is compatible with it. So, for the UK, the loss is the difference between LNAV minima and LPV minima.

Peter wrote:

Not quite because the UK has GPS approaches which, like all others in Europe, are based on the US GPS system. Maybe some airliner avionics uses Galileo but nothing I have seen is compatible with it. So, for the UK, the loss is the difference between LNAV minima and LPV minima.

And loss of 3D RNAV capability…
200ft vs 250ft is negligible for most genuine GA (non-business aviation) users, while 3D might be important.
And I see no real replacement – ILS installation costs millions to tens of millions per AD.

What is 3D RNAV?

ILS installation costs millions to tens of millions per AD.

IIRC, the one-time manager of Gloucester airport posted that they spent £1M on their ILS, and the whole project that included lots of other stuff e.g. lighting came to a few M more. Annual cost of an ILS is something which no airport manager wants to reveal but is thought to be of the order of £30k-50k and that is the flight testing and the service contract on the equipment.

Nobody will be installing an ILS for light GA. It is only ever done for commercial traffic, but existing installations, paid off long ago, can continue from GA training revenue and other GA IFR traffic (e.g. Lydd, Le Touquet).

Peter wrote:

What is 3D RNAV?

LPV? Localiser Performance with Vertical guidance. Unlike 2D (LNAV) it provides you with RNAV-derived glideslope. And it is much cheaper than LNAV+BARO VNAV for GA (not sure if BARO VNAV IAPs are going to be available either).

Nobody will be installing an ILS for light GA. It is only ever done for commercial traffic, but existing installations, paid off long ago, can continue from GA training revenue and other GA IFR traffic (e.g. Lydd, Le Touquet).

That is precisely my point – we’ll have to use LNAV or NDB. GA airports will lose ability to have 3D approaches.

Peter wrote:

MHO the +V mode will remain usable because while it does need WAAS/EGNOS (“SBAS”), it does not need any airport-specific procedure in the navigator database, and thus even if UK LPV procs were stripped out, the +V would remain available – because the signal itself will remain receivable. And, frankly, all people who are LPV capable will also be +V capable, and IMHO most of those who have +V will just fly the +V glideslope to the LPV minima You just can’t do this on your IR test.

The Avidyne 440/540 and the GTN650/750 at the latest version of the software do not require SBAS for +V. At least as it is intended, the +V is not supposed to be used below the MDA(H), so any error is not really a safety hazard unless the pilot makes more of +V than what was promised. If they do, they risk being removed from the gene pool.

arj1 wrote:

And it is much cheaper than LNAV+BARO VNAV for GA (not sure if BARO VNAV IAPs are going to be available either).

Not sure what the rules are in EC and UK, but in USA, SBAS vertical is approved for use for flying to LNAV/VNAV line of minima. It is not an SBAS approach persay as the lateral guidance is still LNAV, +/- 556 meters FSD. Accomodations in how the GPS handles LNAV/VNAV vertical FSD are incorporated into the RTCA DO229 specification in that the vertical FSD is fixed beyond the point where it equals +/- 150 Meters and inside where it reaches +/- 45 meters. Temperature compensation is not required.

The Avidyne 440/540 and the GTN650/750 at the latest version of the software do not require SBAS for +V. At least as it is intended, the +V is not supposed to be used below the MDA(H), so any error is not really a safety hazard unless the pilot makes more of +V than what was promised.

That’s great!

If they do, they risk being removed from the gene pool.

That’s how it should be

GA airports will lose ability to have 3D approaches.

Almost no UK airports have LPV, and they won’t lose the +V option.

Peter wrote:

GA airports will lose ability to have 3D approaches.

Almost no UK airports have LPV, and they won’t lose the +V option.

Peter, that is why I wrote “ability to have 3D approaches”, meaning in the future.
+V – requires an extra ADC, attached to GTN/IFD. That is not used that often…
Yes, you can add +V approach but not many GA aircraft will use it.
Yes, those with glass cockpit will, but anything legacy with a GPS upgrade won’t.
And Yes, I know that right now it’s a mute point as UK CAA’s usefulness in introduction of new IAPs at uncontrolled airports is similar to a chocolate teapot.