It’s part of ICAO Global Air Navigation Plan (GANP) for PBN harmonisation with is mostly driven by cutting ground infrastructure costs for the states and fuel costs by airliners industry
On side note PBN (RNAV & RNP) is not necessarily GNSS for airliners…the new “EU thing with EU regulation” is Cat1 ILS being decommissioned by 2030 instead of Cat1 LPV (this means GNSS+SBAS), the rest does not depends on GPS
For GA, PBN = GPS, not sure how this will play out when VOR/NDB and ILS Cat1 are removed (GA is not capable of Cat2/3 but one can fly Cat2/3 on Cat1 DH & VIS)
Has this been posted before? If it has I apologise.
gnss_based_instrument_flight_procedures_implementation_for_general_aviation_pdf
Peter wrote:
There has to be something else behind this. Is the EU funding the development of GPS approaches? If paid for, they work out at best part of €30k per runway end, although AIUI it depends on how much surveying has already been done. Some pointers here. Airports which currently don’t have GPS approaches don’t have them because something is preventing them e.g.
Possibly it is just the EU getting into this century? GPS technology isn’t exactly new, and lets admit it, we do fly ILS’s but how many of us who actually fly these things in real conditions regularly don’t (at least) have the GPS overly there as well. It’s 2022, the technology is good and (in theory at least) exceeds the capability for radio navigation based technologies, it might just be putting a stick in the sand… Not everything is the big bad EU… personally I like it…
chrisn wrote:
It’d be easy to jam ILS too though (and all the other radio beacons)?
It would be feasable to jam an ILS or a VOR, but the kind of wide area denial that is possible with GPS is impractical due to the power you would need (which means you could be detected and caught fairly rapidly) – not to mention the amount of spectrum you would have to jam for an area denial.
The GPS signal received on the ground is incredibly weak – the L1 signal is about -125dBm. While you’re going down the ILS, the signal strength will be at the very worst around -50dBm at a rough guess, which is about ten million times more power at the receiver compared to the GPS L1 (for each 10dB difference, add a zero – 10dB = 10 times the power, 20dB = 100 times the power and so on). So you can see the vulnerability of the GPS signal in comparison to a ground based navaid.
alioth wrote:
So you can see the vulnerability of the GPS signal in comparison to a ground based navaid.
Talking about emergencies not business as usual or nice to have
We only rely on GPS when close to the ground, above terrain MSA, radar MVA, radar MEA altitudes,
- Radar should work fine and at 10kft agl one is likely to receive nav aid in 150nm and PLOG is fine
- You would receive DME which is very enough to find an emergency position (better than stop watch), also VOR/NDB is any is left
- It’s difficult to jam GPS bellow 2000ft agl over whole country unless you install 50nm*50nm grids or nuke the whole sky
It’s problematic when GPS jamming happens at your destination airport but I would be worried the same for ILS or having military vehicles on destination runway…for PA28, GPS should always work to cloud-break below 2000ft agl somewhere (e.g. sea, plains)
Possibly it is just the EU getting into this century?
Sure, but who will pay. The reason we have non-GPS-IAP airports is because they don’t want to / can’t pay.
It is like mandating that everybody buys a TBM.
Peter wrote:
Sure, but who will pay
I think you need to split two work streams here,
1) Getting LPV/LNAV to replace exiting ILS/VOR as mandated by EU 2018/1048, I am sure it costs nothing: it’s the opposite ANSP/AD and CAT claim they make money on this (DGAC/DSNA claimed they makes 9 digits money and load on airliners side as “cost saving”)
2) Getting GPS-IAP to non-instrument runways as suggested by ESSP/GSA/EASA, yes someone needs to pay for this to happen, although some small airports seems to have 5k-50k/year money for GPS-IAP but were priced out of VOR/ILS with 100k-1m per year
For 1) if it’s an overlay of an existing plate, all you need is survey and test flight for NAA to approve it
yes someone needs to pay for this to happen, although some small airports seems to have 5k-50k/year money for GPS-IAP but were priced out of VOR/ILS with 100k-1m per year
How? In most of Europe, VORs are paid for by the State. They have to be.
Generally only bigger places with lots of commercial or IR training traffic have an ILS.
The ones which don’t have GPS
So I don’t get this at all. Why not just make turboprop engines mandatory?
If you have to install VOR in your aerdrome and publish an approche on it, well you gotta pay for it? just like you do for ILS?
I am bloody sure it’s not the Congres who will install VOR on my grass strip TCH/ARP for me to let down on my IAP, even in generous aviation taxpayer country like USA !
I think ENR VOR/NDB are paid for by NATS, do you know the details for AD VOR/NDB like SAM? they probably “got it installed for free” and are using it for VOR IAP, who pays it’s running costs now?
Almost no airport VORs (or any other VORs for that matter) have been installed in Europe, in many years.
SAM is paid for by NATS, or some part of it (NERL?). Also SAM is not an approach aid. But not relevant; the UK is not in the EU anymore.
