Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

GPS IAP design in different countries

Hi,

Not sure what to make of it.
Checked a few GPS approach plates here in the UK and they are all, well, weird.
Typically no hold and requires a conventional nav aid either for approach itself of for MAP (EGKA, EGTE,…).
While in France, for example, different story!
Just found, for example, LFBN (attached, see page 10) – OCAS, AFIS. Normal procedure with a hold, GPS only waypoints etc.
LFBN_AIP_pdf

Why?

EGTR

arj1 wrote:

Checked a few GPS approach plates here in the UK and they are all, well, weird.
Typically no hold and requires a conventional nav aid either for approach itself of for MAP (EGKA, EGTE,…).

Here is my guess?

How it works in UK where GPS is pushed from the buttom:
- They are designed by individual airfields and reviewed (and push back up/down and left/right) on case by case by national regulator, so no logic
- How do you manage/“separate” traffic? no need, there is no ATS OCAS and they can declare IFR/VFR above MSA as they like
- What to do when GPS goes off? you go-missed, then go-missed to an NDB/DME/VOR for missed segments (we have no radars in UK )

Here it works in France where GPS is pushed from the top:
- They are designed at the regulator/top level and pushed down to individual airfields, so some logic
- How do you fly it? call FIS/APP for clearance and join the IAF (or you can’t just go there)
- What if GPS goes off? you go missed but you get radar vectors from FIS/APP
- How they manage/“separate” traffic? bit grey but way above MSA you can be on radar or class E and way bellow you are “visual” or have something from AFIS…

It is already a nightmare dealing with nearby airfields on GPS approvals so many tend to stick the GPS IAP to exiting Nav Aid infrastructure as it grease things up with neighbours, especially for holds

Last Edited by Ibra at 12 May 12:39
ESSEX, United Kingdom

In the UK, historically, the policy was to reuse the existing hold (if any). Hence the conventional holds and MAP

Nympsfield, United Kingdom

Can you post some UK plate as well to clarify your question?

LDZA LDVA, Croatia

Xtophe wrote:

In the UK, historically, the policy was to reuse the existing hold (if any).

Any idea why? because there are no radars in UK OCAS since 1990? or is it something to do with nearby airfields?

ESSEX, United Kingdom

Emir wrote:

Can you post some UK plate as well to clarify your question?

Hi Emir,

For example, EGKA: EG_AD_2_EGKA_8_1_en_2019_11_07_pdf

EGTR

arj1 wrote:

Hi Emir,

For example, EGKA: EG_AD_2_EGKA_8_1_en_2019_11_07_pdf

TBH I don’t see many strange things except MAPt not being at runway threshold. I don’t have here access to G1000 at them moment but from previous experience the approach distances shown at FPL window would be relative to threshold while the plate shows distances to MAPt (I’ll check this in few days and confirm). So, to effectively use the plate with G1000 you should recalculate distances and write them down. Regardless how trivial this looks, it can kill you in IMC if you don’t have it clearly written.

If NBD in missed approach bothers you, don’t worry there are many. If non-existence of holding pattern at the beginning of the approach bothers you, again don’t worry, very often it doesn’t exist and usually it’s not needed.

LDZA LDVA, Croatia

I was wrong!
The new (six approaches per day) Sywell EGBK is different!

EG_AD_2_EGBK_8_1_en_2020_03_26_pdf

EG_AD_2_EGBK_8_2_en_2020_03_26_pdf

But still no published holds.

EGTR

I don’t see this as a problem. ATC will give you the instructions what to do in after completing published part of missed approach. It’s expected to be able to execute another approach immediately and if holding is needed ATC can give you non-published one.

LDZA LDVA, Croatia

Emir wrote:

I don’t have here access to G1000 at them moment but from previous experience the approach distances shown at FPL window would be relative to threshold while the plate shows distances to MAPt (I’ll check this in few days and confirm).

Approach distances should be relative to the next waypoint, which in this case is the MAPt.

ESKC (Uppsala/Sundbro), Sweden
37 Posts
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top