For GA it will never make sense.
I agree that the current RNP AR regulations make no sense for GA.
However, a curved GPS guided approach would make a lot of sense for GA for example into Innsbruck, or Tivat, and would IMO be safer than the current IGS or LOC DME approaches.
Even a relatively untrained pilot would achieve a flight technical error by far good enough for this. Garmin conducted a study where they deliberately created a roller coaster approach with many curved path segments and let normal pilots fly it with different aircraft that included aircraft with fairly old equipment (single GNS430W), the resulting FTE was 0.2NM (2 sigma).
Again, current regulation does not mirror reality, and denies us safety benefits from modern technology.
RNP AR requires operator and pilot approved training.
We looked into this with the Bermudan CAA on the 737 I fly, but the CAA there hadn’t even looked into this. Its a massive undertaking, and is only a solution for bigger operators operating into the same airports on a daily basis.
SAS can cut like 5 minutes of their approach time into Tromsø when landing south. The RNP AR approach takes you through different valleys on the way to the localizer.
Thats a lot of fuel saved when you have something like 5 flights a day.
For GA it will never make sense.
There’s a difference between an RNP approach and an RNP AR approach (AR = “authorisation required”). As far as I understand, the curved stuff will be RNP AR.
RNP is (or is going to be) the official wording for what was formerly called RNAV or GPS Approaches. I was told that this has something to do with changes in the ICAO PBN-Manual. The DFS will start renaming RNAV approaches to RNP Approaches on December 11th this year. The first airport to use the new wording is Hannover.
Might it be that there is also a mess regarding the terms?
I think that RNP – as in the Swiss document – has something to do with those curved paths on approaches. There was a conversation on COPA a while ago and at least the people using Avidyne R9 said the equipment can fly those but the pilot needs to be qualified.
I’m not sure if you should be worried about the need for RNAV approvals in different European countries. The whole situation seems to be mess.
Sweden says:
Can the FAA even issue such an approval to you?
France seems to be more sensible.
I interpret this as for an FAA licensed pilot no additional approvals are needed.
Germany. Well. Maybe you just need a signature in your logbook saying that you are trained to fly RNAV approaches.
I will let some else clarify that.
Switzerland. They seem to require that you’ve basically have attended their training as described in this document
And the national CAAs and EASA seem to be of the opinion that the training requirements that are mentioned in AMC 20-27 and AMC 20-28 are too strict and are hoping for relaxed rules in NPA 2013-25. But that has not yet come into effect.
To me it seems weird that there is so much focus on getting out more RNAV approaches to LPV and/or LNAV/VNAV minima and at the same time the problem of allowing the pilots to fly them has not been addressed.
[links cleaned up]
My memory on this is rubbish but I recall reading a post from a well known EASA committee member that mandatory training was coming in for all GPS approaches in the EU. It was a quid pro quo for something else being abandoned.
I was actually thinking about those RNAV approvals not about flying IFR in Europe in general. I’ve done that already a few times.
Is there anything I should be worried about for my flying on FAA IR in Europe?
I do not think there is anything to worry about. Get some training from an instructor knowledgeable of both systems (US and European) to familiarise yourself with the European IFR system, do one flight with said instructor to learn the ropes, and you should be fine.
Some the most noteworthy items to cover:
- filing the FPL – Eurocontrol – RAD
- pop-up clearances
- alternate minima
- departing from uncontrolled fields
- arriving at an uncontrolled field.
- IFR outside controlled airspace (OCAS)
I have some notes somewhere that I took when I did this a few years ago. There is not that much to it.
Maybe somebody here who recently aquired his EASA-IR can tell you how this topic was covered in his flight training / ground school.
I did my EASA IR here in Austria in summer/autumn 2013. RNAV approaches were treated as just another NPA in training. In fact, I flew one on my checkride too in addition to an ILS and a VOR approach.
There was no signoff or separate entry in my logbook.
