Establishing and maintaining GNSS (GPS, EGNOS, SBAS, ...) approaches

JasonC wrote:

I don’t think that is true. The approach ban applies regardless of operator type in Europe including to foreign registered aircraft.

That’s a good question, actually. Certainly, there is an approach ban in part-NCO (NCO.OP.210 b), but part-NCO is in most (all?) countries not in effect yet. At the present time it would be up to national regulations. Sweden does have the approach ban for all operators, but not for foreign-registred aircraft unless the operator is Swedish.

I’ll try and answer the questions based on my (limited?) understanding of these things.

Stephan_Schwab wrote:

What is required to establish a GNSS approach?

Let’s assume that an airport already has an instrument runway and other instrument approaches. Meaning that things such as air traffic service and airspace design are already in place. Then.

Obstacle survey.
Procedure Design.
Safety and Hazard Analysis.
Flight Validation.

What I’ve heard is that the amount of work that goes into the Procedure Design is 1/3 of the amount of work that goes into the Safety and Hazard Analysis!?

Stephan_Schwab wrote:

Who starts the process and who pays for it?

The airport would usually start the process and also pay for the procedure.

Stephan_Schwab wrote:

How does the approach get into the AIP?

Once all the steps are completed the procedure is sent to the AIP to be included. (Or, as it is done in some countries to lower the cost, is to first publish the procedure in the AIP so that it ends up in the navdata from Jeppesen. NOTAM the procedure as unavailable. Do the flight validation. And if that is successful remove the NOTAM so that everyone can fly the procedure.)

Stephan_Schwab wrote:

How does the approach get into avionics databases?

Jeppesen reads the AIP and puts the appraoach into its avionics database.

Some good news learned of French GA web news :
- Jonzac airfield LFCJ (south of Cognac) is expected to build a hard runway on its present grass one. Their runway is already lighted (with PCL !!) and a GNSS approach is planned too. AVGAS available with TOTAL card.

- Charleville LFQV (in the Ardennes, next to Belgium) : runway lighting and a new GNSS approach are planned to be implemented on the existing hard runway, along with automatic AVGAS and JET fuel pumps. An AFIS service should be set up too.

Two active airfields looking for more GA traffic : feel free to stop by and encourage them !

From here

Timothy wrote:

have recently heard that many approach designers are now refusing contracts

(my bold above)

I always was under the – apparently incorrect – assumption that this was done by the various CAAs (or FAA here). How does one become an approach designer? And are there many ? Serious question.

There seem to be some freelance design outfits in Europe e.g. this one in Slovakia which reportedly designed some of the Scottish ones.

Another such outfit now owns the operating lease for Shoreham EGKA!

The UK CAA doesn’t design them; they just approve them (or more likely find something to object to, so you hae to throw yet more money at the consultant).

In the rest of Europe, I don’t know, but clearly outfits like the Slovak one are not living off just the few Scottish jobs

There are quite a few. Certainly several in the UK, one I know of in Spain, and the Slovak one Peter mentions.

All that I know of are no longer prepared to accept contracts in the UK because the (possibly singular) ops inspector(s) in the CAA are so finickety and so inflexible towards GA airfields.

However, I believe that there is a new person involved in the CAA now, who has always been a great ally of GA and is creative and intelligent, so maybe he’ll be able to get some change. Who knows?

There are two more such outfits in Czechia – the Czech Air Navigation Services (they design not only national procedures, but do quite a lot of contract work for other states, including calibration flights) and Aaltronav.