Can any kind soul explain the difference between an EGNOS approach ) for example EDBN RNP27 which includes “EGNOS CH77378 E27A” in the description and and an RNAV-GPS approach? Can an EGNOS approach be flown with a standard GNS430W or is extra equipment required?
Hello!
The approaches into Neubrandenburg are officially “RNP” (required navigation performance) approaches as the caption on top of the chart states. Depending on your onboard equipment (or your “navigation performance”) they can be flown as LNAV approaches (lateral only), LNAV/VNAV (with barometric VNAV) or LPV (with satellite derived geometric vertical guidance), therefore the three different minima. The latter (LPV) requires EGNOS augmentation (or WAAS in more general terms) and some manufacturers of GPS units (e.G. Garmin) use the channel number on the chart to enable quick selection of the procedure from the database. The EGNOS channel number on the chart is only relevant if you have this kind of equipment.
Your GNS430W is capable to do the LPV approach which you can either select by dialing in the airport identifier and the approach or by dialing in the Channel number instead.
Many thanks what_next. All clear now 
Peter_Mundy wrote:
All clear now
I whish it was… “They” (authorities, training providers avionics manufacturers, …) created such a formidable confusion from the simple concept of area navigation over the past few years that it is almost impossible not to get lost in the acronyms. Often there are two or three acronyms which stand for exactly the same thing and to make it more confusing, the Americans use different ones than the Europeans. For our commercial operation I was required to take a two-hour online course on “PBN” (performance based navigation) which is now the preamble of all this stuff. The makers of that course got confused themselves on several occasions and messed up things.
EGNOS, WAAS, GAGAN, MSAS etc are all SBASs, Satellite Based Augmentation Systems needed to fly an RNP APCH – LPV approach. If you are in the US then WAAS does the augmentation. If you are in Europe then it’s EGNOS, for India it’s GAGAN, Japan has MSAS, the Chinese will have one of their own one day.
The acronyms are a mess since different authorities were writing about the same things at the same time but they were sitting on different tables.
what_next wrote:
Depending on your onboard equipment (or your “navigation performance”) they can be flown as LNAV approaches (lateral only), LNAV/VNAV (with barometric VNAV) or LPV (with satellite derived geometric vertical guidance), therefore the three different minima.
Just to check: LNAV and LNAV/VNAV can be flown without WAAS while for LPV WAAS is needed. Correct?
Emir wrote:
LNAV/VNAV
LNAV/VNAV needs either baro-VNAV for the glidepath or WAAS GPS.
Europe is in a mess in this department (and a few others).
Only a few years ago the powers to be were putting out proposals to make (what we now call) LPV approaches available only via the Galileo satellite constellation (i.e. Galileo+EGNOS) and they were going to charge for it’s use by the sale of encryption keys! On their website was a claim of creating 100000 (100k) jobs in Europe!
I recall reading a report criticising this utterly stupid proposal, citing the scenario where your keys run out during flight and you can’t land. But the far bigger problem was that the Eurocrats forgot that all the avionics we use is made in…. the USA which ….. doesn’t use Galileo and has no need for it. So who would make the required avionics? Precisely nobody.
How many billions were wasted on these white elephant job creating schemes?
If your power is limited to yellow jackets, you make sure everybody wears it even for a 10m walk. If you can waste billions, you waste billions because to waste less is just not the done thing.
Just my opinion; you understand 
Incidentally, do any of the LPV capable boxes support GAGAN or MSAS? Presumably these are same as WAAS or EGNOS but are on yet different frequency channels?
while for LPV WAAS is needed
Yes; how else could you get the “glideslope” guidance? One cannot do this barometrically. Well, not down to anything like LPV minima, AFAICT.
Peter wrote:
Incidentally, do any of the LPV capable boxes support GAGAN or MSAS?
G1000 support WAAS, MSAS and EGNOS in my software version.
Peter wrote:
Incidentally, do any of the LPV capable boxes support GAGAN or MSAS? Presumably these are same as WAAS or EGNOS but are on yet different frequency channels?
As far as I know, they are all on the same frequencies as the low-orbit GPS satellites, merely with PRN beyond 32 (which, incidentally, are unique across all SBAS).
