Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

UK CAA heel dragging on GPS approaches, including LPV, and approaches with no ATC, and CAP1122

I was at a meeting with NATS on Wednesday and there are a lot of them planned in the next couple of years. A lot of work is also being done on truncating SID’s and STARs to reduce track miles in order to improve efficiency.

One of the STARs for London City for example begins overhead Manchester…

Sorry I don’t have any specific dates though.

Another “UK LPV approaches” thread is here

there are a lot of them planned in the next couple of years

However, has that not been the case for years and years? The £30k or so seems to be the biggest issue, along with mandatory ATC. I have just merged the above-linked “LPV” thread from several other near-identical ones and it turns out that High Wycombe / Booker has ATC so could have an IAP if they can only find the money.

Otherwise, most UK airfields with ATC already have IAPs, and if they aren’t GPS IAPs few people care because they fly them with GPS anyway The main drawback of doing that is the longer track distance of flying an NDB/DME or VOR/DME IAP because of the long outbound leg.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Thanks for the answers.

Still mindboggling. I wasn’t even thinking of RNAV approaches to airfields without existing IAPs where other issues mentioned above would apply. I was thinking about IAPs to airports with existing IAPs such as EGHQ, EGKB, EGSH etc. Airports in many other parts of the world have RNAV approaches now (not necessarily LPV approaches, also because various parts of the world don’t have SBAS such as WAAS/EGNOS) in addition to precision and non-precision approaches.

What sparked my mind here is that I was going through Thailand, Malaysia and Indonesia AIPs where there are currently new RNAV and RNP0.3 approaches coming out with every cycle as they are under pressure from ICAO to stay within their PBN implementation plans (e.g. see here local copy). If this is in an ICAO goal, the UK seems to be dragging its feet. In that vain, the UK also has not yet adopted the new phraseology for SID/STARs (see here local copy) where it says

The amendment anticipates a worldwide implementation of 12 months from 10 November 2016. However, the UK’s implementation is not expected to be completed before late 2017.

Wolfgang

Last Edited by wbardorf at 25 Mar 06:21
EGTF, EGLK, United Kingdom

However, the point becomes moot with the latest version of GTN software, which gives everyone an LPV into every runway

Does the GTN provide approach sensitivity, or is this just a version of the OBS function?

The FAA emphasises no RNAV GNSS approaches unless they are loaded from the IFR database, but then most US airports have an RNAV GNSS approach.

Oxford (EGTK), United Kingdom

I think the main issue is that most UK airports are self financing, whereas in the rest of the world most are State operated, or at least the procedures are designed for free by the national CAA (as is the case in the USA). Also, approach controllers are provided by the State or the national CAA almost everywhere in the world.

In order to allow IAPs, the UK has no mandatory requirement for ATC at the airport; the ATCO can be remotely located (as most US approach controllers are for example).

The issue is ATC privatisation, money and the “user pays” principle

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

RobertL18C wrote:

Does the GTN provide approach sensitivity, or is this just a version of the OBS function?

The FAA emphasises no RNAV GNSS approaches unless they are loaded from the IFR database, but then most US airports have an RNAV GNSS approach.

It provides visual approach guidance akin to what is in a ProLine21 FMS. Think of it as LNAV with vertical guidance but obviously not surveyed for terrain or obstacles. It is not an LPV. Obviously it will still be pretty accurate.

EGTK Oxford

According to one Proline pilot I know, the system provides a synthetic “ILS” from the FAF to the MAP but it needs a real IAP to be published. It won’t do a “farm strip IAP”.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Peter wrote:

According to one Proline pilot I know, the system provides a synthetic “ILS” from the FAF to the MAP but it needs a real IAP to be published. It won’t do a “farm strip IAP”.

No. It needs the airport to be in the database. Plenty of VFR airfields are for example EGBT. It is a GPS line in the sky just like Garmin’s. You say you want a 3 or 5nm or whatever final approach track and can intercept like any GPS approach.

Last Edited by JasonC at 25 Mar 10:57
EGTK Oxford

How much does a GPS approach cost in these other counties? Is it cica 30 grand like in the UK. Also how long does it take to implement?

Barhman asks:

How much does a GPS approach cost in these other counties?

In France they are offered free to airfields as an incentive to have, instead of taking over the maintenance costs of an ILS (which I suspect is in the region of €30,000 p.a.) which the central government wishes to jettison.

Rochester, UK, United Kingdom
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top