I published a short article summarising research and analysis of the number and type of Instrument Approaches available at UK civilian airports which may be of interest to readers. It shows how the ILS remains dominant because it provides the lowest minima while at the other end of the spectrum, there are two airports where a timed NDB is the best on offer. The slow pace of RNP rollout, compounded by the UK CAA’s reluctance to open up RNP approaches for GA combined with the loss of EGNOS, has resulted in real capacity constraints for instrument training and limitations on accessibility to more remote/smaller airfields that have remained VFR.
Comments welcome, especially contrasting with other European countries.
Thanks for the nice summary, indeed it’s becoming problematic to do an IR test or revalidation in UK (I had Lydd…the other options with ATC were Jersey, LeTouquet, if finding an IRE who fly SEP over water is possible)
On a side note, I think 3D & 2D classification would more appropriate for FCL IR test than precision & non-precision (maybe only applicable for ANO IMCR tests?)
Some typos and point of details:
In Figure 1, it should be “licensed, non-instrument 62” rather than “licensed, non-instrument 124” and the proportion of the pie needs adjusting.
Below figure 1, it says “52 our of 69” shouldn’t it be 62 to match the text before Figure 1 and Figure 1.
The Sywell IAP were removed from the AIP in April.
For RNP, few questions: not sure if GA are allowed to fly L/VNAV in UK with GPS? do examiners consider it 3D or precision (if one like to call it that way) during CBIR test?
Third, OCH minima for RNP L/VNAV, LNAV (even LPV before EGNOS loss) in AFIS airfields like Sywell & Kemble are substantially high, toward 500ft OCH, this seems to be artificial rather than related to obstacles in the vicinity? they are way off from 2D MDA one can calculate on LNAV surface using listed obstacles (as one do for their route MSA )
A very nice piece of work David, thank you.
Ibra wrote:
do examiners consider it 3D or precision (if one like to call it that way) during CBIR test?
I don’t know what UK examiners consider them to be, but by definition LNAV/VNAV is not a precision approach. Only ILS and LPV200 are precision approaches. (Well, ok, MLS and GBAS LPV are also precision approches…)
Airborne_Again wrote:
by definition LNAV/VNAV is not a precision approach
Does LNAV/VANV count as 3D approach in Sweden and ticks what you need for FCL CBIR exam? ignore ‘precision’, it’s a common misnaming of ‘3D’ in UK…and yes 3D approaches like LPV250 (APV with SBAS) and LVNAV/VANV (APV with SBAS or APV with BARO) are not Cat1 precision only LPV200 & ILS fall under Cat1 precision specs (plus what you listed maybe with addition of precision Cat1 PAR by radar ATC?)
Xtophe wrote:
The Sywell IAP were removed from the AIP in April.
When?!
You can’t fly Sywell RNP for training anyway (even on IFR arrival from Belgium outside training you get refused PPR for IAP, you have to cloud-break elsewhere), besides, the airport is NOTAMed closed with runway being closed, so the point about the RNP down there is very academic !
Ibra wrote:
You can’t fly Sywell RNP for training anyway (even on IFR arrival from Belgium outside training you get refused PPR for IAP, you have to cloud-break elsewhere), besides, the airport is NOTAMed closed with runway being closed, so the point about the RNP down there is very academic !
@Ibra, I see it is closed until 22-July, but the RNP IAPs were removed?