For licencing, verybody in Europe with an EASA IR has PBN signoff on his licence to show that he can fly RNAV & RNP (GPS), so the scope is mostly those with FAA IR having to show UK CAA that LOA fits the bill for Part91 operation…
For equipment, NCO operators have blanket approval to fly RNP APCH, without need for “individual pilot approval”, this was negociated with navigators manufacturers, FAA & EASA when EASA started their “PBN tough line” on pilot
You can fly DIY approach in N-reg aircraft of flown by EASA IR/PBN holder and operating under NCO & FAR, the minima are those in PANSOPS & TERPS 
I don’t understand the above.
Also, European papers are not valid on an N-reg except under 61.3 i.e. only in airspace owned by the country which issued them.
Yes I agree, only in country of the licence, so the scope is mostly when flying PBN on FAA IR (not when flying N-reg with FCL IR in homecountry as per 61.3)
I would be curious who flies DIY GPS outside his home country in N-reg on FAA IR?
Can someone explain in clear terms which I can understand what this is about?
Yes please, the only place I have heard of DIY approaches is on this forum.
Peter wrote:
Can someone explain in clear terms which I can understand what this is about?
It is my understanding that some civil aviation authorities require an LOA on N registered aircraft when operating the aircraft using an FAA pilot certificate. This is from the guidance in the section named “Background”.
The part 91 LOA C052 is an optional LOA provided upon the request of part 91 operators in order to show evidence of authorization and training to conduct Area Navigation (RNAV) Global Positioning System (GPS) approaches should they be required to provide such evidence to a civil aviation authority (CAA) outside of the United States. The LOA may also authorize PRM approach procedures.
If your CAA does not require the LOA from the FAA, then this guidance does not apply.
As far as the FAA is concerned, DIY approach procedures are not supported in any way and do not meet the limitations included in the guidance:
2. Limitations and Provisions for IAPs at Foreign Airports.
a. Unless otherwise authorized by this LOA, the operator must not conduct any instrument flight rules (IFR) IAP at any foreign airport unless:
(1) All GNSS procedures have been constructed using criteria based on current FAA Order 8260 series criteria specified for that type of procedure, or International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Doc 8168, Procedures for Air Navigation Services—Air Operations, or special criteria approved by the Flight Technologies and Procedures Division (AFS-400). Additionally, Satellite-based Augmentation System (SBAS)-specific procedures (LPV, LP, and SBAS-based LNAV/VNAV) have been constructed using criteria authorized by the SBAS service provider, and State, as being compatible with the specified SBAS system performance;
(2) The provisions outlined in the State’s AIP are met, including type of SBAS receiver (e.g., European Geostationary Navigation Overlay Service (EGNOS)-capable);
(3) The visibility, Runway Visual Range (RVR), or Converted Meteorological Visibility (CMV) is based on FAA Order 8260.3, United States Standard for Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS), the applicable European Union (EU) or European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) regulation, or ICAO Doc 9365, Manual of All-Weather Operations; and
(4) The operator uses a procedure with minimum descent altitude (MDA) or decision altitude/height (DA/H) at or above 200 feet height above threshold (HATh).
b. RVR. Touchdown zone (TDZ) RVR reports, when available for a particular runway, are controlling for all approaches to and landings on that runway.
(1) The midpoint (MID) RVR and rollout (RO) RVR reports (if available) provide advisory information to pilots.
(2) Visibility values below ½ statute mile (sm) are not authorized and must not be used.
(3) The MID RVR report may be substituted for the TDZ RVR report, if the TDZ RVR report is not available.
c. Approach Procedures Using GNSS or SBAS. The operator is authorized to conduct GNSS- or SBAS-based instrument approach operations using the GNSS or SBAS equipment listed in their manufacturer-provided, FAA-approved Airplane Flight Manual (AFM)/Supplement (AFMS), pilot’s operating handbook (POH), avionics manual, or similar document. This authorization to conduct approaches using GNSS or SBAS is subject to the following limitations and conditions:
(1) The airborne GNSS or SBAS navigation equipment to be used must be approved for IFR operations, certified for the intended operation (LPV, LNAV/VNAV, LP, LNAV, or GLS), and must contain current navigation data.
(2) Both the GNSS constellation and the required airborne equipment must be providing the levels of availability, accuracy, continuity of function, and integrity required for the operation.
I expect for the typical European IFR ramp check I doubt they have caught on that you need PBN approval on your IR, although they would check database expiry.
As far as FAA is concerned, DIY approach procedures are not supported in any way and do not meet the limitations included in the guidance
Does FAA and TERPS support RNP to non-instrument runways? or RNP-A followed by circling or cancel?
Places like LFAB, LFFK, LFRC, LOWZ…all have GPS IFR cloud-breaks to non-instrument runways in Golf with no additional marking or lights for the runway with OCH > 500ft and maybe followed by circling or cancel…few ICAO countries have done these so far: Germany (EDME), UK (EGBK), Switzerland (LSZG), France (LFRC), Austria (LOWZ) most of these runways are 2000ft-3000ft pavements with no additional infrastructure but many require AFIS in the tower as minimum to conduct the operation
Also, in US places where Golf airspace (up to 14kft in Alaska), does US allow descent to MSA on GPS (say to 1kft/2kft above obstacles) or IFR stops on VOR Airways MEA or ATC Radar MVA? I recall reading while ago that FAR banned GPS navigation even for en-route outside the traditional coverage of ground Nav Aids and ATC radars, has this changed?
Obviously, in most other places with Echo airspace everywhere down to 1200ft/700ft agl one can’t fly IFR bellow MVA/MEA anyway without being on a published route with two-way comms & clearance
