Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

PBN Capability and flight plan equipment codes

When I did my training the instructors said they file B2S1 in block 18 for PBN for their DA42 (non-sbas equipped G1000). After some reading of Part-NCO.IDE and contacting Diamond it seems they understated the capabilities.
Part-NCO says:

(c) The following documents are considered acceptable sources of information:
(1) AFM/POH, supplements thereto, and documents directly referenced in the AFM/POH;
(2) FCOM or similar document;
(3) Service Bulletin or Service Letter issued by the TC holder or STC holder;
(4) approved design data or data issued in support of a design change approval;
(5) any other formal document issued by the TC or STC holders stating compliance with PBN
specifications, AMC, Advisory Circulars (AC) or similar documents issued by the State of
Design; and
(6) written evidence obtained from the State of Design.

The AFM says nothing about which PBN specifications the aircraft complies with but Diamond provided me this document laying out which specifications (+ source document) it complies with.

This same document (excel file) is available from Garmin btw.

What I find interesting (and I’m hoping for a correction if I am misreading/misunderstanding this) is that the system is eligible (according to Part-NCO) for RNAV 10, 2, 1, RNP 4 (Oceanic), and RNP 1 based on its compliance with FAA specifications. These are in addition to its capabilities based on EASA/JAA specifications.

Sweden

In the US, RNP 4 and RNP 10 require a Letter of Authorization from the local FSDO. Just because equipment is capable of meeting an RNP specification, does not mean that the aircraft or the equipment is approved.

KUZA, United States
I initially wote this does not apply now in Europe. However yet again my efforts to work out actual rules in Europe have failed. I have no idea.
Last Edited by JasonC at 28 Dec 19:05
EGTK Oxford

What would the circumstances under which a Europe based DA42 is going to need to fly RNP4 or RNP10?

EGKB Biggin Hill

All I know about this is that Eurocontrol does need the PBN string in the flight plan, for it to validate, but it doesn’t check it for plausibility against the aircraft type or anything else.

Years ago there were scare stories (spread by some “purists” in the IR GA community; nobody posting on EuroGA AFAIK) that ATC were going to get a database access to things like the FAA PRNAV LoA issues, allowing them to check if a particular N-reg had the FAA PRNAV (now called RNAV1, I believe) LoA. At the time there was no EASA process for this, so the only PRNAV approved planes would be N-reg. There is no indication that this has happened, so you can stick what you like in the flight plan equipment list. You could have a plane with a KLN94 and file RNAV1 or INS or whatever…

I also know of no evidence that ATC (or Eurocontrol) use anything in the equipment list to change the available routings, though this aspect might change one day. I did read about 10 years ago that ATC in Australia did use the equipment list to determine some things.

This stuff is so obscure that very few people know what it means, let alone worry about it. I reckon the number of DA42 owners who hassle Diamond about it can be counted on 1 or 2 fingers

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Cttime wrote:

The AFM says nothing about which PBN specifications the aircraft complies with but Diamond provided me this document laying out which specifications (+ source document) it complies with.

Note that this document is about equipment compliance, not installation compliance. That is a different thing, but it is the thing that matters

E.g. from the table you can see that the GNS430 is RNAV/RNP-1 capable, but you’ll be hard pressed to find installations on EASA aircraft which are RNAV/RNP-1 approved. Peter’s post above gives a likely reason for that. I guess this is the origin of the myth that you need SBAS to have RNAV/RNP-1 – which you do not. (Non-SBAS G1000 Cessna 172’s are examples of RNAV/RNP-1 approved aircraft.)

ESKC (Uppsala/Sundbro), Sweden

So a Cirrus or Diamond (EASA registered) with a GNS430 (non W) or G1000 (non W) can fly P-RNAV/RNP1 SIDs or (LNAV only) APPs → or not?

Which, concerning RNP1, is a bit contradictory because PBN → RNP usually means system integrity is monitored, which afaik isn’t the case for the above installations. Anyway, maybe it’s not so important going only down to RNP1 and is only necessary below that (eg RNP APP with 0.35)?!

Is using the above equipment for IR training sufficient to comply with PBN licensing requirements?

Additionally to any answers I’d be equally interested in any documents where I can read up on it and find an answer myself. Thanks!

Last Edited by Snoopy at 03 May 13:01
Airline/Mentor/Safety/Instructor - Pilot
Based Austria | Operating Worldwide

Snoopy wrote:

So a Cirrus or Diamond (EASA registered) with a GNS430 (non W) or G1000 (non W) can fly P-RNAV/RNP1 SIDs or (LNAV only) APPs → or not?

That depends on what installation approvals they have which primarily depends on what the airframe manufacturer asked for. In principle, there is no reason they could not. As I wrote before, Cessna 172’s with non-SBAS (“non W”) G1000 installations are approved for RNP 1 and RNP APCH.

Which, concerning RNP1, is a bit contradictory because PBN → RNP usually means system integrity is monitored, which afaik isn’t the case for the above installations. Anyway, maybe it’s not so important going only down to RNP1 and is only necessary below that (eg RNP APP with 0.35)?!

The boxes (not the installations) have integrity monitoring using RAIM — “Reciever Autonomous Integrity Monitoring”.

Additionally to any answers I’d be equally interested in any documents where I can read up on it and find an answer myself. Thanks!

GM1 to NCO.IDE.A.195 explains various ways you can tell if an GPS (or any RNAV) installation can be used for PBN.

Last Edited by Airborne_Again at 03 May 14:07
ESKC (Uppsala/Sundbro), Sweden

How about this one in a Cirrus G2 with „non W“ 430?

I think: According to the Garmin table above, a GNS430 non W can do RNP1/PRNAV. According to the Cirrus POH (which is controlling) it cannot. What’s the solution? How can airframes built before PBN/RNP be legally abled to fly RNP1 stuff? Anybody know?

Thanks @airborne_again
I am digging through https://www.easa.europa.eu/sites/default/files/dfu/Consolidated%20unofficial%20AMC-GM_Annex%20VII%20Part-NCO%20March%202017.pdf
starting at page 73

Last Edited by Snoopy at 03 May 15:13
Airline/Mentor/Safety/Instructor - Pilot
Based Austria | Operating Worldwide

Snoopy wrote:

How about this one in a Cirrus G2 with „non W“ 430?

I guess that B2D2O2S1 is what you should put in flight plan.

LDZA LDVA, Croatia
38 Posts
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top