PBN RAD Consultation Workshop
Brussels, 05 February 2013
PAVLICEVIC Franca
Head of Navigation & CNS
Research Unit
NESHEVSKI Sasho
Mandate Activity Manager
Agenda Item 1
 Welcome, Introduction
 Workshop Objectives
 Agenda
PAVLICEVIC Franca
Head of Navigation & CNS
Research Unit
Introduction
bl
a
r
e
el i v
SSC informed
D
European
Commission
e
Formal
Stakeholder
Consultation
RAD
Comments
Early SoR
Stakeholder
Workshop
Upd
Updated SoR
ate
PBN RAD Consultation Workshop – 05 Feb 2013
3
Introduction
 Thank you for the comprehensive comments
 RAD must develop issues to identify options for a
regulatory approach
 RAD selects the most appropriate option based on
readily available information
 We are in the Initiation Phase of the mandate - significant development
is ahead of us
 Full impact analysis may influence specific provisions
PBN RAD Consultation Workshop – 05 Feb 2013
4
Workshop Objectives
 Discuss the main outcomes of the Formal Consultation
for ENPRM/12-004
 Present and discuss issues
 Based on the discussions, present the most appropriate
basis for the development of the draft Implementing Rule
PBN RAD Consultation Workshop – 05 Feb 2013
5
Agenda
Item
Start
Subject
Actor(s)
1
10h00
Welcome, Introduction and Workshop Objectives
Franca PAVLICEVIC
2
10h15
The Mandate:
- Why is this Mandate required?
- Subjects raised during consultation
Franca PAVLICEVIC
Sasho NESHEVSKI
3
10h30
Results of the consultation on the draft RAD for
PBN:
- Overview
- Comments received and draft responses
- Discussions
Franca PAVLICEVIC
Sasho NESHEVSKI
And all
11h15
Coffee break
-
11h30
Continuation on the results of the consultation
Sasho NESHEVSKI
and all
13h00
Lunch
-
14h00
Continuation on the results of the consultation
Sasho NESHEVSKI
and all
15h30
Coffee break
-
16h00
Closing:
- Summary
- Next steps
Franca PAVLICEVIC
and all
17h00
End of Stakeholder Consultation Workshop
-
4
PBN RAD Consultation Workshop – 05 Feb 2013
6
Agenda Item 2: The Mandate
 Overview
 Why is the PBN Mandate required ?
 Subject raised during consultation
NESHEVSKI Sasho
Mandate Activity Manager
Overview
The PBN Mandate
 Subject
 ’’Mandate to Eurocontrol to assist the European Commission in the
development of an interoperability implementing rule on Performance
Based Navigation (PBN).’’
 Purpose
 Define navigation performance requirements
 Identify the functionalities required in en-route and terminal airspace,
including arrival and departure, and also approach
 Address the implementation of ICAO Resolution A37-11
 Developed in coordination with EASA
PBN RAD Consultation Workshop – 05 Feb 2013
8
Overview
The Mandate development process
Initial plan
30 Jun 2011
Regulatory Approach
March 2013
Draft Final Report
Dec 2013
Final Report
Jun 2014
A-ENPRM
(31 July – 16 Nov 2012)
ENPRM
(Dec - Feb 2014)
EC
ECand
andSSC
SSC
proceedings
proceedings
PBN RAD Consultation Workshop – 05 Feb 2013
9
Overview
Mandate Current Status
 Phase I - Regulatory Approach
 Draft Regulatory Approach Document (RAD) submitted
to formal stakeholder consultation from 31 July 2012 to
16 November 2012
 Review of comments
 Early draft Summary of Responses (SoR) document
PBN RAD Consultation Workshop – 05 Feb 2013
10
Overview
Mandate Phase 1 - Next Steps
 Finalisation of the draft RAD
 Coordination with the Single Sky Committee (SSC)
 Delivery of RAD to the European Commission – March
2013
PBN RAD Consultation Workshop – 05 Feb 2013
11
Overview
Mandate Phase 2 - Implementing Rule
Development
Draft Final Report
 Based on the option selected following the Regulatory
Approach consultation
 Includes:
 Proposed Draft Implementing Rule
 Draft Justification Material
 Detailed impact assessment (safety summary, civil/military
organisation, efficiency and economic aspects)
Draft IR submitted to formal consultation (ENPRM)
PBN RAD Consultation Workshop – 05 Feb 2013
12
Why is a PBN IR required ?
 Harmonisation of navigation performance and
functionalities within EATMN to avoid potential
fragmentation
 Commitment to coordinated and harmonised introduction
of navigation capabilities and deployment of PBN routes
and procedures
 Operational benefits
 Improved flight efficiency
 Increased capacity
 Enabling new concepts of operation
PBN RAD Consultation Workshop – 05 Feb 2013
13
Subjects raised during consultation
(No prioritisation)
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
I.
J.
K.
Global Harmonisation and Consistency
Navigation Performance Requirements and Stakeholder Actions
Implementation Conditions
Means of Compliance
Economic Impact Assessment
Safety Impact Assessment
Civil-Military Coordination
Impact on General Aviation Stakeholders
Reversionary Mode of Operation
Applicability of the SES Legislation to Providers outside EU
Availability of Harmonised High Quality Aeronautical Data
PBN RAD Consultation Workshop – 05 Feb 2013
14
Agenda Item 3: Results of the
consultation
 Overview
 Main comments received / draft responses
 Discussions
PAVLICEVIC Franca
Head of Navigation & CNS
Research Unit
NESHEVSKI Sasho
Mandate Activity Manager
Overview
Stakeholders Groups
Responses Received by Stakeholders
Industry (IND)
8%
International Organisation
(INT)
0%
General Aviation (GA)
4%
Military Authority (MOD)
8%
EUROCONTROL Body
(ECTL)
0%
National Supervisory
Authority (NSA)
11%
Civil Aviation Authority
(CAA)
28%
Other
0%
Airport Operator (AO)
Airspace User (AU)
Civil Aviation Authority (CAA)
EUROCONTROL Body (ECTL)
General Aviation (GA)
Industry (IND)
International Organisation (INT)
Airspace User (AU)
11%
Airport Operator (AO)
2%
Service Provider (ANSP)
28%
Military Authority (MOD)
National Supervisory Authority (NSA)
Other
Service Provider (ANSP)
53 Responses – 320 Individual Comments
PBN RAD Consultation Workshop – 05 Feb 2013
16
Overview
Categories of Responses
Total Received Responses by Category
None
11%
Prefer Option 1
6%
Propose another
alternative
15%
Prefer Option 1
Agree w ith Option 2 as recommended in
the Draft Regulatory Approach
Prefer Option 3
Prefer Option 3
2%
Propose another alternative
None
Agree w ith Option 2 as
recommended in the Draft
Regulatory Approach
66%
PBN RAD Consultation Workshop – 05 Feb 2013
17
Overview
Summary of Responses document
 Comments summarised into ‘Key’ issues in the draft RAD.
 ‘Editorial’ type comments will be reflected in the updated RAD.
 All preferences and comments recorded verbatim in the annexes to
the SOR.
PBN RAD Consultation Workshop – 05 Feb 2013
18
Issue A – Global Harmonisation and Consistency (1)
Comments






Interoperability requirements should be developed in a global perspective.
Global interoperability of each option is not sufficiently addressed.
Traceability and compliance with global standards should be established.
ICAO standards terminology shall be kept.
Emphasise should be put on global coordination on PBN implementation.
Need for coordination with ICAO and FAA.
Responses





Global harmonisation and consistency is required.
Global standards are being defined in RTCA SC-227 / EUROCAE WG-85.
Regulatory drafting will rely on the existing global industry standards as far as
practicable.
The aim of a draft PBN IR  ensure that relevant industry standards are used.
Coordination with ICAO, FAA and EUROCAE will be ensured.
PBN RAD Consultation Workshop – 05 Feb 2013
19
Issue A – Global Harmonisation and Consistency (2)
Comments



Consistency between the SES implementing rules and the EASA implementing rules
need to be established.
Synchronisation between airborne equipage mandate and related certification
material publication shall be effective.
The RAD should present the plans for the EASA publications to enable PBN
operations.
Responses



Need for consistency between the SES interoperability regulation and the EASA
regulatory framework is fully recognised.
Close coordination and cooperation with EASA is maintained during the development
of the implementing rule, necessary PBN implementation guidance material & means
of compliance.
Timely availability of appropriate certification and operational standards should be
ensured.
PBN RAD Consultation Workshop – 05 Feb 2013
20
Issue A – Global Harmonisation and Consistency (3)
Actions


Close coordination with EASA, ICAO, FAA and EUROCAE will continue to be
maintained during the development of the draft IR.
The draft RAD will be revised to further emphasise the importance of global
harmonisation, coordination and consistency and to provide details on how these will
be achieved.
PBN RAD Consultation Workshop – 05 Feb 2013
21
Issue B – Navigation Performance Requirements and
Stakeholder Actions (1)
Comments








Performance requirements and functionalities not clearly specified.
Need for more details and precision in the description of the foreseen stakeholder
actions.
Targeting should be applied when defining the requirements.
Concept of operations not fully defined (e.g. RTA, FRT & TPO).
Clear guidance, specific required functionality, and approval processes should be
available for identified equipment standards.
Need for clarification on the identified navigation performance requirements and
functionalities, and their use in the various phases of flight.
Need for clarification on availability of regulatory material for aircraft certification and
operational approval.
Recommendation to adapt requirements proportionally to the appropriate capabilities
of aircraft for which limitations exist (i.e. GA aircraft).
PBN RAD Consultation Workshop – 05 Feb 2013
22
Issue B – Navigation Performance Requirements and
Stakeholder Actions (2)
Comments



Need for synchronisation of actions of all stakeholders involved.
Not enough obligations foreseen for the ANSPs and need for clearly defined
obligations in the IR.
Option 3 not a real option; poorly specified.
Responses




ICAO PBN Manual - including the Advanced RNP specification - provides detailed
descriptions of the identified navigation performance requirements and functionalities.
All stakeholders requirements will be clearly defined in the IR.
Concepts of operation for some functions need further redevelopment. Availability of
regulatory material for aircraft certification and operational approval needs to be
ensured.
Further analysis and assessment required for a number of technical issues.
PBN RAD Consultation Workshop – 05 Feb 2013
23
Issue B – Navigation Performance Requirements and
Stakeholder Actions (3)
Responses






All potential stakeholder actions identified in the RAD will be further developed and
complemented as necessary before being translated into obligations in the draft IR.
Option 3 is aimed at enabling the introduction of the SESAR target concept - Steps 1
through 3.
RTA functionality is required to be considered by EC Mandate and ICB
recommendation.
Foreseen navigation specification is Advanced RNP.
Foreseen industry standard is EUROCAE ED-75B/RTCA DO-236B (work is currently
ongoing on revision/update).
Unlikely that ANSPs will be able to put in place all necessary facilities to take
advantage of some of the Option 3 functionalities by 2025.
PBN RAD Consultation Workshop – 05 Feb 2013
24
Issue B – Navigation Performance Requirements and
Stakeholder Actions (4)
Actions





Necessary clarifications will be provided and the description of the foreseen
requirements will be revised.
The Advanced RNP specification will be made available to stakeholders as reference.
The limitations for some categories of aircraft are recognised and the requirements
will be adapted proportionally to the appropriate capabilities of those aircraft.
Synchronisation of stakeholder actions is one of the main goals of the IR and will be
pursued during the development of the draft IR.
Further analysis will be undertaken during the drafting of the IR and the extended
regulatory impact assessment in order to address a number of technical issues.
PBN RAD Consultation Workshop – 05 Feb 2013
25
Issue C – Implementation Conditions
1. Implementation Timescales for Airborne Equipage and
Deployment of ATS Routes and Procedures
Comments



Preference for delayed implementation timescales by 4 to 5 years, e.g. to the
beginning of 2025.
Commercial airspace users  deployment of PBN ATS routes, procedures &
associated tools and systems to take place 2 years before retrofit.
Deployment of RNP approaches should be done by 2016, in conformity with ICAO
resolution A37-11.
Responses


Sufficient time needs to be allowed to stakeholders to achieve compliance 
Amended Option 2.
A 2016 target date for deployment of RNP approaches is not achievable for all
instrument runway ends in Europe.
Action

Implementation timescales will be subject to further analysis and consideration during
the drafting of the IR and the extended regulatory impact assessment.
PBN RAD Consultation Workshop – 05 Feb 2013
26
Issue C – Implementation Conditions
2. Airspace of Applicability
Comment

Explain the meaning of the statement that "The draft IR may apply to more limited
areas of airspace in the case of a phased deployment" and to indicate which areas of
airspace were envisaged in this context.
Response


Statement reflects the principle of targeting of the requirements.
Although the IR will be effective in all states where EU law is applicable, some
requirements can be limited in their applicability  further analysis, EIA.
Action

Implementation timescales, applicability criteria for aircraft equipage and airspace of
applicability will be subject to further analysis and consideration during the drafting of
the IR and the extended regulatory impact assessment.
PBN RAD Consultation Workshop – 05 Feb 2013
27
Issue C – Implementation Conditions
3. Applicability Criteria for Aircraft Equipage
Comment


Based on the applicability criteria for airborne equipage various levels of equipage
could be achieved (e.g. 70%, 80%, 90%).
ANSPs  90%.
Airspace users  Best Equipped Best Served (BEBS) concept to be implemented
IATA and AEA  Alternative proposal (different criteria for aircraft equipage).
EUROCONTROL to specifically define the applicability to helicopters in the draft IR
and invite comments from the aviation community.
Response



Further work is required to detail the way the BEBS concept can be implemented in
the EATMN.
Targeting of requirements on the basis of detailed fleet analysis is seen as a means
to facilitate the introduction of changes and to achieve the required benefits.
It is intended that the IR will not be applicable to helicopters.
Action

The applicability criteria for aircraft equipage will be subject to further analysis and
consideration during the drafting of the IR and the extended regulatory impact
assessment.
PBN RAD Consultation Workshop – 05 Feb 2013
28
Issue C – Implementation Conditions
4. Airborne Exemption Policy Principles
Comment



Mandate exemption processes to be clearly defined.
GA stakeholders  for some models produced after 2000 (including models still in
production), the requirement for the retrofit of certain capabilities, such as "Advanced
RNP (1 NM TSE)", may be impractical.
Regulatory options should include the requirement for a marginal level of exemptions
to the full implementation of the whole set of functionalities required.
Response


Exemptions need to be as limited as possible.
Exemptions only to be granted where they have a minor effect on the volume of
flights by equipped aircraft and where the effect can be expected to reduce over time.
Action

The airborne exemption policy will be further addressed during the drafting of the IR
and the necessary clarity will be provided.
PBN RAD Consultation Workshop – 05 Feb 2013
29
Issue D – Means of Compliance (1)
Comments







The existence of relevant EASA and FAA compliance material should be the driver
for determining the implementation dates.
Carriage of new avionics must only become mandatory after EASA has implemented
a streamlined process for
 a) Approval / documentation / certification of all new onboard navigation
equipment required for PBN (e.g. FAA approvals to be valid in EASA member
states)
 b) Training requirements for pilots
 c) Administrative / Organisational / maintenance cost burden for the aircraft
operator.
Advanced RNP navigation specification, should be the one reflected in the EASA CSACNS and AMC material.
PBN IR should not specify new requirements, but facilitate application of existing
modern aircraft capability by formalising a functional and performance framework.
SES rules should establish which PBN type of operation would be deployed in which
airspace volumes and by when.
EASA rules should establish the "how”.
Synchronisation between airborne equipage mandate and related certification
material publication should be ensured.
PBN RAD Consultation Workshop – 05 Feb 2013
30
Issue D – Means of Compliance (2)
Response




EASA’s intent is to ensure that the certification and approval material will be available
within a timely manner before the effective date of the IR, in accordance with their
Rulemaking Programme.
EASA’s intent is to transpose all of the navigation specification published in the PBN
Manual into appropriate certification and operational approval standards to enable
global PBN application.
Due account should be taken to minimise the impact on OEM and operators with
respect to existing approvals in the draft IR requirements and the EASA airworthiness
and operational standards.
Consistency between the SES interoperability regulation and the EASA regulatory
framework is fully recognised and timely availability of the appropriate certification
and operational standards should be achieved.
Action

The draft RAD will be revised according to the above the comments.
PBN RAD Consultation Workshop – 05 Feb 2013
31
Issue E – Economic Impact Assessment (1)
Comments






ANSP  the assumption that aircraft older than 20 years in 2020 would be exempted
led to a projection of 20% non-equipage which would cause the service provider
significant problems for airspace design and mixed operations.
Airspace users  aircraft exemption age of 17-15 years to be able to use
investments for 8 -10 years. BEBS concept was suggested to enable airspace users
to decide on the need and time of retrofit, based on their own business case.
GA stakeholders  PEIA ignored the potential disbenefit of access to airspace being
heavily reduced as a result of a PBN IR. Economic value of the operations under a
variety of business models currently in operation should be taken into account for the
impact assessment.
All costs should be taken into account in the assessment.
Need for a more detailed assessment of the costs and benefits, including
confirmation of the assumptions applied.
Need for a presentation of a detailed breakdown of the estimated impact on the fleet
per stakeholder group.
PBN RAD Consultation Workshop – 05 Feb 2013
32
Issue E – Economic Impact Assessment (2)
Comments




A financial incentive scheme could be useful for all stakeholder groups.
A review should be made of GA fleet and cost data, as well as GA equipage levels,
capabilities and associated assumptions, and that additional detail be provided as
part of the draft IR consultation.
It is doubtful that PBN IR could make a positive contribution to the achievement of all
of the SES high-level objectives and network performance targets. Lack of hard data
prevents from convincing airspace users to invest in airborne avionics at this moment
in time. CBA should provide compelling argument to prove otherwise.
Cost saving expected from the optimisation of the NAVAID infrastructure has not
been factored into the CBA. However, the importance of these benefits should not be
underestimated, therefore text should be added to indicate that implementers should
not dismiss NAVAID rationalisation as being of no consequence.
PBN RAD Consultation Workshop – 05 Feb 2013
33
Issue E – Economic Impact Assessment (3)
Response





A balance is to be obtained between the requirements of the ANSPs and those of the
aircraft operators.
Procedures could be developed and implemented for a transition period during which
a gradual increase of the proportion of equipped flights from a level of about 75-80%
to a level of 90% could take place.
PBN IR should not result in some parts of the GA fleet being priced out of the market.
Nor to block access to airspace to any category of airspace users. If evidence is
available to show that this would be the effect, remedial measures could be
proposed.
An estimate of all costs should be included in the assessment.
If benefits can be allocated to user groups on the basis of the proportion of flight
hours, then commercial airlines would experience a large positive Net Present value
(NPV), regional airlines would experience a small positive NPV, whilst GA would
suffer a small net loss. The NPV values can be included in a revised annex.
PBN RAD Consultation Workshop – 05 Feb 2013
34
Issue E – Economic Impact Assessment (4)
Response




Financial incentives are presented as a possibility. At this stage, no decision has
been made to implement incentives to support the IR.
Because the IR will represent a legal requirement, financial incentives are not offered
as an incentive to comply with the IR but to go beyond its scope.
Financial incentives are seen as being appropriate to commercial organisations but
not to state owned bodies.
The need to review the GA fleet and cost data, equipage levels, capabilities and
associated assumptions, is recognised. Additional details will be provided as part of
the draft IR consultation.
PBN RAD Consultation Workshop – 05 Feb 2013
35
Issue E – Economic Impact Assessment (5)
Response





Performance-based navigation is one of the key enablers to improve the performance
of the EATMN, along with other enablers. PBN has the potential to enable benefits
most notably in the areas of flight efficiency, capacity and safety.
The draft RAD provides an indication of the improvements that can be enabled by the
IR.
Evidence should be provided to back up assertions.
It is normal for the assessment of a new technology to be supported by tests and
simulations and the PBN assessment has made best use of what information is
available.
NAVAID infrastructure rationalisation should be encouraged in whatever way
possible.
Action



Detailed assessment of the costs and benefits, including as far as possible
confirmation of the assumptions applied will be undertaken during the extended
economic impact assessment.
Additional cost and benefit information will be sought in order to further detail the
assessment.
The corresponding sections of the draft RAD will be reviewed and revised.
PBN RAD Consultation Workshop – 05 Feb 2013
36
Issue F – Safety Impact Assessment (1)
Comments






The detailed technical requirements should be expressed as acceptable means of
compliance.
Safety requirements resulting from the end-to-end safety assessment should be
covered by the EASA rules at CS level and only high level security requirements
should be put at the level of the draft IR.
More detailed requirements should be identified at the level of the CS (Certification
Specification or Community specification).
Safety assessment should be validated by EASA and the issues and/or assumptions
identified during the safety assessment for each of the proposed options should be
related with the necessary EASA regulatory material.
Assessment should be made to determine whether a generic ANS-wide GNSS safety
assessment is needed to be performed at a European level. Such an activity would
have to be led by EUROCONTROL.
Text should be amended to improve precision and readability.
PBN RAD Consultation Workshop – 05 Feb 2013
37
Issue F – Safety Impact Assessment (2)
Response



Safety requirements will be properly allocated within the available applicable
regulatory frameworks. Full consistency and harmonisation will be ensured.
Validation by EASA is part of the process. Full consistency with EASA regulatory
material will be ensured.
The potential need for a generic ANS-wide GNSS safety assessment to be performed
at European level will be subject to assessment during the drafting of the IR and the
extended impact assessment.
Action

The corresponding sections of the draft RAD will be reviewed and revised. The
extended safety impact assessment will further address the specific relevant points
raised in the comments.
PBN RAD Consultation Workshop – 05 Feb 2013
38
Issue G – Civil-Military Coordination (1)
Comments





Clarification was sought on the applicability of SES legislation to military stakeholders
as well as on the categories of aircraft that would potentially be affected by the IR.
Need for transition arrangements related to both aircraft equipage to take account of
the procurement and technical constraints incurred by military organisations when
confronted with new ATM.
Need for accommodation of non-equipped flights by State aircraft by ATSPs.
Exemptions should only be granted for fighter aircraft, not for transport type state
aircraft.
No indication of military costs was given (not even a baseline cost).
PBN RAD Consultation Workshop – 05 Feb 2013
39
Issue G – Civil-Military Coordination (2)
Response






Civil-military aspects are proposed to be covered in the draft IR because civil-military
coordination is an essential requirement of SES, recognised in the Interoperability
Regulation and in line with the declaration of member States on military matters
included in the framework regulation.
For new production transport type state aircraft, forward fit actions are expected to be
implemented by the military, in consequence of PBN regulatory provisions.
Forward fit must comprise not only new aircraft but also aircraft scheduled for major
mid life upgrades. For other aircraft, compliance could be achieved on the basis of
performance equivalence.
ATSPs will be requested to accommodate non equipped traffic as needed to enable
unrestricted airspace access.
Exemptions are envisaged to be granted to transport type state aircraft only when out
of service date is very close to the implementation date.
Applicability dates for transport type state aircraft could be later than those for civil
aircraft.
PBN RAD Consultation Workshop – 05 Feb 2013
40
Issue G – Civil-Military Coordination (3)
Response

It is proposed to exempt military aircraft from retrofit requirements. For the purposes
of the impact assessment, it is assumed that in the baseline case (no PBN IR) aircraft
operators, including the military, would still equip new aircraft with suitable PBN
avionics. Therefore the implementation of the IR would impose no incremental costs
on the military. Military equipage will thus be on a voluntary basis and not as a
consequence of the IR.
Action

The corresponding sections of the draft RAD will be reviewed and revised
accordingly. The extended impact assessment will further address the specific
relevant points raised in the comments.
PBN RAD Consultation Workshop – 05 Feb 2013
41
Issue H – Impact on General Aviation Stakeholders (1)
Comments









There is likely to be a lack of suitable equipment to meet the RNP1 requirements and
all foreseen functionalities.
There would be, huge and unfeasible cost barriers.
There are large number of IFR aircraft with many different avionics fitments.
Text should be added to clarify that availability of solutions may be an issue for
GA/AW due to certain segments of the market not yet being served with appropriate
equipment.
The maturity and availability of the airborne functionalities were overstated.
Specific applicability of requirements to the GA fleet, in line with the characteristics
and capabilities of this population of aircraft is recommended.
In the PEIA, cost of development, installation and certification of the proposed Option
2 functionalities were underestimated.
Annex E analysis was unclear as to the types of aircraft considered as
"business/turboprop" and those considered as “general aviation”.
EUROCONTROL should revise the PEIA to clarify the aircraft classifications and
update the costs associated with complying with the proposed Option 2
functionalities.
PBN RAD Consultation Workshop – 05 Feb 2013
42
Issue H – Impact on General Aviation Stakeholders (2)
Response




Availability of solutions for GA/AW is an issue.
The applicability criteria for aircraft equipage will be further detailed to determine to
which classes of aircraft the IR will apply.
The types of aircraft included within the categories can be made available
EUROCONTROL welcomes the opportunity to work with avionics manufacturers to
improve the cost estimates.
It is intended that proportionality be applied when setting requirements on GA
operators consistent with the capabilities compliant with E/TSO-C146 requirements.
Action


The draft RAD will be amended accordingly to reflect the points that were raised.
Consideration will be given to the possibility to excluding GA aircraft from
requirements outside of the approach phase of flight. A detailed description of
requirements and breakdown of impact on GA will be provided taking into account the
recommendations given.
PBN RAD Consultation Workshop – 05 Feb 2013
43
Issue I – Reversionary Mode of Operations
Comments




It should be within the scope of the PBN IR to regulate the reversionary navigation
means in case of GNSS outages - both scheduled and unscheduled.
In the case of loss of the GNSS Signal in Space, ATC contingency procedures shall
be established in a harmonised manner by the ANSPs.
Implementation of same procedures across the EATMN is of utmost importance.
Consider the use of RNAV 1 as the reversionary mode to RNP 1.
Response


Further analysis of the possible contingency procedures needs to be undertaken, with
a view to harmonise as much as possible the requirements for reversionary mode of
operations in case of GNSS outage.
Guidance material would be needed in order to ensure that the contingency
procedures are consistently applied across the EATMN to enable seamless operation
to the maximum extent possible.
Action

Assessment of the possible application of the RNAV 1 specification as reversionary
mode of operation to A-RNP/RNP1 will be made during the development of the draft
IR and the extended regulatory impact assessment. Other possibilities will also be
examined.
PBN RAD Consultation Workshop – 05 Feb 2013
44
Issue J – Applicability of the SES Legislation to Providers
outside EU
Comments


The draft RAD does not address the issue of the applicability of SES regulations
provisions to the GPSSPS. This point was considered to be of utmost importance for
NSAs as, according to the ICAO GNSS Manual, States shall approve GNSS.
Clarification is deemed necessary with regard to the extent that the SES regulations
apply to GPS and the required steps a State should follow in order to approve
operations based on GNSS.
Response


The point of the applicability of SES to GPS/GNSS is under consideration at present.
The matter was discussed with the SSC in 2010 and is likely to be discussed further
in early 2013.
EUROCONTROL is discussing with the EC and EASA how to introduce a waiver in
the applicability of the SES to GNSS core-constellations. A paper addressing this
subject could be presented to SSC in 2013.
Action

The matter should be clarified before PBN enters into force, i.e. before 2015.
PBN RAD Consultation Workshop – 05 Feb 2013
45
Issue K – Availability of Harmonised High Quality
Aeronautical Data
Comments




The non-availability of high quality aeronautical data in support of PBN was not
mentioned in the draft RAD.
High quality digital data is critical to the implementation of PBN and that this crucial
dependency must be pointed out.
Appropriate information assurance and in particular information security policies
would need to be applied to ensure safe information exchanges.
As onboard navigation databases would rely heavily on digital aeronautical
information, this dependency should be expressed in the draft RAD.
Response

Availability of harmonised high quality aeronautical data and information and its
secure exchange is of paramount importance for the implementation of PBN.
Action


The draft RAD will be amended accordingly.
This subject will be considered and analysed during the extended impact
assessments and will be captured at least in the justification material attached to the
draft IR.
PBN RAD Consultation Workshop – 05 Feb 2013
46
Amended Option 2
Date of
applicability of
PHASE OF FLIGHT
certification
and
En-Route
Terminal
operational
approval for
Aircraft
aircraft and
implementatio
Service Provision
Aircraft
Service Provision
n for Service Above FL195 Below FL195
Provider
Approach
Aircraft
RNP APCH
(APV where
appropriate
subject to
operational
needs but LNAV
as a minimum)
By end
2018
RNP1
Provide RNP SIDs
APV
+
and STARs
(either Baro
RF leg
Use of altitude
or SBAS)
+
constraints
RNAV Holding Optimise TMA flows
to provide:
 Capacity
 Efficiency
 Access
 CCO/CDAs based
on positive CBA
By end
2020
A-RNP
+
FRT
By end
2023
Service
Provision
RNP1
+
RNAV
Holding
Airspace designed
to optimise flight
efficiency.
 Free routes
airspace enabling
user preferred
trajectories.
 High density
airspace redesigned for
closer space
routes and route
conformance
monitoring tools
implemented to
manage traffic
 Use of altitude
constraints
PBN RAD Consultation Workshop – 05 Feb 2013
47
Agenda Item 4: Closing
 Summary
 Next Steps
PAVLICEVIC Franca
Head of Navigation & CNS
Research Unit
Summary
bl
a
r
e
el i v
SSC informed
D
European
Commission
e
Formal
Stakeholder
Consultation
RAD
Comments
Early SoR
Stakeholder
Workshop
Upd
Updated SoR
ate
PBN RAD Consultation Workshop – 05 Feb 2013
49