1. Safety Regulation of PBN Operations
Filippo Tomasello
Rulemaking officer
25 May 2011

2. “Specific” approval is not the “normal” solution
Instrument Rated (IR) pilots normally authorized (by law):
FCL.605 IR – Privileges
ref. EASA Opinion 04/2010; 27 Aug 2010:
(a) fly aircraft in IFR with minimum DH of 200 ft
(b) In case of multi-engine IR, even lower when the applicant has undergone specific training
(c) ….
Rule FCL.605 (and all other EASA rules for FCL) is expected to be adopted by the European Commission during 2011
… but national rules in the EU, based on JAR-FCL are similar
Underlying assumptions: operations well established in the community; suitable training programmes for IR; airworthiness certification; safe radio-navigation signal; etc….
25 May 2011
ICAO EUR – PBN Workshop

3. 8 requirements behind privileges
Aircraft (and avionics) has airworthiness approval covering the envisaged IFR operations
OPS of not challenging complexity
Concept/systems “mature” (= operationally used since a sufficient number of years = not “new”)
Associated risk is tolerable, including
Accuracy, integrity, availability and continuity of radio-navigation signals
Safety oversight of procedure designers
Accuracy and integrity of NAV data base
8. Suitable training standards and (periodic) checking procedures for pilots established
25 May 2011
ICAO EUR – PBN Workshop

4. MNPS operations were “new” in 1977
FAA AC (23 Aug 1977)
d. Lateral separation in NAT-MNPS airspace is reduced (1978) from 120 NM to 60 NM = more complexity
e. decided by ICAO that all operators desiring to use MNPS must show that equipment and procedures are capable of continuously complying with specifications
U.S. operators to FAA (= to competent authority)
Operators who have long-range navigation equipment installed (and certified) may be issued Letters of Authorization to operate in NAT-MNPS airspace
The 8 requirements were not satisfied
Specific Approval (SPA)
25 May 2011
ICAO EUR – PBN Workshop

5. Authorization, Approval or SPA?
Is the semantics sufficiently standardised?
No definitions in Annex 6 for authorization, acceptance, approval or specific approval
a “normal” case seems to exist:
Par of Part II (Intl GA) .. aeroplanes in IFR shall comply with instrument approach procedures approved by the State
“specific” is used in particular cases:
Par of Part II to … fly below aerodrome minima
25 May 2011
ICAO EUR – PBN Workshop

6. General authorization through rules
Par Annex 6 Part II
An aeroplane shall be operated:
In compliance with the terms of its airworthiness certificate or equivalent
Within the operating limitations prescribed by the certifying authority of the State of Registry
…. And of course by a pilot enjoying sufficient privileges
Par Annex 6 Part II
All turbine-engined …authorised to carry more than nine passengers….
No SPA known for No of pax
The word “authorization” in Annex 6 does NOT necessarily mean SPA
25 May 2011
ICAO EUR – PBN Workshop

7. Is “approval” always “specific”?
Par. 3, Attach 3.B to Annex 6 Part II
The State should indicate through approval of a Minimum Equipment List (MEL) ….
Is the approval of the MEL “specific”?
25 May 2011
ICAO EUR – PBN Workshop

8. States have several choices
Authorization for PBN
Par Annex 6 Part II
For PBN operations, in addition:
Equipment compliant with the PBN specification
Authorized by State of Registry
Authorization can be issued:
Through general rules
Through OPS spec attached to AOC for CAT operators (of course not for G.A.)
As privilege to IR pilots (when all the other requirements are fulfilled), including for aerial work and general aviation
Through a Specific Approval (e.g. letter of authorisation)
…..etc.
States have several choices
25 May 2011
ICAO EUR – PBN Workshop

9. Many possibilities for approvals/oversight
General rules in EU OPS
Regulation 859/2008 (applies only to operators of CAT by aeroplanes):
1.175 General for air operator certification
(c) 3. satisfy Authority that can conduct safe operations
(g) 2. procedures for the supervision of operations
(l) ensure that every flight is conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Operations Manual
(n) ensure that aeroplanes are equipped and crews are qualified for the area and type of operation
(o) comply with the maintenance requirements
Many possibilities for approvals/oversight
25 May 2011
ICAO EUR – PBN Workshop

10. Normal authorization or special approval are almost the same x CAT?
Appendix 1 to EU OPS 1.175
Contents of the Air Operator Certificate:
(c) Description of the type of operations authorised
(f) Authorised areas of operation
(g) Special limitations
(h) Special authorisations/approvals e.g.:
CAT II/CAT III (including approved minima)
(MNPS) Minimum navigation performance specifications
(ETOPS) Extended range operation twin engined aeroplanes
(RNAV) Area navigation
(RVSM) Reduced vertical separation minima
Transportation of dangerous goods
Authorisation to provide cabin crew safety training
Normal authorization or special approval are almost the same x CAT?
25 May 2011
ICAO EUR – PBN Workshop

11. Possible non-uniformity
PBN in EU OPS 1.243
Operation in areas with specified navigation performance requirements
(a) Operator shall ensure that an aeroplane operated where navigation performance requirements have been specified, is certified according to these requirements, and
if required, that the Authority has granted the relevant operational approval
(b) Operator shall ensure that all contingency procedures, specified by the authority, have been included in the Operations Manual
Possible non-uniformity
25 May 2011
ICAO EUR – PBN Workshop

12. Much larger scope than EU OPS (= JAR OPS 1)
EASA OPS Rules
Apply to:
CAT (by aeroplane or helicopter)
SPO (= aerial work)
NCC = Non-Commercial Operators of “Complex” aircraft (e.g. business or corporate aviation)
NCO= Non-Commercial Operators of “non-complex” aircraft (e.g. light and sport private aviation)
NPA b proposed SPA (of unlimited validity) for certain types of operations, including:
PBN
B-RNAV (RNAV 5)
Much larger scope than EU OPS (= JAR OPS 1)
25 May 2011
ICAO EUR – PBN Workshop

13. NPA 2009-02b (January 2009) Uniform common rules
OPS.SPA.001.SPN Operations in areas with specified performance based navigation (SPN)
(a), (b) only if the operator has been approved by the competent authority
(c) To obtain approval operator shall:
(1) demonstrate navigation equipment functionality …
(2) training programme for the flight crew
(3) establish operating procedures specifying:
(i) equipment to be carried, including MEL
(ii) crew composition and experience
(iii), (iv) normal and contingency procedures
(v) incident reporting
(vi) specific regional procedures, in case of MNPS
(vii) navigation database integrity, in case of PBN
Uniform common rules
25 May 2011
ICAO EUR – PBN Workshop

14. CRD 2009-02b.4 (November 2010) Part SPA SPA.PBN.100 PBN operations
Aircraft shall only be operated where performance-based navigation (PBN) is established, if the operator has been granted an approval by the competent authority
No specific approval is required for RNAV5 (basic area navigation, B-RNAV)
Opinion to be delivered during 2011
Adoption expected in 2012
25 May 2011
ICAO EUR – PBN Workshop

15. SPA for PBN in EASA OPS (CRD)
Operation
AMC
Specific Op. Approval
CAT
SPO
NCC
NCO
RNAV 10
20-12 Y
RNAV 5 (B)
20-4 No
RNAV 2 //
RNAV 1 (P)
20-16
RNP 4
Basic RNP 1
20-XX
APCH/LNAV
20-27
APCH/L/VNAV
APCH/LPV
20-28
RNP AR
20-26
25 May 2011
ICAO EUR – PBN Workshop

16. Data providers contracted
ICAO SARPs
Regional/National safety rules
National competent authority
Safety
oversight
Safety
oversight
Air Operator
Air Operator
Safety
oversight
Safety
oversight
Contracted NAV Data Provider
25 May 2011
ICAO EUR – PBN Workshop

17. Evolution RNP APCH in Europe (excluding AR)
Requirement
Year No
Topic
2009
2011
2013 1
Airworthiness
No AMC
AMC 20-27
+AMC 20-28 2
Complexity
No more complex than ILS Cat I 3
Maturity
PBN not explicit in EU OPS
PBN in draft EASA SPA
EASA OPS in force 4
Risks
RNP also includes on board monitoring 5
GNSS Signal in Space
No clear legal responsibilities
EGNOS SSP certified
EASA oversight 6
Procedure designers
No common EU provisions
Art 2.2(c)(ii) Reg. 73/2010 7
Data bases
Responsibility of operator
EASA rules 8
Competence of pilots
EASA FCL amended + OSD
25 May 2011
ICAO EUR – PBN Workshop

18. The will of the EU legislator
Whereas:
In its Communication of 15 November 2005 entitled “Extending the tasks of the European Aviation Safety Agency – an agenda for 2010”, the Commission announced its intention to progressively extend the tasks of the European Aviation Safety Agency ("the Agency"), with a view towards a "total system approach", to aerodrome/airport safety and interoperability, Air Navigation Services ("ANS") and Air Traffic Management ("ATM")
Recital 1 EASA BR
25 May 2011
ICAO EUR – PBN Workshop

19. Certification of avionics not sufficient
Segment
Constituents/Elements
Responsibility of
Airspace
Classification and borders of airspace volumes
State aviation authority
ATS routes (including instrument procedures)
Airspace designers**
Published AIS
AIS Providers*
Airborne
Navigation Data
Data providers**
Integrated Nav. (avionics)
Manufacturers & Air Operators
Navigation receiver(s)
Space
Nav. Signal in Space (SIS)
NAV SP*
Ground
Ground segment
Information to ATCOs
ATS provider*
Airport Lights
Aerodrome operators**
25 May 2011
ICAO EUR – PBN Workshop

20. Navigation Service in SES
Regulations 549 and 550/2004
Facilities and services that provide aircraft with positioning and timing (Art. 2.30; 549)
GNSS clearly fells into this definition
NAV providers (= NSP) can be individually certified (Art. 7.3; 550)
No identical requirement exist for other transport modes
EGNOS initiated before (…. unfortunately!!!!)
Planning for certification of Galileo NSP should initiate as soon as possible
…. EASA available to advise
25 May 2011
ICAO EUR – PBN Workshop

21. Certified NAV data providers
ICAO SARPs
Regional/National safety rules
Regional/National competent authority
Safety
over
sight
Safety
over
sight
Safety
over
sight
SATNAV SP
Certified Data Provider
Air Operator
25 May 2011
ICAO EUR – PBN Workshop

22. Operational Suitability Data (OSD)
GNSS has changed NAV
NAV has a tradition for “specific approval” (SPA)
SPA has unlimited validity
Even COM is evolving (e.g. data link)
But for COM no SPA is required
OSD allows to define (and mandate) specific training requirements:
Whenever there is a relevant change
“key elements” under responsibility of the (S)TC holder
Implementation of said requirements is checked through regular oversight of pilots/operators
Rules for OSD in force in 2012
25 May 2011
ICAO EUR – PBN Workshop

23. Conclusion
All aviation operations require approval/authorization (“normal” or “specific”)
For CAT operators several ways (AOC, OPS Spec, Manual, etc…)
For G.A. the easiest way is through pilot’s privileges
When the 8 safety requirements … …. are not satisfied SPA
Opinion for EASA OPS will follow CRD (= only BRNAV exempted from SPA)
…but EASA is drafting Pre-RIA for new task MDM.062 in order to replace the SPA for some PBN OPS (e.g. straight in RNP APCH)
OSD is an emerging concept, possibly safer than SPA
25 May 2011
ICAO EUR – PBN Workshop

24. Thanks for the attention
Questions?