1. Association of California Airports Instrument Flight Procedures
September 13, 2017

2. Introduction Instrument navigation
Departures
Arrivals
United States Standards for Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS)
Approaches
New Procedures
FAA Instrument Flight Procedures Gateway
Modification of Procedures
Construction

3. Instrument navigation
Association of California Airports
Instrument navigation

4. Instrument Navigation
Types of Navigation
Ground based
ILS, LOC, MLS, VOR, DME, TACAN (Military), ASR, NDB
RNAV – DME/DME/IRU
Space based
RNAV Lateral Navigation (LNAV)
Uses FMS and un-augmented GPS for navigation (no vertical information)
RNAV Lateral Navigation/Vertical Navigation (LNAV/VNAV)
Uses FMS and un-augmented GPS for lateral navigation and Barometric sensing for vertical navigation
RNAV Localizer Performance Vertical (LPV)
Uses the WAAS GPS signal for lateral and vertical navigation
RNAV Localizer Performance (LP)
Uses the WAAS GPS signal for lateral navigation
RNAV Required Navigational Performance (RNP)
Uses certified FMS with actual navigation reporting and un-augmented GPS for lateral navigation and barometric sensing for vertical navigation
RNAV Ground Based Augmentation System (GBAS)
Uses a locally corrected GPS signal for final approach.

5. Phases of Flight Source: Federal Aviation Administration
Prepared by: Ricondo & Associates Inc.

6. Types of Procedures to Consider for Airports
Departures
Ground Based
VOR, DME, LOC, TACAN (Military), NDB, RNAV (DME/DME/IRU)
Space Based
RNAV (GPS), RNAV/RNP
Approaches
ILS, LOC, MLS, VOR, DME, TACAN (Military), ASR, NDB
RNAV (GPS) LNAV, LNAV/VNAV, LPV, LP, RNP, GBAS

7. TERPS Obstacle clearance surfaces for Airports
Association of California Airports
TERPS Obstacle clearance surfaces for Airports

8. Departure Obstacle Clearance Surface
Based on 200’/NM Climb Gradient
Obstacle clearance is 40:1 from ICA to en route altitude

9. TERPS Departure Surface - Initial Climb Area
Current Criteria
Typical path of aircraft with
35’ threshold crossing height
400’
96.2’
Path of aircraft with minimum required climb gradient of 200’/NM
Obstacle Clearance Surface 40:1.
Required
Crossing
Height 35’
3.15’
303.80’
35’
10’ 27
1.24 NM 1’
7,512.36’
Runway
Elevation = 0’
40’
400’
2 NM
Notes:
Not to scale. For illustration purposes only
Based on FAA Order B
Prepared by Ricondo & Associates, Inc.
12,152.23’

10. SIAP Approach Types and Minimums
Categories of Approaches
Precision Approaches (PA) and Approach Procedures with Vertical (APV) – Lateral and Vertical Guidance1
ILS1 , LPV2 , GBAS/LAAS1 ,MLS1 , LNAV/VNAV3, RNP3
Non-Precision – Lateral Guidance Only
LOC, RNAV, LNAV, LP, NDB, ASR, VOR, DME, TACAN
Notes:
1 - Approach types consistent with FAR Part 77 precision approach category
2 - Approaches can be categorized as either FAR Part 77 precision or non precision category depending on minimums.
3 - Approaches have vertical guidance but non-precision minimums. They fall within the FAR Part 77 non-precision approach category.

11. SIAP Approach Types and Minimums
Minima Types
Straight in
Aligned with runway
Offset
+/- 3° for ILS, MLS, LPV /- 15° LDA with glide slope +/-15° for LNAV/VNAV
+/- 30° for RNAV LNAV, VOR/DME
Circling
To other runway ends
When obstacles exist precluding a standard descent
Notes:
1 - Approach types consistent with FAR Part 77 precision approach category
2 - Approaches can be categorized as either FAR Part 77 precision or non precision category depending on minimums.
3 - Approaches have vertical guidance but non-precision minimums. They fall within the FAR Part 77 non-precision approach category.

12. SIAP Approach Types and Minimums
Minimums Calculation
Precision Approach
Based on sloping final surface
APV
Based on combination of a flat and sloping surface for RNP
Based on combination of a flat and sloping surface for LNAV/VNAV
Non Precision Approach
Based on highest obstacle in final +250’ for LNAV, LP, VOR, TACAN
Lowest Approach Minimum by Categories
CAT I Precision - 200’ HAT and ½ mile visibility or RVR of 1800
Non-Precision - 250’ HAT and ½ mile visibility or RVR of 2400
CAT II – 100’ HAT and ¼ mile visibility or RVR of 1600
CAT IIIa - 50’ HAT and RVR of 700’
Cat IIIb -0’ – 50’ HAT and RVR > 600’
Cat IIIc - 0’ HAT and 0’ RVR (Not currently Used)

13. SIAP – Flight Segments Feeder Initial Intermediate Final Approach
Missed Approach
Holding

14. TERPS Basics – Approach Flight Segments
Obstacle Clearance
Segment
Obstacle Clearance
Feeder
1,000 feet
2,000 feet, mountainous
Initial
Intermediate
500 feet
Final – Precision
Clear of Obstacle Clearance Surface (OCS). Slope is 34:1 for 3° glide path angle.
Final – Non-Precision
250 feet, 300 feet, 350 feet
Final – RNP
250 feet in DVEB and
Clear of OCS.
Final LNAV/VNAV
Clear of OCS slope based on barometric calculation.
Missed Approach
Clear 40:1
Holding

15. Final Approach Obstacle Clearance Surface (OCS) – Plan View

16. Final Approach Obstacle Clearance Surface (OCS) – Profile View
2,796.72’
2,439.58’
Y Surface 7:1
X Surface 4:1
1,470.58’
W Surface 34:1
117.85’
75’ 0’
50,200 Feet
W Surface Start = Rwy End Elevation
X Surface Start = Rwy End Elevation Rising to 75’ at 4:1
Y Surface Start = 75’ Rising to ’ at 7:1
W Surface at 50,000’ = 1,470.58’
X Surface at 50,000’ = 1,470.58’ Rising to 2,439.58’ at 4:1
Y Surface at 50,000’ = 2,439.58’ Rising to 2, at 7:1

17. Final Approach Obstacle Clearance Surface (OCS)

18. TERPS Precision Final Approach Area
MDA 250’ Above Highest Obstacle
Intermediate
Approach
500’ Above Highest Obstacle
PFAF
(Precision Final Approach Fix)
2,680.87’
ROC
(Required Obstacle Clearance) ’
78.3’
W Obstacle Clearance Surface 34:1
Threshold
Crossing
Height 50’
Descent angle 3.0°
68.3’ ’
Y Surface 7:1
X Surface 4:1
1 NM
10’
6, ’ 09 1’
W Surface 34:1
1 NM
Runway
Elevation = 0’
X Surface 4:1
6, ’
34’
Y Surface 7:1
340’
Notes:
Not to scale,. For illustration purposes only
Approach example based on a standard 3.0° glide path angle with 50’ Threshold Crossing Altitude (THC) and 8.26 NM final segment.
Precision approaches include ILS, MLS, LPV, and GBAS
Based on FAA Order
Prepared by Ricondo & Associates, Inc.
8.26 NM
50,200’

19. TERPS Non-Precision Final Approach Area
LOC and LP
Final Approach
MDA 250’ Above Highest Obstacle
Intermediate
Approach
500’ Above Highest Obstacle
FAF
(Final Approach Fix)
Optimal Descent angle 3.0°
500’
Threshold
Crossing
Height 50’
250’
Y Surface 7:1
1 NM 27
6, ’
Primary Surface
1 NM
Runway
Elevation = 0’
6, ’
Y Surface 7:1
Notes:
Not to scale. For illustration purposes only
Approach example based on a standard 3.0° glide path angle with 50’ Threshold Crossing Altitude (THC) and 8.26 NM final segment.
Non-Precision approaches include LP, LOC, RNAV LNAV, VOR, NDB. Surface shown represents LOC or LP final.
Based on FAA Order B
Prepared by Ricondo & Associates, Inc.
8.26 NM
50,200’

20. TERPS Non-Precision Final Approach Area
RNAV LNAV
Final Approach
MDA 250’ Above Highest Obstacle
Intermediate
Approach
500’ Above Highest Obstacle
FAF
(Final Approach Fix)
Optimal Descent angle 3.0°
500’
Threshold
Crossing
Height 50’
250’
.3 NM
Secondary Surface 7:1
.6 NM 27
Primary Surface
.6 NM
Runway
Elevation = 0’
.3 NM
Secondary Surface 7:1
Notes:
Not to scale. For illustration purposes only
Approach example based on a standard 3.0° glide path angle with 50’ Threshold Crossing Altitude (THC) and 8.26 NM final segment.
Non-Precision approaches include LP, LOC, RNAV LNAV, VOR, NDB. Surface shown represents RNAV LNAV Final
Based on FAA Order
Prepared by Ricondo & Associates, Inc.
Variable Length

21. TERPS RNAV LNAV/VNAV and RNP Final Approach Area
Based on VEB and OC
DA >= 250 AGL
Intermediate
Approach
500’ Above Highest Obstacle
PFAF
(Precision Final Approach Fix)
DA is 250’ Above the Highest Obstacle in DVEB
500’
Optimal Descent angle 3.0°
Threshold
Crossing
Height 50’
OCS Based on Avg. Cold Temp and Airport Elevation
Secondary Surface 7:1
1 x RNP
250’
2 x RNP 27
Primary Surface
DVEB – Calculated
As a function of the
Vertical Error Budget
2 x RNP
Runway
Elevation = 0’
Secondary Surface 7:1
1 x RNP
Secondary not used for SA Procedures
Notes:
Not to scale
Approach example based on a standard 3.0° glide path angle with 50’ Threshold Crossing Altitude (THC)
APV approaches include RNP, RNP SA , and RNAV LNAV/VNAV. Surface shown represents RNP and RNP SA.
Based on FAA Order
Variable Length

22. FAA Instrument flight procedures Information gateway

23. IFP Information Gateway
The IFP Information Gateway is a centralized instrument flight procedures data portal, providing a single-source for:
Charts - All Published Charts, Volume, and Type.
IFP Production Plan - Current IFPs under Development or Amendments with Tentative Publication Date and Status.
IFP Coordination - All coordinated developed/amended procedure forms forwarded to Flight Check or Charting for publication.
IFP Documents - Navigation Database Review (NDBR) — Repository and Source Documents used for Data Validation of Coded IFPs
IFP Requests - All requests for new procedures, amendments, or cancellations must go through the IFP Gateway.

24. IFP Webpage

25. IFP Web Page Search

26. Airport Search Results

27. IFP Procedure Request

28. IFP Procedure Request

29. IFP Request Process

30. FAA IFP Questions
Compliance with AC A- Paragraph Table 3-4
Environmental documentation
Weather reporting
Runway
Aircraft category
Visibility minima

31. Airport Design Requirements

32. Procedure Production Process for New Procedure
The process takes approximately 483 days for a new procedure
All requests go to a Regional Airspace Planning Team (RAPT)
Production schedule slot identified
Time
Priority
Schedule
Procedure development process includes
Build
Coordination with ATO and other groups
Environmental review
Flight check
Rebuild
Charting/Publication
TBD

33. Modification of Procedures for construction
Association of California Airports
Modification of Procedures for construction

34. Projects Driving IFP Modification
Runway
Extension
New Displaced
Threshold
Runway Reconstruction
Portion of Runway Closed
Runway Reconstruction
Twy Used as Temp Runway
Obstacles-
New or Removed

35. Determine IFP Requirements
Consider
IFP currently serving the airport
NAVAIDs impacted
Physically
Due to construction equipment
Duration of construction
Commercial service operator needs
In many cases existing circling procedures can be used
Straight in minima N/A via NOTAMs
Early Coordination with FAA

36. Planning, Coordination and New Procedures Implementation
IFP Planning Schedule – Runway Closure, Taxiway to be Used as Temporary Runway
Project Definition is Completed
Construction of
Taxiway B Begins
Opening Day of Taxiway B
As Temporary Runway
Opening Day of Reconstructed
Runway
Planning, Coordination and New Procedures Implementation
Construction
of Taxiway
Construction
of Runway
YEAR 1
YEAR 2
X MONTHS
X MONTHS
x months
• FAA Flight Procedures Office
• FAA Facilities and Equipment
• FAA Airports Division
Estimated lead time: 2 years
• Establishment of
reimbursable agreement
• Data transfer for initial procedure
development
Estimated lead time: 1 to 2 years
• Construction
• Installation of LOC and
PAPIs
• Aeronautical survey of
temporary Runway
• Transfer data to FAA
• Update 7480 forms
• Flight check
• Commissioning of temp.
Runway and
NAVAIDS
• Construction
• Aeronautical survey of
Reconstructed Runway
• Transfer data to FAA
• Update 7480 forms
• Flight check
• Commissioning of
reconstructed Runway
and NAVAIDS

37. Reimbursable Cost Agreements
Reimbursable costs items may include
Procedure development
Based on lines of minima
E.g. Circling, LNAV, LNVAV/VNAV, LP, LOC, ILS
Flight Check
Mobilization
NAVAIDs check
Procedures check
Tech Ops Labor
ROM Cost
$15K per line of minima
$100 per hour of FAA engineer time

38. Association of California Airports
Thank you