1. CHARTING Regulation and issues
ACAC RNAV Procedures Workshop
September 2002-Morocco
ARAB INSTRUMENT PROCEDURE DESIGN SEMINAR

2. CONTENTS Charting in the RNAV context RNAV procedure identification
Regulation
Charting objectives
User needs
RNAV procedure identification
Objectives and standards
Standards evolution proposals
Waypoint naming and symbology
The issues
Waypoint symbology
Waypoint naming

3. REGULATION
The ICAO defines the SARPS in the charting area, both for conventional and RNAV procedures
Pans-Ops (vol. I and II)
Annex 4
Annex 15
These standards are regularly updated, but with a low frequency
Technical work is conducted in specific international working groups (Obstacle Clearance Panel, AIS/MAP section)
ICAO Air Navigation Commission approval
Consultation of Member States

4. User recommendations for AIS (ED77 / DO201A)
REGULATION (2)
Some other regional or industry standards have been developed for :
Support of new RNAV operations in terminal airspace
Harmonization with on-board map displays
EUROCONTROL
Charting guidelines for RNAV procedures (TARA)
User recommendations for AIS (ED77 / DO201A)
Maps MOPS
… and various national reference documents (SAE G10, etc.)

5. CHARTING OBJECTIVES DEPICTION OF ALL THE NECESSARY INFORMATION
CLEARLY
ACCORDING TO USER NEEDS

6. TECHNICAL SUPPORT USERS
OPERATIONAL USERS
TECHNICAL SUPPORT USERS
Commercial charting providers
Navigation database providers
RNAV system manufacturers
Flight planning support
Pilots
Air Traffic Control

7. OPERATIONAL USER NEEDS
Sufficient data to conduct operations.
Charts
easy to read
unambiguous
only data which is necessary for the operation.
Coordinates, bearings and distances to a resolution that is compatible with the operational system displays

8. TECHNICAL SUPPORT USER NEEDS
Sufficient data to define instrument procedures.
Data resolution appropriate to meet the operational system’s computational requirements.
Charts used to validate the output from the operational systems.

9. THE NECESSARY INFORMATION
Procedures are currently published as charts and as textual descriptions
The charts are used by the pilots and ATC
Database providers require clear, and unambiguous procedure descriptions and use the charts to validate/check

10. RNAV SPECIFIC INFORMATION
RNAV procedures are defined by:
Sequence of waypoints
Identifier
Coordinates
Fly-over/fly-by/fixed radius
Path Terminators - ARINC 424
Altitude restrictions
Speed restrictions
Direction of turn
Required navaid
Waypoint and navaid co-ordinates should generally be published in one location in an AIP. Co-ordinates specifically associated with an aerodrome should be published in the appropriate aerodrome entry. Although the RNAV system databases hold co-ordinate data to a resolution appropriate to the calculations that have to be made, the data displayed to the pilot is usually limited to a resolution of 0.1 minutes. Where co-ordinate data is provided on the charts used by pilots, it should be to a resolution that is compatible with the RNAV system displays. It is recommended that the Annex 15 requirements are met by the publication of all waypoint and navaid co-ordinates in tabular form and the charting requirements for pilots are met by the publication, on the charts or on associated pages of the chart manual, of appropriate co-ordinates to a resolution of 0.1 minutes.

11. INFORMATION FOR PILOTS
Systems/sensors
Navaids
Distance,gradient,
orientation,
Speed and altitude
restrictions
Waypoint name
and sequence
Fly-over or
fly-by
OCA/H
IAF, FAF, Mapt
type des WP ( FO ou FB)
orientation en ° magnétique
coordonnées en 1/10 min
définition par des moyens radioélectriques pour vérification
Identification obstacles

12. INFORMATION FOR ATC Distance,gradient, orientation, Waypoint name
Navaids
Distance,gradient,
orientation,
Altitude, IAS
Holding levels
available
OCA/H
Segregation
IAF, FAF, Mapt
Waypoint name
and sequence
type des WP ( FO ou FB)
orientation en ° magnétique
coordonnées en 1/10 min
définition par des moyens radioélectriques pour vérification
Identification obstacles

13. INFORMATION FOR NAVIGATION DATABASE SUPPLIERS
Navaids
Distance,gradient,
Orientation (true °)
Turn directions
Speed and altitude
restrictions
Waypoint identifiers,
sequence and coordinates
Navigation system req’ts
(path terminators)
Fly-over or
fly-by
type des WP ( FO ou FB)
orientation en ° magnétique
coordonnées en 1/10 min
définition par des moyens radioélectriques pour vérification
Identification obstacles

14. SUMMARY Waypoint sequence Fly-over/fly-by/fixed radius
Speed/Altitude Restrictions
Leg distance & magnetic track
Fix information
Turn direction

15. ADDITIONAL TEXTUAL DESCRIPTION
Textual description is usually used to provide formal statement of procedure
Often open to interpretation
RNAV procedures require more specific details including path terminators
Can result in lengthy descriptions
Alternative descriptive methods are being considered :
Tabular layout
Formalised textual description
Formalised short-hand description

16. TABULAR DESCRIPTION
RNAV Approach
RNAV SID

17. FORMALIZED DESCRIPTION
Climb on track 047° M to 800ft, turn right [A800+; M047; R]- FA
Climb on heading 123° M to 1000ft, turn right [A1000+; M123; R]- VA
Direct to ARDAG at or above 3000ft ARDAG[A3000+]- DF
To PF035 at or below 5000ft, then turn left -PF035[A5000-;L]- TF (Fly-over)
To OTR on course 090°M at 210kts -OTR[M090; K210]- CF
To STO at or above FL100, turn left STO[F100+; L]- TF (Fly-over)
direct to WW039 at or above FL070, WW039[F070+]- DF
to WW038 at 5000ft WW038[A5000] TF
An RNAV procedure is defined by one or a number of waypoints, each defined by a waypoint name and a set of constraints.
Waypoint Name (underlined) denotes 'fly-over'.
Waypoint Name (not underlined) denotes 'fly-by'.
‘To’ Waypoint Name denotes TF leg coding.
'Direct to' Waypoint Name denotes DF leg coding.
'To’ Waypoint Name ‘on course XXX ' denotes CF leg coding.
‘Çlimb on track XXX ’ denotes FA coding
‘Climb on heading XXX ’ denotes VA coding (only used for parallel runway departures)
‘From’ Waypoint Name ‘to’ Altitude/Flight Level ‘on track XXX’ denotes FA coding
Waypoint Name followed by {R, NN.N, LatLong} denotes the waypoint at the end of the turn, the radius and the centre point of a fixed radius turn.
Waypoint Name followed by {H, Turn Direction, Inbound Track, Leg Distance/Time, Terminating Altitude} denotes a holding procedure.
[Speed, track and altitude constraints are contained within square brackets.]
If [A Set of Constraints] is not preceded by a waypoint name, the last calculated track must be flown until the constraint is reached.
Each constraint is coded in the format UNNNNNCD where:
U may be : A for altitude in feet AMSL M for degrees magnetic
F for Flight Level T for degrees true
K for Indicated Air Speed in knots
NNNNN is a number from 000 to 99999
C may be: + for 'at or above’ - for 'at or below'
a blank space for 'at'
D is used to indicate turn direction in conditional and fly-over transitions:
L for ‘Turn left’ R- for ‘Turn right
Multiple constraints should be separated by a semi-colon (;). Individual waypoints in a procedure, together with their associated constraints, should be separated by a hyphen (-), except when the subsequent leg is coded as DF when an arrow () should be used.

18. CONTENTS Charting in the RNAV context RNAV procedure identification
Regulation
Charting objectives
User needs
RNAV procedure identification
Objectives and standards
Standards evolution proposals
Waypoint naming and symbology
The issues
Waypoint symbology
Waypoint naming

19. OBJECTIVES
HARMONIZATION

20. REGULATORY STANDARDS EVOLUTION
OCP 12 + AIS/MAP : RNAV procedure identification - validation and publication (Annex 4, amendment 51)
OCP 13 + AIS/MAP : Conventional and RNAV procedure identification
Titles
Required equipment
Operational minima

21. RNAV PROCEDURE IDENTIFICATION
All RNAV procedures (departures, arrivals and approaches) must be identified as such

22. Both DME/DME and Basic GNSS (GPS) may be used.
Reversion to VOR/DME or IRS is acceptable in accordance with JAA guidance.
If more than 2 DME inputs cannot be guaranteed at all times, this should be highlighted in explanatory text.
Where reversion to a specific VOR/DME is required for part of the procedure, the navaid must be clearly identified as the recommended navaid.
Where a reversion to VOR/DME is allowed but is NOT mandated, recommended navaids are NOT required.

23. RNAV PROCEDURE IDENTIFICATION
Identification may also include reference to the navigation infrastructure available:
RNAV(DME/DME)
RNAV(GNSS)
RNAV(Except Class A GNSS)
RNP(x)

24. Only DME/DME may be used.
Reversion to VOR/DME is not allowed.
Reversion to IRS is acceptable in accordance with JAA guidance.
If more than 2 DME inputs cannot be guaranteed at all times, this should be highlighted in explanatory text

25. Only GNSS may be used.
When Galileo and the Space Based Augmentation Services are available, it is anticipated that the generic terms B-GNSS, or ABAS, and SBAS will be used instead.
Reversion to VOR/DME is not allowed.
Reversion to IRS is acceptable in accordance with JAA guidance.

26. Both DME/DME and Class B and C GNSS may be used.
Reversion to VOR/DME or IRS is acceptable in accordance with JAA guidance.
If more than 2 DME inputs cannot be guaranteed at all times, this should be highlighted in explanatory text.
Where a reversion to a specific VOR/DME is required for part of the procedure, the navaid must be clearly identified as the recommended navaid.
Where a reversion to VOR/DME is allowed but is NOT mandated, recommended navaids are NOT required.
Reversion to VOR/DME or IRS is acceptable in accordance with JAA guidance. Where a reversion to a specific VOR/DME is required for part of the procedure, the navaid must be clearly identified as the recommended navaid. Where a reversion to VOR/DME is allowed but is NOT mandated, recommended navaids are NOT required. If more than 2 DME inputs cannot be guaranteed at all times, this should be highlighted in explanatory text.

27. The procedure is for RNP 0.3 RNAV capable aircraft only.

28. RNAV SID & STAR
Where part of a SID or STAR is to be flown conventionally and part is designated as appropriate for B-RNAV, P-RNAV or RNP (x) RNAV capable aircraft, it should be annotated on the chart itself.

29. STANDARDS EVOLUTION PROPOSALS
Current situation : conventional procedure should be named according to the navaid(s) to be used
This standard causes :
many variations in chart titles from State to State
pilots to hear different clearances from State to State
different expectations for equipment requirements
In the future
title of approach procedure will be the same as the navigation system providing the final approach lateral guidance (LLZ, VOR, NDB) or the precision approach system (ILS, MLS).
Other navaids required for the procedure will appear on the chart (not in the title)

30. STANDARDS EVOLUTION
Guidance for procedure designers, to be included in PANS-OPS Volume II
References to PANS-OPS Volume II to be included in Annex 4
OCP 13 + AIS/MAP : Conventional and RNAV procedure identification
Information to be contained in the titles
Navigation equipment requirements
Navigation equipment optional to obtain better minimums
Applicable in November 2004

31. PROPOSED NEW PROCEDURE TITLES (EXAMPLES)
ILS or LLZ Rwy 25 - localizer required and glide slope available
When glide slope available, clearance from controller would be for ILS Rwy 25.
When glide slope not available, clearance from controller would be for Localizer Rwy 25
ILS Rwy 25 - localizer required and glide slope required. (There are cases where the glide slope must be used because of final approach segment obstacles.)
ILS or LLZ Rwy 07L - localizer and DME required and glide slope available. Note on chart for DME required.
VOR Rwy 04 - only VOR required - also used when DME available for better minima or stepdown fixes, etc.
VOR Rwy 11 - VOR and DME required. Note on chart for DME required
NDB Rwy 17R - NDB or locator and DME required. Note on chart for DME required.

32. CONTENTS Charting in the RNAV context RNAV procedure identification
Regulation
Charting objectives
User needs
RNAV procedure identification
Objectives and standards
Standards evolution proposals
Waypoint naming and symbology
The issues
Waypoint symbology
Waypoint naming

33. WAYPOINT SYMBOLOGY ISSUES
Need to standardize the symbology used both for charts and onboard equipment
The symbology shall encompass the different kinds of waypoints
Fly-over waypoints
Fly-by waypoints
The waypoint symbology shall accomodate other symbols such as the navaids or the significant points (fixes) ones

34. WAYPOINT SYMBOLOGY Fly-by with VOR/DME Fly-over with Reporting Point
OCP 12
PROPOSALS
consistency with navaids and fixes symbology
Fly-by with VOR/DME
Fly-over with Reporting Point

35. WAYPOINT SYMBOLOGY PROPOSALS

36. ILLUSTRATION OF NAMING CONVENTION ISSUES
Direct to
NDB « R »
High workload due to runway change.
ATC clears to Rozo
Rozo is “R” NDB on the chart.
Crew enter “R” in the FMS, Bogota Romeo NDB (Romeo, 1st “R” on the list as the closest of the data base, among 12 other “R”)
Romeo and Rozo are about 150 Nm away from each other.
The plane starts a left turn, which is detected and corrected after a 90° turn.
A GPWS alarm is triggered
Despite a quick crew response the plane crashed into a ft summit.

37. NAMING CONVENTION ISSUES
The information created by States may work very well in the paper world but the electronic world creates new challenges.
It is essential to create new awareness of the differences that happen between the charts and what pilots see on their avionics
The consistency of wording for waypoints used by ATC, Airspace Authorities, and database providers is a major issue
This issue is a top level/cross border issue involving every speciality (not only FMS Safety Assessment)

38. WAYPOINT NAMING ISSUES
The current ICAO naming convention is based upon the use of 5 letter name codes (5LNC)
This convention ensures global uniqueness…
… but it does not provide the flexibility required for RNAV procedures
Waypoints correlation within a given procedure
Ease for pilots / controllers to recognize the sequence of waypoints
Hence, extension (not amendment) to the ICAO convention is proposed
The extension is already applied in several States

39. WAYPOINT IDENTIFICATION
Waypoints are used to define ‘RNAV routes and flight paths of aircraft employing RNAV systems’.
Significant points are used to describe a ‘specified geographical location used in defining an ATS route or the flight path of an aircraft and for other navigation and ATS purposes’.
All waypoints = significant points.

40. WAYPOINT IDENTIFICATION
Significant points identified by co-located navaid or by unique five-letter pronounceable “name-code” (5LNC).
However some waypoints in the terminal area used for vectoring or for sequencing and must be easy to enter in an RNAV system.
5LNCs are not appropriate for this.
Some regional organizations (EUROCONTROL, AUSTRALIA CAA, ECAC States) have adopted a concept of strategic and tactical waypoints to address this problem
The proposals are being examined, harmonized and submitted for approval by OCP (OCP 13)

41. TACTICAL AND STRATEGIC WAYPOINTS
A strategic waypoint is a waypoint in the terminal area which is:
of such significance to the ATS provider that it must be easily remembered and stand out on any display, or
used as an ‘activation point’ to generate a message between computer systems when an aircraft passes it.
Strategic waypoints are identified with 5LNCs unless they are co-located with a navaid, when the 3 letter navaid ID is used.
A tactical waypoint is a waypoint which is defined solely for use in the specific terminal area and has not been designated a strategic waypoint.

42. TACTICAL WAYPOINT NAMING CONVENTION
Identified as AAXNN, where:
AA - the last two characters of the aerodrome location indicator,
X - a numeric code from 0 to 9 (N, E, W and S may be used instead if a State has a requirement for quadrantal information)
NN - a numeric code from 00 to 99.
If co-located with a navaid, the navaid three letter identifier is used.
If co-located with the runway threshold, an identifier in the format RWNNA is used, where:
NN - a numeric code from 01 to 36 and
A is an optional alphabetic code of ‘L’, ’C’ or ‘R’.

43. WAYPOINT VERSUS FIX A waypoint is defined by coordinates.
A fix may be defined by the intersection of 2 radials or radial and distance.
HOWEVER, on RNAV approaches:
Initial approach waypoint - IAF
Intermediate waypoint - IF
Final approach waypoint - FAF
Final approach point (ILS/Baro VNAV) - FAP
Missed approach waypoint - MAPt.

44. WAYPOINT NAMING AND SYMBOLOGY
Proposed waypoint symbology
Waypoint naming convention

45. SUMMARY

46. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION ANY QUESTION?