1
$\begingroup$

Good afternoon folks. I am a bit confused and trying to find the right answer. This is what we have:

BGBW RNP Z RWY 06

Why do we have here minimum for straight-in approach even though the descent angle is 4.1 degrees? If we convert it to percentages it becomes around 7.2% with the groundspeed of 100 knots.

According to ICAO Doc 8168, all non-precision approaches with the gradient more than 6.5 percent for a non-precision approach for Cat A and B aircraft are considered as circle to land only. If we take a look at BGBW RNP A, it has a descent angle of 3.7 degrees, but if we measure the distance from FAF to the THR RW24 it becomes around 8.3% and now it makes sense why it’s impossible to apply straight-in minimums for RW24.

For reference, this is RNP A plate for BGBW:
enter image description here

Improve this question
$\endgroup$

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
4
$\begingroup$

The design "requirements" in PANS like Doc 8168 are more like suggestions than requirements. They have no legal force. States are free to ignore these requirements or make their own, and unlike Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs), states are not required to specifically notify ICAO of the differences or publish them.

In other words, this appears to just be a difference from the ICAO recommendations set out in the document you mentioned. This is not unusual- there are quite a few differences between the ICAO PANS-OPS and the US TERPS as well.

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ I don't disagree with your answer specifically because differences between pans-ops instrument approach design criteria and what a particular country may publish for a certain instrument approach is sometimes obvious from looking at the approach plate. However, it is interesting to note that in the OP's example IAP's shown, the words "PANS OPS" are displayed in the bottom left corner of the plate. This would seemingly suggest the procedure was designed in accordance with Doc 8168. $\endgroup$
    – user22445
    Commented Sep 27, 2023 at 20:34
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @RTO Per Jeppesen, that label is specifically for aircraft handling speeds obstacle clearance in circling approaches, where PANS-OPS and TERPS differ very significantly in a way that directly impacts the safety of circling approaches and how they should be flown. $\endgroup$
    – Chris
    Commented Sep 27, 2023 at 21:12
  • $\begingroup$ I see that. Good point. Here's an upvote. $\endgroup$
    – user22445
    Commented Sep 27, 2023 at 21:30

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .