![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Bob Noel wrote:
In article , G Farris wrote: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/21/na...tml?oref=login If you're not registered to read NYTimes articles you may not be able to access this - maybe someone has a more user-friendly source for this article. I'm not sure how frequently they would want to be using 13L at JFK and 04 at LGA simultaneously, but the case is well demonstrated anyway. GF DCA or JFK? The RNP procedure at DCA does not enhance separation. It lowers minimums for Runway 19 but only Alaska Airlines can presently use it. It will take a long time for anyone else to qualify for that low of an RNP value. The reason the RNP value is that low is not for obstacle clearance but to assure clearance from P-56. The JFK procedure is presently being promoted by Jet Blue to emulate the Canarsie (VOR 13L/R) IAP at JFK, albeit with lower minimums so they don't have to switch to the 13L ILS. So long as the Canarsie approach is in use LGA can run Runway 4 ILS approaches. This has been true for many years. But, once the weather drops below Canarsie minimums then JFK has to switch to the ILS 13L, which shuts down the LGA ILS 4. With the lower minimums proposed by Jet Blue, the percentage of time that JFK would have to use the 13L ILS would decrease significantly. Trouble is, unless every flight into JFK is RNP qualified, including RF (radius-to-fix) leg capable, it will do no good. Many, many air carrier aircraft are not properly equipped and will not be so for the life of that portion of the air carrier fleet. So, it is the FAA promoting something that just won't become a reality at JFK. At DCA it works for Alaska Airlines, because there the benefits are not dependent upon everyone being equipped with the "latest and greatest" RNP suite, not to mention all the related special crew training and qualifications. The FAA is to be given credit for finally embracing the concept of advanced, approach-capable RNP, but neither the air carriers nor the ATC system is quite ready for "prime time." The new Palm Springs RNP IAPs, effective this very day, are great except the airspace and ATC system is simply not prepared to deal with them. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|