TERPS vs. PANS-Ops - Flight Safety Foundation

TERPS vs. PANS-Ops - Flight Safety Foundation

TERPS vs. PANS-Ops Instrument Procedure Design and Operational Differences Presented By Mr. Guy Gribble General Manager, International Flight Resources, LLC TERPS vs. PANS-Ops They Are The Same, Only Different Departures Holding Arrival Maneuvering Approaches Missed Approaches TERPS vs. PANS-Ops They Are The Same, Only Different Physics, Aerodynamics, Mathematics

Units of Measure US Customary Units vs. Meters Conversions ? Rounding of Numbers Fix Tolerances and Accuracy Flight Technical Errors TERPS vs. PANS-Ops Who is In Charge Here ? State (Country) Aeronautical Information Publication, AIP Flight Check, Maintain Publish, Revise Design Criteria Standard design development Role of the Procedure Designer Pilot operational procedures

ICAO, International Civil Aviation Organization SARPS vs. Documents TERPS vs. PANS-Ops Where Does This Data Come From ? State (Country) Commercial Provider WGS-84 Compliant ? Airport Country Somewhere ? Russia China India Reproduced with permission of Jeppesen Sanderson,

Inc. TERPS vs. PANS-Ops Standard Instrument Departure X X Normal Operations X X Maintain the Ground Track X Maintain the Required Climb Gradient X TERPS vs. Pans-Ops vs. FAR 25 Standard Instrument Departure Vertically Speaking MSA AFL t e

e F 1,500 Departure End Of Runway DER 35 Ft ? 15? 5 M TERPS vs. PANS-Ops Standard Instrument Departure If straight out will not work X X X X X X

Climb faster over obstacle Turn away from obstacle Keep in sight, See and avoid Climb in a safe sector away from obstacle Speed limiting Combinations of any of the above X X X X X X TERPS vs. PANS-Ops Standard Instrument Departure Climb Faster Over Obstacle MSA

152 Feet per NM OCS Requires 350'/NM 48 Feet per NM ROC Until Reaching MSA 200 FEET PER NM .8 DER 5M OC M % IS O 2.5%

Maintain 4.3% Until Reaching 1700MSL 35 Ft ? % MSA 3.3 TERPS vs. PANS-Ops Standard Instrument Departure Turn Away From Obstacle 2 NM Initial Climb Area 3.5 KM 15 Splay

500' 500' Area 1 TERPS vs. PANS-Ops Standard Instrument Departure Turn Away From Obstacle 2 NM Initial Climb Area 3.5 KM 15 Splay 500' 500' Area 1

TERPS vs. PANS-Ops Standard Instrument Departure, TERPS Keep in Sight and Tell Pilot to "See and Avoid" X Visual Climb Over Airport Hazard Beacons on Take Off Minimums top of hill to the east 800/2 clearly visible or Take Off Minimums 600/1 15 MAX TERPS vs. PANS-Ops Standard Instrument Departure, TERPS

Climb in a Safe Sector 25 or 46 NM Diverse Departure Evaluation No Departure Turns East 15 MAX X TERPS vs. PANS-Ops Standard Instrument Departure, PANS-Ops Climb in a Safe Sector X

TERPS vs. PANS-Ops Standard Instrument Departure, PANS-Ops Climb in a Safe Sector No Turns Eastbound X TERPS vs. PANS-Ops Standard Instrument Departure Minimum Safe Altitude, MSA TERPS Reproduced with permission of Jeppesen Sanderson, Inc. Not to be used for navigation. TERPS vs. PANS-Ops Standard Instrument Departure Minimum Sector Altitude, MSA PANS-Ops Reproduced with permission of Jeppesen Sanderson, Inc. Not to be used for navigation.

TERPS vs. PANS-Ops Standard Instrument Departure Minimum Safe Altitude, MSA PANS-Ops Reproduced with permission of Jeppesen Sanderson, Inc. Not to be used for navigation. TERPS vs. PANS-Ops Holding Timing PANS-Ops >14,000 = 1.5 Minute 14,000 = 1 Minute TERPS

TERPS vs. PANS-Ops Holding Speeds PANS-Ops >34,000 = IMN.83 >20,000 34,000 = 265 KIAS >14,000 20,000 = 240 KIAS 265 = 240 14,000 = 230 KIAS >14,000 230/210KIAS >6,000 14,000 = 220 KIAS 6,000 = 210 200 KIAS TERPS TERPS vs. PANS-Ops Holding

Evaluated Airspace TERPS vs. PANS-Ops Arrivals and Maneuvering Procedures X X X X X X Definitions and Use of Entry Procedures Evaluated Airspace Obstacle Clearance Speeds Selection of Turn

X X X X X X TERPS vs. PANS-Ops Arrivals and Maneuvering Procedures 45/180 45/180 80/260 80/260 Teardrop

Base Turn 10 NM Limit Holding In lieu of Turn point Entry Sector Racetrack TERPS vs. PANS-Ops Arrivals and Maneuvering Procedures, TERPS Entry Procedure TERPS vs. PANS-Ops Arrivals and Maneuvering Procedures, PANS-Ops

Entry Sector Defined TERPS vs. PANS-Ops Arrivals and Maneuvering Procedures, PANS-Ops "Omni-Directional" Defined TERPS vs. PANS-Ops Evaluated Airspace Intermediate Segment, TERPS TERPS vs. PANS-Ops Evaluated Airspace Intermediate Segment, PANS-Ops y ar km M) 4.6 5 N 2. km M) (

4.6 5 N . (2 Se nd co a are 1 min./45-180 Procedure turn area TERPS vs. PANS-Ops Evaluated Airspace Final Segment, Non-Precision VOR = 7.8 SPLAY

NDB = 10.3 SPLAY All = 14.29 SPLAY TERPS vs. PANS-Ops Approach Procedures 350 No Final Approach Fix 300 300 Final Approach Fix 250 200 Precision Approach 200 TERPS vs. PANS-Ops Arrivals and Maneuvering Procedures Speeds TERPS vs. PANS-Ops Arrivals and Maneuvering Procedures Speeds TERPS vs. PANS-Ops Visual Approaches and Visual Maneuvering

X X X X X X Definition of Use for Evaluated Airspace OCA/ROC Speeds Visual Aids and Cues X X X X

X X TERPS vs. PANS-Ops "Visual" vs. Circle-to-Land X X X X X X X Definition of Use for Evaluated Airspace OCA/ROC Speeds

Visual Aids and Cues MDA vs. Descent Point X X X X X X X TERPS vs. PANS-Ops Circling Approaches and Maneuvering C 2.68 NM D 3.49 NM 1.7 NM 2.3 NM

C 4.2 NM D 5.28 NM 300AFL 394AFL TERPS vs. PANS-Ops Circling Approaches and Maneuvering Pans-Ops Acft Cat Min Vis MOC/HAA C

2.0 NM 394/ 591 ft D 2.5 NM 394/ 689 ft Max Speed/AOB 180 KIAS/20 205 KIAS/20 2 x Radius + Straight 3.70+.5 = 4.20 NM 4.68+.6 = 5.28 NM

TERPS Acft Cat Min Vis OEA Radius + ROC/HAA Max Speed/AOB C 1 SM 300/ 450 ft D

2.0 SM 300/ 550 ft 145 KIAS/20 165 KIAS/20 Straight=CAR* 2.18+.5 = 2.68 NM 2.89+.6 = 3.49 NM With Change #21 and later, At 1000MSL, ISA Standard and 25KTS of added wind. Visibility in Statue Miles OEA= Obstacle Evaluated Area, CAR= Circling Area Radius (1.3NM Minimum) TERPS vs. PANS-Ops Circling Approaches and Maneuvering Pans-Ops Acft Cat

Min Vis MOC/HAA C 2.0 NM 394/ 591 ft D 2.5 NM 394/ 689 ft Max Speed/AOB 2 x Radius + Straight

180 KIAS/20 3.70+.5 = 4.20 NM 205 KIAS/20 4.68+.6 = 5.28 NM TERPS Acft Cat Min Vis OEA Radius + ROC/HAA Max Speed/AOB

C 1 SM 300/ 450 ft D 2.0 SM 300/ 550 ft 145 KIAS/20 165 KIAS/20 Straight=CAR* 2.18+.5 = 2.68 NM 2.89+.6 = 3.49 NM

With Change #21 and later, At 1000MSL, ISA Standard and 25KTS of added wind. Visibility in Statue Miles OEA= Obstacle Evaluated Area, CAR= Circling Area Radius (1.3NM Minimum) TERPS vs. PANS-Ops Circling Approaches and Maneuvering Pans-Ops Acft Cat Min Vis MOC/HAA C 2.0 NM 394/ 591 ft D

2.5 NM 394/ 689 ft Max Speed/AOB 180 KIAS/20 205 KIAS/20 2 x Radius + Straight 3.70+.5 = 4.20 NM 4.68+.6 = 5.28 NM TERPS Acft Cat

Min Vis OEA Radius + ROC/HAA Max Speed/AOB C 1 SM 300/ 450 ft D 2.0 SM 300/ 550 ft 145 KIAS/20 165 KIAS/20

Straight=CAR* 2.18+.5 = 2.68 NM 2.89+.6 = 3.49 NM With Change #21 and later, At 1000MSL, ISA Standard and 25KTS of added wind. Visibility in Statue Miles OEA= Obstacle Evaluated Area, CAR= Circling Area Radius (1.3NM Minimum) TERPS vs. PANS-Ops Circling Approaches and Maneuvering Pans-Ops Acft Cat Min Vis MOC/HAA C

2.0 NM 394/ 591 ft D 2.5 NM 394/ 689 ft Max Speed/AOB 2 x Radius + Straight 180 KIAS/20 3.70+.5 = 4.20 NM

205 KIAS/20 4.68+.6 = 5.28 NM TERPS Acft Cat Min Vis OEA Radius + ROC/HAA Max Speed/AOB C 1 SM 300/ 450 ft

D 2.0 SM 300/ 550 ft 145 KIAS/20 165 KIAS/20 Straight=CAR* 2.18+.5 = 2.68 NM 2.89+.6 = 3.49 NM With Change #21 and later, At 1000MSL, ISA Standard and 25KTS of added wind. Visibility in Statue Miles OEA= Obstacle Evaluated Area, CAR= Circling Area Radius (1.3NM Minimum) TERPS vs. PANS-Ops Circling Approaches and Maneuvering

Pans-Ops Acft Cat Min Vis MOC/HAA C 2.0 NM 394/ 591 ft D 2.5 NM 394/ 689 ft

Max Speed/AOB 2 x Radius + Straight 180 KIAS/20 3.70+.5 = 4.20 NM 205 KIAS/20 4.68+.6 = 5.28 NM TERPS Acft Cat Min Vis OEA Radius +

ROC/HAA Max Speed/AOB C 1 SM 300/ 450 ft D 2.0 SM 300/ 550 ft 145 KIAS/20 165 KIAS/20 Straight=CAR* 2.18+.5 = 2.68 NM

2.89+.6 = 3.49 NM With Change #21 and later, At 1000MSL, ISA Standard and 25KTS of added wind. Visibility in Statue Miles OEA= Obstacle Evaluated Area, CAR= Circling Area Radius (1.3NM Minimum) TERPS vs. PANS-Ops Circling Approaches and Maneuvering Pans-Ops Acft Cat Min Vis MOC/HAA C 2.0 NM

394/ 591 ft D 2.5 NM 394/ 689 ft Max Speed/AOB 180 KIAS/20 205 KIAS/20 2 x Radius + Straight 3.70+.5 = 4.20 NM 4.68+.6 = 5.28 NM TERPS

Acft Cat Min Vis OEA Radius + ROC/HAA Max Speed/AOB C 1 SM 300/ 450 ft D 2.0 SM 300/ 550 ft

145 KIAS/20 165 KIAS/20 Straight=CAR* 2.18+.5 = 2.68 NM 2.89+.6 = 3.49 NM With Change #21 and later, At 1000MSL, ISA Standard and 25KTS of added wind. Visibility in Statue Miles OEA= Obstacle Evaluated Area, CAR= Circling Area Radius (1.3NM Minimum) Reproduced with permission of Jeppesen Sanderson, Inc. Not to be used for Reproduced with permission of Jeppesen Sanderson, Inc. Not to be used for

Reproduced with permission of Jeppesen Sanderson, Inc. Not to be used for navigation. Greece South Korea Japan Canada Mexico Venezuela Azores Germany Saudi Arabia TERPS vs. PANS-Ops Missed Approach Procedures ach b

o r App Clim d se .7% Mis ires 3 u Req Intermediate Missed Approach TERPS vs. PANS-Ops Missed Approach Procedures Intermediate Missed Approach TERPS vs. PANS-Ops Instrument Procedure Design and

Operational Differences Presented By Mr. Guy Gribble General Manager, International Flight Resources, LLC www.InternationalFlightResources.com

Recently Viewed Presentations

  • Grasslands Savanna and Prairie - Weebly

    Grasslands Savanna and Prairie - Weebly

    Grasslands Savanna (Tropical Grassland) and Prairie (Temperate Grassland) Prairie-Location-North America The middle of North America The prairies are a type of grassland dominated by herbaceous plants and grasses. Very few trees grow on the prairies and are usually widely scattered.
  • Studio Ghibli - Cleveland State University

    Studio Ghibli - Cleveland State University

    Studio ghibli. Founded in 1985 by Hayao Miyazaki, Isao Takahata, Toshio Suzuki, and Yasuyoshi Tokuma, with funding from the publishing company by TokumaShoten. Co-principals Miyazaki and Takahata already had well-established careers in film and television animation
  • Net Present Value - Leeds School of Business

    Net Present Value - Leeds School of Business

    Net Present Value Last Time We spent the time developing our basic approach to DCF analysis. We discussed: The importance of a financial market to the economy and why investors receive interest (compensation) for saving/lending.
  • Equatorial Box Project 35o 35o 25o Hawaii 15o

    Equatorial Box Project 35o 35o 25o Hawaii 15o

    Equatorial Box Project 35o 35o 8 Nitrate Concentrations ( M) 25o 25o Hawaii 6 15o 15o 4 5o 5o 5o 5o 2 Nuka Hiva 15o 15o 0 25o 25o 120o E 160o W 160o E 120o W 140o E 80o...
  • PROPOSALS and PERSUASION

    PROPOSALS and PERSUASION

    What will it cost to implement this proposal? (Do you need to estimate this in the proposal?) How will you explain and justify these costs? Proposal Elements Conclusion Restate problem briefly Restate objectives Restate request to work on this project...
  • Introduction to Financial Management

    Introduction to Financial Management

    CFFA_2. CFFA_1. Net sales. Cost of goods sold. Depreciation. EBIT. Interest paid. Taxable income. Taxes. Net income. Dividends. Addtion to retained earnings. 2010 Income Statement. DOLE COLA. 2010 Operating Cash Flow + Depreciation - Taxes. 2010 Net Capital Spending. Ending...
  • Judaism - MR. DORAN'S WEBSITE - Home

    Judaism - MR. DORAN'S WEBSITE - Home

    Unquestionably monotheistic—this is why Judaism, despite its size, is so important to world religions ... This begins the notion of prophecy which is central to all Abrahamic religions. ... illustrated values of Judaism, and importance to the Jewish faith—think: if...
  • Mieux informer : stratégies pour rendre les informations plus ...

    Mieux informer : stratégies pour rendre les informations plus ...

    Intelligibilité - Historique Élargir le concept de lisibilité…compréhensibilité… interaction texte-lecteur (Racle, 1988) Avoir accès au sens du texte (Labasse, 1999) Indicateur de l'intelligibilité : facilité ou difficulté des lecteurs à comprendre la teneur d'un texte (Sorin, 1996) Logique, organisation et...