Manual of Standards Part 173—Standards Applicable to Instrument Flight Procedure Design
Version 1.8
made under Part 173 of the
Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998
Compilation No. 7
Compilation date: 11 August 2022
Includes amendments up to: F2022L01052
Prepared by the Advisory and Drafting Branch, Legal, International and Regulatory Affairs Division, Civil Aviation Safety Authority, Canberra.
|
Manual of Standards Part 173—Standards Applicable to Instrument Flight Procedure Design © Civil Aviation Safety Authority This work is copyright. You may download, display, print and reproduce this material in unaltered form only (retaining this notice) for your personal, non-commercial use or use within your organisation. Apart from any use permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, all other rights are reserved. Requests for authorisation should be directed to: Corporate Communications Civil Aviation Safety Authority GPO Box 2005 Canberra ACT 2601 Email: PublicEnquiries@casa.gov.au Version 1.8: August 2022 |
1.1.1.1 The Civil Aviation Safety Regulations Part 173 – Instrument Flight Procedure Design establishes the standards pertaining to the design of Instrument Flight Procedures.
1.1.1.2 For the design of:
(a) Instrument Flight Procedures, other than the design of Required Navigation Performance Authorization Required Approach (RNP AR APCH) procedures, the design standards are contained in:
(i) International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Publication Doc 8168-OPS/611, Volumes I and II, also referred to as the Procedures for Air Navigation Services – Aircraft Operations (PANS‑OPS); and
(ii) this Manual of Standards (MOS) which comprises:
(A) additional design standards not included in PANS-OPS; and
(B) differences which are adopted by Australia; and
(C) new or developing standards; and
(b) RNP AR APCH procedures, the design standards are contained in:
(i) PANS OPS; and
(ii) this MOS which comprise:
(A) additional design standards not included in PANS-OPS; and
(B) differences which are adopted by Australia; and
(C) new or developing standards; and
(iii) ICAO Publication Doc 9905-AN/471, also referred to as the Required Navigation Performance Authorization Required Procedure Design Manual (ICAO Doc 9905).
1.1.2.1 Notwithstanding the above, where there is a difference between a standard prescribed in ICAO documents and the MOS, the MOS standard shall prevail.
1.1.3.1 The document hierarchy consists of:
(a) relevant Civil Aviation Safety Regulations (CASRs);
(b) the Manual of Standards (MOS); and
(c) Advisory Circulars (ACs).
1.1.3.2 The regulatory documents establish, for service providers, a comprehensive description of system requirements and the means of meeting them.
1.1.3.3 CASRs establish the regulatory framework (Regulations) within which all service providers must operate.
1.1.3.4 The MOS comprises specifications (Standards) prescribed by CASA, of uniform application, determined to be necessary for the safety of air navigation. In those parts of the MOS where it is necessary to establish the context of standards to assist in their comprehension, the sense of parent regulations has been reiterated.
1.1.3.5 Readers should understand that in the circumstance of any perceived disparity of meaning between MOS and CASRs, primacy of intent rests with the regulations.
1.1.3.6 Service providers must document internal practices (Rules) in their own operational manuals, to ensure the maintenance of and compliance with standards.
1.1.3.7 ACs are intended to provide recommendations and guidance to illustrate a means, but are not necessarily the only means of complying with the Regulations. ACs may explain certain regulatory requirements by providing interpretive and explanatory material. It is expected that service providers will document internal actions in their own operational manuals, to put into effect those, or similarly adequate, practices.
1.1.4.1 Responsibility for the approval of the publication and amendment of the MOS resides with the Branch Head, Airways, Air Traffic and Aerodrome Standards Branch, of the Aviation Safety Standards Division, Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA).
1.1.4.2 This document is issued and amended under the authority of the Branch Head, Airways, Air Traffic and Aerodrome Standards Branch.
1.1.4.3 Requests for any change to the content of this MOS may be initiated by:
(a) technical specialist areas within CASA;
(b) instrument approach procedure designers;
(c) ATS service providers;
(d) pilots and ATC staff;
(e) other aviation industry service providers.
1.1.4.4 The need to change standards in the MOS may be generated by a number of causes. These may be to:
(a) ensure safety;
(b) ensure standardisation;
(c) respond to changed CASA standards;
(d) respond to ICAO prescription;
(e) accommodate new initiatives or technologies.
1.1.5.1 These standards should be read in conjunction with:
(a) ICAO Procedures for Air Navigation — Air Operations, Doc 8168‑OPS/611, Volume II — Construction of Visual and Instrument Flight Procedures; and
(b) ICAO Instrument Flight Procedures Construction Manual, Doc 9368‑AN/911; and
(c) ICAO Template Manual for Holding, Reversal and Racetrack Procedures, Doc 9371‑AN/912/2; and
(d) ICAO Required Navigation Performance Authorization Required Procedure Design Manual, Doc 9905‑AN/471.
1.1.6.1 In this Manual of Standards:
ALS, in relation to a runway, means an approach lighting system for the runway.
AMSL means above mean sea level.
BALS (short for basic ALS), in relation to a runway, means an ALS for the runway that is at least 210 m, and less than 420 m, long.
CASR 1998 means the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998.
CAT I lighting system has the same meaning as in section 9.41 of the Part 139 (Aerodromes) Manual of Standards 2019.
CAT II and CAT III lighting system has the same meaning as in section 9.42 of the Part 139 (Aerodromes) Manual of Standards 2019.
DH means decision height.
FALS (short for full ALS), in relation to a runway, means an ALS for the runway, consisting of a CAT I lighting system, or CAT II and CAT III lighting system, which is at least 720 m long.
GNSS means Global Navigation Satellite System.
IALS (short for intermediate ALS), in relation to a runway, means an ALS for the runway that is at least 420 m, and less than 720 m, long.
kt means knots.
MAPt means missed approach point.
MDA means minimum descent altitude.
MDA/H means minimum descent altitude or height.
MSA means minimum sector altitude.
NALS (short for no ALS), in relation to a runway, means:
(a) no ALS in relation to the runway; or
(b) an ALS, in relation to the runway, which is less than 210 m long.
NM means nautical miles.
RVR means runway visual range.
TIFP means terminal instrument flight procedure.
visibility means the ability, as determined by atmospheric conditions and expressed in units of distance, to see and identify prominent unlighted objects by day and prominent lighted objects by night.
2.1.1.1 A certified designer must prepare an Operations Manual which includes the following:
(a) a table of contents based on the items in the manual, indicating the page number on which each item begins;
(b) a description of the designer’s organisational structure and a statement setting out the functions that the designer performs, or proposes to perform under CASR Part 173;
(c) a description of the chain of command established, or proposed to be established, by the designer and a statement of the duties and responsibilities of any supervisory positions within the organisational structure;
(d) a statement showing how the designer determines the number of operational staff required including the number of operational supervisory staff;
(e) a list of the design services that the designer provides, or proposes to provide;
(f) a statement, for each design service, that identifies the location from where the service is provided, or proposed to be provided;
(g) a statement of the responsibilities and functions for each position;
(h) a description of the arrangements made or proposed to be made by the designer to ensure that it has, and will continue to receive, the information necessary for providing the service;
(i) a description of the arrangements made or proposed to be made by the designer to ensure that it has, and will continue to be able to provide, information in connection with its design services to another person whose functions reasonably require that information;
(j) a description of the designer’s record keeping system;
(k) a statement detailing any agreement entered into by the designer in relation to the provision of a design service provided by another party;
(l) a copy of the document that sets out the designer’s safety management system;
(m) a description of the processes and documentation used to present to staff the relevant standards, rules and procedures contained in PANS‑OPS, this MOS, ICAO Doc 9905 if applicable, and any of the designer’s site-specific instructions for the provision of design services;
(n) a description of the processes and documentation used to provide operational instructions to staff;
(o) a description of the procedures to be followed to ensure all operational staff are familiar with any operational changes that have been issued since they last performed operational duties;
(oa) without affecting any other provision of this MOS, a statement to the certified designer’s staff to the effect that:
(i) a design for a type of terminal instrument flight procedure (TIFP) (other than one for use in a specialised helicopter operation or a ship’s pilot PinS operation) may only be completed and given for verification, validation or publication for a certified aerodrome or a registered aerodrome; and
(ii) the terms of paragraphs 6.1.3.3 and 6.1.4.1A of this MOS must be followed as if they were part of the Operations Manual;
Note This statement in the Operations Manual is to complement regulation 139.030 of CASR 1998. This provides that, other than for a specialised helicopter operation, a person must not operate an aerodrome for which there is a type of TIFP unless the aerodrome is a certified aerodrome or a registered aerodrome. Designing may be commenced for an applicant for certification or registration of an aerodrome but, unless the aerodrome is actually certified or registered, the design may not be completed, or given for verification, validation or publication.
(p) a description of the designer’s training and checking program;
(q) a description of the procedures to be used in commissioning new facilities, equipment and services;
(r) a description of the standards, rules and procedures to be used to ensure a procedure is published in accordance with the format and drafting conventions specified in a data product specification given to the designer under regulation 175.160 of CASR 1998;
Note: The term data product specification has the meaning given by the CASR Dictionary.
(s) a description of the format(s) that will be used for the issue of completed designs for publication;
(t) a description of the procedures to be used to ensure that all equipment, including software is operated in accordance with the manufacturer’s operating instructions and manuals;
(u) the safety management system of the certified designer;
(v) a description of the procedures to be used to conduct environmental assessments; and
(w) the procedures to be followed for revising the operations manual.
2.1.1.2 In this paragraph:
ship’s pilot PinS operation means a helicopter operation to and from a point in-space (PinS) at or near a ship at sea for transferring the ship’s pilot to or from the ship.
2.1.2.1 An authorised designer must include in an Operations Manual the procedures and practices which are followed in the application of its authorisation under CASR Part 173.
2.1.2.2 The Operations Manual must include those items listed in paragraph 2.1.1.1 that are relevant.
3.1.1.1 The grades established under CASR Part 173 for certified design organisations are:
(a) Chief Designer;
(b) Qualified Designer;
(c) Unqualified Designer.
3.1.2.1 The minimum standard for the qualifications and experience of a Chief Designer is:
(a) the qualification and experience requirements of a Qualified Designer;
(b) appropriate experience in the design of the type of procedures to be designed under an Instrument Flight Procedure Design Certificate; and
(c) satisfactory completion of an advanced course in PANS-OPS procedure design.
Note: For guidance on the experience requirements under (b) and (c) above, see AC 173-02.
3.1.2.2 The minimum standard of recent experience for appointment as a Chief Designer is:
(a) relevant design experience within the previous one year; or
(b) satisfactory completion of an approved PANS-OPS procedures design course or an advanced course on PANS-OPS procedure design within the previous two years.
3.1.3.1 The minimum standard for the qualifications and experience of a Qualified Designer is:
(a) satisfactory completion of an approved PANS-OPS procedures design course; and
(b) satisfactory completion of a course of in-service training in procedures design as detailed in the designer’s operations manual; and
(c) required minimum experience in accordance with paragraph 3.1.6; and
(d) a written approval by the Chief Designer as specified in Section 3.4.
3.1.4.1 Personnel who are not qualified under paragraph 3.1.1 must not:
(a) design a procedure for which a Certificate of Approval is required under CASR Part 173, except under direct supervision; or
(b) verify (check) a procedure for which a Certificate of Approval is required under CASR Part 173.
3.1.4.2 Direct supervision means supervision by a qualified designer who is engaged on a full-time basis in the same premises.
3.1.5.1 The minimum standard for the qualifications and experience of persons responsible for the supervision of other design staff is:
(a) Qualified Designer; and
(b) substantial experience in the design of instrument flight procedures.
3.1.6.1 Minimum design experience is required for each type of procedure to be designed.
3.1.6.2 The minimum experience required is three designs, checked and approved by a Chief Designer, and completed within any six consecutive months.
3.1.7.1 A person must not design (except under direct supervision) or verify a procedure, unless he/she has designed, checked or been directly involved in the detailed review of a procedure of the same type within the previous year.
3.2.1.1 The minimum standard for the qualifications and experience of persons holding a Procedure Design Authorisation or employed by the holder of a Procedure Design Authorisation to review and/or amend procedures in accordance with CASR Part 173 Subpart C is:
(a) satisfactory completion of an approved PANS-OPS course; and
(b) design of three procedures of each type of procedure to be reviewed or amended, completed within any six consecutive months.
The authorised designer shall include in the company operations manual, training and checking procedures to ensure that design personnel meet the minimum standards.
3.2.1.2 The minimum standard for the qualifications and experience of persons authorised to design off-shore helicopter procedures in accordance with CASR Part 173 Subpart C is:
(a) extensive experience as pilot-in-command of IFR operations to offshore structures; and
(b) a demonstrated knowledge of, and experience in, the design of procedures in accordance with Section 8.6.
3.2.1.3 CASA must also consider the amount of additional practical experience that may be appropriate to an authorisation and the level of supervision that must be provided.
3.3.1.1 In determining whether a course will be considered as an approved course, the following will be taken into consideration:
(a) an appropriate syllabus;
(b) adequate duration;
(c) appropriately qualified and experienced course lecturer(s);
(d) the provider/institution.
3.3.1.2 Approval of a course may require on-site inspection and observation of the conduct of the course.
3.3.1.3 Where assessment required in paragraph 3.3.1.1 is not possible due to the lapse in time since the course was provided, CASA may consider a course to be approved if:
(a) sufficient evidence exists that the course was completed satisfactorily; and
(b) the course could reasonably have been expected to meet the minimum requirements of an approved course applicable at the time that it was completed; and
(c) the applicant can provide evidence of additional training or practical experience which enable the applicant to satisfy the syllabus requirements of an approved course.
3.4.1.1 The Chief Designer shall maintain a register of:
(a) personnel qualifications and courses attended;
(b) staff training;
(c) proficiency checks conducted;
(d) staff approvals;
(e) staff recency.
3.4.2.1 The Chief Designer shall provide each staff member engaged in instrument flight procedure design as a Qualified Designer with a written statement specifying:
(a) that the person is a Qualified Designer; and
(b) the types of procedure that the person is approved to design; and
(c) any limitations or supervision requirements that apply; and
(d) any approval to supervise other design staff.
4.1.1.1 The following documents, as applicable, are required for the design of instrument flight procedures and management of the design process:
(a) CASA Manual of Standards (MOS) Part 173;
(b) ICAO Procedures for Air Navigation — Air Operations, Doc 8168‑OPS/611, Volume II — Construction of Visual and Instrument Flight Procedures;
(c) ICAO Instrument Flight Procedures Construction Manual, Doc 9368‑AN/911;
(d) ICAO Template Manual for Holding, Reversal and Racetrack Procedures, Doc 9371‑AN/912/2;
(e) ICAO Required Navigation Performance Authorization Required Procedure Design Manual, Doc 9905‑AN/471;
(f) ICAO Quality Assurance Manual for Flight Procedures Design, Doc 9906‑AN/472, Volume 1 — Flight Procedures Design Quality Assurance System;
(g) ICAO Quality Assurance Manual for Flight Procedures Design, Doc 9906‑AN/472, Volume 2 — Flight Procedure Designer Training (Development of a Flight Procedures Designer Training Programme);
(h) ICAO Quality Assurance Manual for Flight Procedures Design, Doc 9906‑AN/472, Volume 3 — Flight Procedure Design Software Validation;
(i) ICAO Quality Assurance Manual for Flight Procedures Design, Doc 9906, Volume 5 — Validation of Instrument Flight Procedures;
(j) ICAO Performance Based Navigation (PBN) Manual, Doc 9613‑AN/937.
4.1.2.1 Document and data control processes are those that control the authorisation, publication, distribution, and amendment of all documentation issued or required by certified designers and authorised designers.
4.1.2.2 These processes must ensure that:
(a) documents are authorised by the Chief Designer or a designated person;
(b) the currency of documentation can be readily determined;
(c) documents are available at locations where needed by staff;
(d) only current versions of documents are available;
(e) A master copy of all documentation is securely held; and
(f) all documents that are related to and referenced in the Operations Manual are indexed in the Operations Manual.
4.1.3.1 A certified or authorised designer must maintain the following records:
(a) all certificates, correspondence, data, calculations, worksheets, drawings, charts and other information pertaining to the design of a procedure;
(b) staff records (see paragraph 3.4.1).
4.1.3.2 Records must be made available for audit by CASA.
4.1.3.3 Records relating to procedure designs must be retained for the period that a procedure is available for use and for a period of two years after a procedure ceases to be available or is withdrawn.
4.1.3.4 Staff records must be retained during the time that staff are employed.
5.1.1.1 A certified designer must establish and maintain a Safety Management System (SMS) in accordance with the following standards.
5.1.2.1 A Safety Management System must define the policies, processes, and practices for managing the safety of all procedure design work.
5.1.2.2 A Safety Management System that meets the following criteria is to be issued under the authority of the Chief Designer.
5.1.2.3 The Safety Management System must:
(a) be a comprehensive and valid statement of the safety situation that applies in actual operations;
(b) define the organisation’s safety objectives;
(c) present the safety situation in respect to compliance with all relevant CASA, ICAO, internal, and other safety related standards;
(d) define the safety accountabilities of all personnel;
(e) be kept under review for effectiveness by all personnel;
(f) include arrangements to encourage staff to identify safety hazards or concerns and suggest methods for enhancement of safety;
(g) establish procedures for the communication and processing of safety concerns within the organisation;
(h) define the interface arrangements between internal groups of the organisation;
(i) be available to, and complied with, by all personnel of the organisation;
(j) contain a safety hazard/risk analysis and risk control/mitigation assessment in accordance with an established methodology endorsed by CASA;
(k) include a quality management system based on those elements of ISO 9001 relevant to instrument flight procedure design;
(l) be documented in a manner that is readily available to all staff.
6.1.1.1 Terminal Instrument Flight Procedures are classified as one of the following types:
(a) Non-precision Approach (Ground-based);
(b) Non-precision Approach (RNP APCH);
(c) Precision Approach (Ground-based);
(d) Precision Approach (GBAS);
(e) Approach with Vertical Guidance (APV);
(ea) Required Navigation Performance Authorization Required Approach (RNP AR APCH);
(f) Departure;
(g) Helicopter (Off-shore) — Airborne Radar.
6.1.2.1 All designs, other than a design mentioned in paragraph 6.1.1.1 (g), must be validated in accordance with the Standards mentioned in Chapter 7.
6.1.2.2 On completion of a design, a certified designer must apply to CASA for flight validation.
Note The address for applications is anaa.corro@casa.gov.au or Air Navigation, Airspace and Aerodromes Manager, Civil Aviation Safety Authority, GPO Box 2005, Canberra, ACT 2601.
6.1.2.3 The application is to include a completed draft copy of the design procedure prepared for publication in accordance with a data product specification given to the designer under regulation 175.160 of CASR 1998.
6.1.2.4 CASA shall arrange for a CASA officer who is a qualified validation pilot to conduct the flight validation.
6.1.2.5 The certified designer shall provide an aircraft of a type approved by the CASA officer conducting the flight validation.
6.1.2.6 The certified designer shall provide a qualified designer to be part of the validation crew.
6.1.3.1 Public Procedures. For a procedure which is to be published in the AIP, the certified designer shall forward to the AIS:
(a) A Certificate of Design signed by the Chief Designer stating that the design has been completed in accordance with CASR Part 173, and,
(b) A copy of the design in the format specified in a data product specification given to the certified designer under regulation 175.160 of CASR 1998.
6.1.3.2 Other procedures. If a procedure is:
(a) not to be published in the AIP; or
(b) not an amended version of a published foreign State procedure where the amendments have been made by an authorised designer;
then, the certified designer, or authorised designer, must provide the following to CASA:
(c) a copy of the design in the format specified in this MOS;
(d) except for an Off-shore Specialised Helicopter Design — a Certificate of Design signed by the Chief Designer stating that the design has been completed in accordance with Part 173 of CASR 1998.
Note The address for applications is anaa.corro@casa.gov.au or Air Navigation, Airspace and Aerodromes Manager, Civil Aviation Safety Authority, GPO Box 2005, Canberra, ACT 2601.
6.1.3.3 Notice of withdrawal. A certified designer or an authorised designer:
(a) who, for paragraph 6.1.3.1 or 6.1.3.2, forwards to the AIS or CASA (as the case requires) a certificate of design, or a copy of a design, for a type of terminal instrument flight procedure (TIFP design); and
(b) who subsequently withdraws the TIFP design in compliance with maintenance requirements under paragraph 6.1.4.1A;
must, as soon as possible after the withdrawal, give written notice to the AIS or CASA (as the case requires) that the TIFP design is withdrawn.
6.1.3.4 NOTAM of withdrawal. As soon as possible after receiving a notice mentioned in paragraph 6.1.3.3, the AIS or CASA (as the case requires) must ensure that a notice of the withdrawal of the TIFP design is published in the AIP or a NOTAM.
6.1.4.1 Maintenance of a Terminal Instrument Flight Procedure includes:
(a) general text and data amendments;
(b) redesign to conform with changes to design standards;
(c) provision of advice regarding obstructions in the vicinity of the aerodrome or procedure;
(d) redesign or amendment required as a result of changes to critical obstacles;
(e) changes as directed by CASA;
but excludes the periodic flight revalidation of procedures.
6.1.4.1A Maintenance of a type of TIFP requires that, if written notification about an aerodrome is received from CASA under paragraph 2.1.9A of the Manual of Standards (MOS) — Part 139 Aerodromes, the following safety procedures must be followed:
(a) withdrawal of the TIFP design for the aerodrome; and
(b) written notification to the aerodrome operator that, in accordance with the maintenance requirements of this paragraph, the TIFP design has been withdrawn because the aerodrome was not a certified aerodrome or a registered aerodrome.
Note This procedure is to complement the obligation on CASA under paragraph 2.1.9A of the Manual of Standards (MOS) — Part 139 Aerodromes that where an aerodrome with a TIFP ceases (for whatever reason) to be certified and does not become registered, or ceases to be registered and does not become certified, CASA will take every reasonable step necessary to give written notification to the certified or authorised designer of the TIFP.
6.1.4.2 At intervals not exceeding five years, CASA shall conduct a flight re-validation of a procedure. On completion of a flight re-validation, CASA will advise the certified designer of any changes required.
6.1.5.1 Prior to the effective publication date of a procedure, the certified designer must forward to the aerodrome operator for which a procedure has been designed, diagrams and obstacle data sufficient to enable the aerodrome operator to fulfil obligations to report and monitor obstacles in the vicinity of an aerodrome as required under CASR Part 139.
6.2.1.1 This section details the standards that must be applied to the issue of a procedure design authorisation in accordance with CASR Part 173 Subpart C.
6.2.1.2 Authorisations are required for persons engaged in:
(a) the review and/or amendment of terminal instrument flight procedures at aerodromes outside Australia in order to apply Australian standards to procedures promulgated by foreign States; and
(b) the design of a helicopter off-shore TIFP in accordance with Section 8.6 (Helicopter off-shore procedures — airborne radar).
6.2.2.1 A Design Authorisation shall contain the following:
(a) the names of persons authorised; and
(b) details of the work that those persons are authorised under CASR Part 173 to perform; and
(c) the standards or design criteria to be used; and
(d) any limitation or conditions that apply to the authorisation; and
(e) the procedures to be followed in the application of the authorisation and the incorporation of those procedures in company operations manuals or other appropriate documents.
7.1.1.1 Flight validation is required for:
(a) instrument approach procedures;
(b) revised instrument approach procedures where the final course has been re-aligned by 3° or more.
7.1.1.2 Validation of an instrument flight procedure comprises:
(a) a review of the draft procedures from an operational perspective conducted by the validation pilot; and
(b) a validation flight check.
7.1.1.3 The process of instrument approach procedure design focuses on those controlling obstacles that affect the procedure. This focus is facilitated through the use of various obstacle and terrain databases. The purpose of flight validation is to verify database information, to check all obstacles (including the identification of any unforeseen obstacles) that affect the safety of the procedure, and to assess the 'flyability' of the procedure.
7.1.2.1 Validation flights must carry maps and charts that meet the following requirements:
(a) An appropriate topographical map of at least 1:250,000 scale or larger scale. (A scale of 1:100,000 may be necessary in areas of precipitous terrain and when checking circling, final and missed approach segments.) The map must be marked by the procedure designer with:
(i) final segment splay/s;
(ii) missed approach segment splay/s;
(iii) circling area for the appropriate categories or category groups; and
(iv) controlling obstacles for each segment, MSA and holding pattern.
7.1.3.1 Validation flights must be undertaken in daylight hours and in VMC. The ceiling should be above the initial approach altitude (preferably above the 25 NM MSA).
7.1.4.1 The Chief Designer is responsible for the organisation of flight validation activities.
7.1.4.2 The procedure design flight validation crew member is responsible for the planning of validation flights.
7.1.5.1 The standard for the type of aircraft to be used for flight validation of a design is an aircraft that has performance capabilities appropriate to the type and design of the procedure.
7.1.5.2 The aircraft must be of a configuration that permits good visibility and adequate cabin dimensions permitting maps and other documents to be readily referred to in flight.
7.1.5.3 The type of aircraft is to be approved by the CASA validation pilot.
7.1.5.4 An aircraft flight simulator, approved by the CASA validation pilot may be used to verify database information and flyability of the procedure.
7.1.6.1 The minimum crew is a pilot and a procedure designer.
7.1.6.2 Only persons involved in the validation procedure being conducted in an aircraft are to be carried in the aircraft.
7.1.7.1 Judgment must be applied when planning the validation flight to minimise the time spent on task. Efficiently linked segments and avoiding those areas where obstacles will have no affect on the procedure will help to achieve this objective.
7.1.7.2 Crew responsibilities:
(a) the pilot must fly the aircraft;
(b) the procedure designer must:
(i) visually navigate the aircraft; and
(ii) direct the pilot by providing tracks and altitudes to fly; and
(iii) note any differences to the pre-determined list of obstacles;
(c) both crew members are responsible for lookout;
(d) when flying the segments of the procedure, the aircraft should be configured to emulate the highest category aircraft for which the procedures are planned—this will be particularly important when the length of a particular segment is short;
(e) when checking individual obstacles, the highest practical speed, commensurate with fuel reserves should be used;
(f) during the validation process, gear should be up and any lights that increase the visibility of the aircraft should be turned on.
7.1.8.1 Prior to conducting validation of a procedure in a populated or environmentally sensitive area, the procedure designer should:
(a) discuss with the validation pilot any options for reducing the environmental impact of the flight.
(b) as appropriate, advise the aerodrome operator, ATC, local CASA office and any other affected persons, of the details of the proposed operation, including advice that low-level flying will be required.
(c) advise the CASA Public Relations office in sufficient time to permit a press release to be issued.
7.1.9.1 The actual sequence of checks is not mandated in this document, as each situation will suggest the most economical way of arranging the elements of the task.
7.1.9.2 The specified altitude(s) for the validation of an instrument approach segment is/are equal to the published segment minimum altitude(s) minus the Minimum Obstacle Clearance (MOC) applicable to the segment.
7.1.9.3 Each controlling obstacle and/or procedure segment must be checked at a specified altitude(s) to validate the obstacle data used and to determine whether there are any unforeseen obstacles extending above the specified altitude. Such a case would indicate that the unforeseen obstacle is higher than the controlling obstacle and that it may affect the procedure. If such an unforeseen obstacle is observed, its location and observed height AMSL must be recorded for subsequent detailed analysis by the procedure designer.
7.1.10.1 Each 25 NM sector, or the 25 NM circle, and the 10 NM circle must be checked at their specified altitudes. 25 NM and 10 NM MSAs include obstacles out to 30 NM and 15 NM respectively from the navigation aid or ARP upon which the MSA is based. Checks must include the controlling obstacle in addition to other obviously high terrain or obstacles. Where the sector/circle does not exhibit greatly differing terrain elevations, judgment may be exercised regarding the tracks flown to provide a full coverage of the area.
7.1.11.1 Each Terminal Arrival Altitude (TAA) sector must be checked at its specified altitude. TAAs include obstacles out to 30 NM from the initial approach fix upon which the TAA is based. Checks must include the controlling obstacle in addition to other obviously high terrain or obstacles. Where adjacent TAAs do not have greatly differing terrain elevations, judgement may be exercised regarding the tracks flown to provide a full coverage of the area.
Note: This paragraph is included in anticipation of Terminal Arrival Altitudes being included in the next amendment to PANS-OPS.
7.1.12.1 Controlling obstacles will be determined by the procedure designer for each segment within each sector of the arrival procedure. These obstacles must be checked at the specified altitude. Additionally, each step in the final and intermediate segments must be flown at the OIS altitude. Each step must be flown around the radius of the step plus 1 NM, between the lateral limits of the sector splay. The controlling obstacles for these steps can be checked during the process of flying the steps.
7.1.13.1 The circling area must be checked by flying around the lateral limit of the circling area for the lowest supported aircraft category or group (usually CAT A/B) at the specified altitude for that category and looking in towards the airfield. In this manner, both the controlling obstacle and any unforeseen obstacles will be seen in the one action.
7.1.13.2 The same procedure is then used to check obstacles in the circling area for the next highest supported aircraft category or group (CAT C/D). By conducting the inner check first, obstacles that may affect all categories can be readily identified.
7.1.13.3 Circling area checks are not conducted in those areas designated 'No Circling'.
7.1.14.1 The final and, where implemented, the intermediate segment, must be checked as follows:
(a) fly from overhead the MAPT at the specified altitude for the final segment, at 90° to the final track, to the limit of the splay;
(b) turn to fly away from the airfield along the lateral edge of the splay at the final specified altitude to abeam the step down fix (if implemented) or abeam the FAF:
(i) abeam the step down fix, climb to the specified altitude for the next section of the final segment;
(ii) terminate abeam the FAF unless an intermediate segment is implemented, in which case continue along the lateral limit of the intermediate segment at the intermediate specified altitude until abeam the IF and terminate at that point;
(iii) during this process look across the splay to identify the controlling obstacle and any unforeseen obstacles;
(c) conduct the same process on the opposite side of the splay, but looking in the opposite direction;
(d) if the terrain and visibility are such that an unobstructed view can be had from one side of the splay to the other, the procedure outlined above can be shortened by flying along the centreline of the splay at the appropriate specified altitude.
7.1.15.1 The missed approach segment must be checked in accordance with the following:
(a) position the aircraft at the start of climb point, determined in accordance with Figure 7‑1, at the specified level;
(b) fly the aircraft along the missed approach track, climbing at a rate that equates to the missed approach design gradient, until in the final phase of the missed approach.
7.1.15.2 For environments with numerous obstacles, the missed approach segment should be checked by flying the missed approach splays in a similar manner to that specified for the final and intermediate segments, but climbing along the lateral edge of the splay, in accordance with the missed approach design gradient, until in the final phase of the missed approach.
7.1.15.3 The validation start of climb must be determined in accordance with Figure 7‑1
Figure 7‑1: Validation start of climb
7.1.16.1 Figure 7‑2 shows a method for linking the checks of the final and missed approach segments.
Figure 7‑2: Final and missed approach segments
7.1.17.1 The controlling obstacles for the holding and initial segments must be checked at their specified altitude and any unforeseen obstacles identified. These checks may be combined with the checks of the DME/GPS Arrival Procedure.
7.1.18.1 The complete design, as proposed for publication, must be checked for operational acceptability. This check should be flown at the maximum segment speeds for the fastest category of aircraft served by the procedure. The check includes:
(a) lead radials;
(b) outbound tracks (highest use category);
(c) outbound timing (highest use category);
(d) descent gradients;
(e) bank angle for turn onto final during base turns;
(f) runway alignment and distance from runway at the minima;
(g) descent gradient from the minima for a straight-in approach;
(h) the missed approach; and
(i) acceptability of initial and intermediate segment lengths for GPS approaches.
7.1.19.1 For runway aligned approaches where a windsock is not located adjacent to the runway threshold, it must be confirmed that a windsock is visible when the aircraft is at the MDA, in accordance with CAO 92.2.
7.1.20.1 Some of these checks will be conducted close to obstacles and in close proximity to airfields, therefore a visual-and-listening watch by all crewmembers is essential. In particular, the following points should be noted:
(a) pay particular attention to airspeed during manoeuvres with high angles of bank;
(b) be vigilant for inconspicuous towers and power transmission lines. Some towers are painted in low-contrast colours;
(c) be alert for birds, particularly near bushfire smoke and over mountainous areas or inland water bodies.
7.1.21.1 Give priority to other traffic when validation requirements conflict with existing traffic patterns.
7.1.22.1 Try to:
(a) avoid flight over built-up areas, concentrations of animals, or other noise-sensitive areas;
(b) avoid repetitious flight over the same area or areas, and
(c) minimise high RPM noise.
7.1.23.1 A flight validation report form, prepared for the applicable aerodrome, must be attached as part of the validation flight request package. The standard report format is shown in Section 7.2.
7.1.23.2 Following completion of the validation flight:
(a) the pilot must complete the validation report; and
(b) the procedure designer must process the report form and complete the follow-up action.
7.1.24.1 The standard for the qualifications and experience of Pilots-in-Command of instrument flight procedure validation flights is:
(a) ATPL;
(b) current command instrument rating, endorsed for the type of procedure under validation;
(c) relevant experience in multi-engine IFR procedures;
(d) completion of a course in PANS-OPS procedures design principles;
(e) a thorough knowledge of ICAO PANS-OPS procedures design principles and methods;
(f) adequate knowledge of the design of procedures in accordance with the MOS;
(g) satisfactory completion of a flight validation course conducted by CASA and possession of a letter of competency issued by CASA certifying his/her competence to conduct flight validation;
(h) satisfactory completion of a course in aerodrome lighting and visual approach slope guidance systems conducted by CASA and possession of a letter of competency issued by CASA certifying his/her competence to conduct aerodrome lighting inspections;
(i) a low flying permit issued in accordance with CAR 157(4)(b); and
(j) completion of a procedure flight validation flight within the previous year.
7.1.24.2 Helicopter procedures are to be validated by pilots who, in addition to the above qualifications, are familiar with helicopter procedure design and operations.
7.1.24.3 Should the validation pilot not be qualified as pilot-in-command of a helicopter, aircraft or flight simulator to be used for a validation flight, another pilot may be assigned to be the pilot in command provided that the validation pilot occupies a seat in the cockpit and directs the conduct of the validation.
FLIGHT VALIDATION REPORT AIRPORT NAME, STATE (Y CODE)
Complete this report to record the results of the flight validation. Those segments that do not apply should be so annotated.
COMMON SEGMENTS
SEGMENT | COMMENT | NEED for CHANGE E (Essential) D (Desirable) |
Circling | | |
25/10NM MSA | | |
APPROACH PROCEDURE (NAME)
SEGMENT | COMMENT | NEED for CHANGE E (Essential) D (Desirable) |
Initial | | |
| | |
Intermediate | | |
| | |
Final | | |
| | |
Missed Approach | | |
| | |
Holding | | |
| | |
APPROACH PROCEDURE (NAME)
SEGMENT | COMMENT | NEED for CHANGE E (Essential) D (Desirable) |
Initial | | |
| | |
Final | | |
| | |
Missed Approach | | |
| | |
Holding | | |
| | |
DME or GPS ARRIVAL (SECTOR A)
SEGMENT | COMMENT | NEED for CHANGE E (Essential) D (Desirable) |
Initial | | |
| | |
Intermediate | | |
| | |
Final | | |
| | |
Missed Approach | | |
| | |
Any previously unidentified obstacles that may affect the procedure can be listed in the table below.
PREVIOUSLY UNIDENTIFIED OBSTACLES |
DESCRIPTION | APPROXIMATE ELEVATION | LOCATION | OWNER (if known) |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
Certification
1. The specified altitudes of the above instrument procedures have been checked and the procedures are acceptable subject to the above-mentioned changes (if any) being incorporated.
2. The specified altitudes of the GPS Arrival Sector A have been checked and the procedure is acceptable subject to the above-mentioned changes (if any) being incorporated.
3. The aerodrome is currently certified/registered/other.
4. The WDIs are suitable for straight-in approaches to runways …………………… and
unsuitable for straight-in approaches to runways ………………… . The suitable WDIs
are/are not illuminated.
5. The approach procedures were/were not found to be operationally suitable for straight-in minimas.
(Signature of validation pilot)
8.1.1.1 Performance Category Groups. Procedures should normally be designed for category groups. Common grouping is A/B and C/D. Unless specific operational gain is necessary, groups must not be split for OCA penalties of less than 100 ft.
8.1.1.2 Category E. Category E procedures will not normally be designed.
8.1.1.3 Overlapping Procedures. The primary areas for instrument approach procedures other than DME Arrivals must not be closer than one nautical mile to the primary area of a procedure to a second aerodrome, unless all procedures involved are wholly contained in controlled airspace. Where this is not practical, vertical separation may be used to ensure that a minimum of 1,000 ft is maintained between aircraft on the two procedures.
8.1.1.4 Airspace Buffers. Procedures within controlled airspace must be designed so that:
(a) horizontally:
(i) a 1 NM buffer is provided between the airspace boundary and the boundary of:
(A) for holding—the primary holding area;
(B) for non-precision approach segments—the primary area;
(C) for precision approach segments—the OAS W and X surfaces.
(b) vertically:
(i) A 500 ft buffer is provided between the nominal aircraft position and an airspace boundary set for VFR level; or
(ii) A 1,000 ft buffer is provided between the nominal aircraft position and an airspace boundary set at a useable IFR level;
except for precision approaches where, in addition, the basic ILS surfaces must be wholly contained within the controlled airspace boundary;
(c) for the Missed Approach Segment:
(i) clearance from airspace is determined using a combination of vertical and horizontal dimensions:
(A) vertically, the height of the nominal aircraft position in a missed approach is determined by applying the techniques of PANS-OPS Vol II, or ICAO Doc 9905 missed approach criteria, using a gradient of 5% from the SOC to the missed approach altitude;
(B) if this height conflicts with airspace, then horizontally a 1 NM buffer is provided between the airspace boundary and the missed approach primary area.
Note: If airspace considerations require a nominal gradient greater than 5%, the IAL chart must show a climb gradient identified by an asterisk.
8.1.1.5 Prohibited and Restricted (P and R) Areas. Procedures which cross or abut P and R areas must be designed so that:
(a) where the P or R area contains flying activities:
(i) horizontally, the boundary of the P or R area does not infringe:
(A) for holding—the primary holding area plus a 1 NM buffer;
(B) for non-precision approach segments:
the primary area of Initial and Intermediate Approach segments plus a 1 NM buffer, and
the primary and secondary area of the Final Approach segment;
(C) for precision approach segments—the OAS W and X surfaces plus a 1 NM buffer.
(ii) vertically, the altitude limit over the area must be the vertical limit of the P or R area plus 500 ft, or the altitude dictated by obstacle clearance criteria, if higher.
(b) where the P or R area is not used for flying activities:
(i) horizontally, the boundary of the P or R area must not infringe:
(A) for holding—the primary holding area;
(B) for non-precision approach segments—the primary area of the Initial, Intermediate and Final approach segments;
(C) for precision approach segments—the OAS W and X surfaces;
(ii) vertically, the upper limit of the P or R area may be used provided obstacle clearance criteria are met.
(iii) for the Missed Approach Segment, clearance from airspace is determined using a combination of vertical and horizontal dimensions:
(A) vertically, the height of the nominal aircraft position in a missed approach is determined by applying the techniques of PANS‑OPS Vol II, or ICAO Doc 9905 missed approach criteria, using a gradient of 5% from the SOC to the missed approach altitude;
(B) if this height conflicts with a P or R area, then horizontally the missed approach primary and secondary areas must not infringe the P or R area boundary.
Note: If a gradient of greater than 5% is required, the IAL chart must show the climb gradient identified by an asterisk.
8.1.1.6 Danger Area Associated with High-Velocity Gas Efflux. Procedures which cross or abut danger areas associated with high-velocity gas efflux must be designed so that:
(a) for procedures based on conventional navigation aids:
(i) horizontally, the danger area does not infringe the procedure primary area.
(ii) vertically, the upper limit of the danger area may be used provided obstacle clearance requirements are met.
(b) for GPS based procedures:
(i) horizontally, the nominal final approach and missed approach tracks clear the danger area by a minimum of 1,000 m;
(ii) vertically, the upper limit of the danger area may be used provided obstacle clearance criteria are met;
(iii) the missed approach incorporates a minimum turn of 45° away from the danger area.
8.1.2.1 Instrument procedure charts must be identified in accordance with ICAO Annex 4 requirements.
8.1.3.1 Wherever possible, non-precision approach procedures must be designed as straight-in approaches in accordance with the alignment criteria contained in PANS‑OPS Vol II or ICAO Doc 9905 for RNP AR APCH.
8.1.3.2 Publication of straight-in minima is limited to aerodromes where the runway conforms to the Non-Precision Approach Runway standards contained in MOS Part 139, with the following exceptions for GPS non-precision approach procedures.
(a) Runway Width and Strip Width. Minimum runway width of 30 m and a minimum strip width of 90 m for procedures limited to code 1, 2 and 3C aeroplanes. For aerodromes with a runway strip width less than 300 m, the MDA must be adjusted in accordance with paragraph 8.1.4.1. Runways accommodating aeroplanes above code 3C require a minimum graded runway strip width in accordance with MOS Part 139.
(b) Approach OLS Area and Gradient. The approach OLS area and gradient parameters are as per MOS Part 139, except that the length of inner edge may be reduced to a minimum length equal to the runway strip width provided in accordance with paragraph 8.1.3.2(a). Where an OLS area survey to the Non-Precision Approach Runway criteria is not available, a straight-in approach minima may be published, provided the MDA is 500ft or more above the aerodrome elevation and an operational assessment confirms the visual approach path is clear of obstacles. The visual approach path for these purposes commences at the point where the nominal 3° approach path coincides with the planned MDA. The obstacle free plane extends from this “Nominal Intercept Point” at an altitude equal to the MDA minus MOC, to a point 50 ft above the runway threshold. (See Figure 8‑1). Laterally, the visual approach path will commence with a width equal to the runway strip width provided and splay at 10% to the visual approach point described above.
Figure 8‑1: Visual descent segment
(c) Surface Wind Information. Surface wind information must be provided in accordance with CAO 92.2.
(d) Runway Edge Lighting. Runway edge lighting shall have 60 m spacing, except that existing 90 m spacing is acceptable subject to assessment for Non-Precision Approach Runways intended to be used in visibility conditions of 1.5 km or more. The suitability of existing 90 m spaced lighting for night approaches must be assessed during the instrument approach validation process.
8.1.4.1 Runway Strip Width less than 300 Metres. Where a straight-in procedure is approved to a runway with a runway strip width of less then 300 m, the minimum obstacle clearance height (OCH) for straight-in procedures required must be no lower than the final segment minimum obstacle clearance plus
metres
Note: The minimum OCH for straight-in procedures referred to in paragraph 8.1.4.1 is as follows:
(a) Precision:
As determined by OAS or CRM
(b) Non-precision (without FAF - 295 ft MOC):
Runway Strip Width (m) Minimum OCH (ft)
230 311
180 323
150 330
90 344
(c) Non-precision (with FAF - 246 ft MOC):
Runway Strip Width (m) Minimum OCH (ft)
230 262
180 274
150 281
90 295
8.1.4.2 Parallel Runways—Sidestep Procedures. Sidestep procedures shall have a visual segment ceiling not less than that derived from the following formula:
318.4 + F
Where VS = visual segment ceiling (feet)
X = ceiling for final segment C/L intercept of 30°
Values are:
CAT A: 300
CAT B: 330
CAT C: 435
CAT D: 540
D = distance between parallel runways in nautical miles
F = factor; for CAT A: 48; CAT B: 82; CAT C: 118; CAT D: 153.
(above values are in feet)
8.1.5.1 In addition to the requirements of PANS‑OPS Vol II or ICAO Doc 9905 for RNP AR APCH, the following factors are to be taken into account in determining OCA:
(a) Accuracy of Maps and Charts. The vertical and horizontal accuracy of the maps and charts used during instrument approach procedure design must be accounted for. In particular:
(i) if the vertical accuracy of the map or chart cannot be determined a value of ± 10 m must be used;
(ii) if terrain height is being determined from contour information, the height of the highest terrain must be assumed to be the height of the highest contour plus the contour interval of the map;
(iii) spot height information does not attract any accuracy superior to that of contour information—therefore, despite the presence of spot height information, terrain height must be calculated from contour data in accordance with paragraphs 8.1.5.1(a)(i) and 8.1.5.1(a)(ii) above.
(iv) survey control point information and the elevation of the top of some structures are subject to specific survey—therefore, these heights may be used without adding the map/chart vertical accuracy described in this sub-paragraph.
(b) Forecast Altimeter Setting Error.
(i) at aerodromes where a 24-hour ATC tower service is not provided, and a TAF is issued on a 24-hour basis (TAF Category 1 or 2 aerodrome), an allowance of 100 ft (3 hPA) must be added to the lowest OCA;
(ii) for aerodromes where a TAF may not be available 24 hours per day, an allowance of 150 ft (5 hPA) must be added to the lowest OCA;
(iii) the published MDA box will be shaded in both cases to permit a reduction of 100 ft to MDA if local QNH is available from an approved source.
(c) Obstacles.
(i) all known obstacles, including vegetation, must be accounted for. In addition, an allowance must be made for vegetation growth and the erection of new obstacles in the period between obstacle surveys. The allowance for these factors must be 100 ft over open country or water suitable only for leisure boating and 200 ft over tropical rain forest, open water, or built-up areas. In the event of known obstacles exceeding these values, the greater value must be used.
8.1.6.1 Definitions. In paragraphs 8.1.6.1A to 8.1.6.1D:
APLL, in relation to a runway, means:
(a) the length of an ALS, for the runway, in metres; or
(b) if there is NALS in relation to the runway — zero metres.
MDH means minimum descent height.
straight-in approach procedure aligned with runway centreline means a straight-in approach procedure, for a runway, which:
(a) utilises precision approach (ILS or GLS), ILS localiser, GNSS, VOR, or NDB, guidance for the final approach segment, and
(b) for which the final approach track is offset by:
(i) for a Cat A or B aeroplane — not more than 10 degrees from the runway centreline; or
(ii) for a Cat C or D aeroplane — not more than 5 degrees from the runway centreline.
TCH means threshold crossing height.
VPA means vertical path angle, in degrees.
8.1.6.1A Application of procedures for determining minimum RVR, or visibility, for certain straight-in approach procedures. The procedures for determining minimum RVR, or visibility, under paragraphs 8.1.6.1B and 8.1.6.1C apply to any of the following straight-in approach procedures:
(a) a precision approach procedure with a DH of not less than 200 ft;
(b) an approach procedure with vertical guidance;
(c) a non-precision approach procedure;
which meets the PANS-OPS Vol II, or ICAO Doc 9905, requirements for a straight-in approach procedure.
8.1.6.1B Method for determining minimum RVR or visibility — straight-in approach procedure aligned with runway centreline. Subject to paragraph 8.1.6.1D, for a straight-in approach procedure mentioned in paragraph 8.1.6.1A, which is a straight-in approach procedure aligned with runway centreline, the minimum RVR, or visibility, for the procedure is the greater of the following:
(a) 
;
(b) the value, as an RVR or visibility, stated in column 1, 2, 3 or 4 of Table 8.1, relevant to the type of ALS in relation to a runway stated in the first row of the table.
Table 8-1: Minimum RVR or visibility
Type of ALS | FALS (Column 1) | IALS (Column2) | BALS (Column 3) | NALS (Column 4) |
| RVR | Visibility | RVR or Visibility | RVR | Visibility | RVR or Visibility |
Distance (metres) | 550 | 800 | 800 | 1,000 | 1,200 | 1,500 |
8.1.6.1C Method for determining minimum RVR or visibility — other straight-in procedures. Subject to paragraph 8.1.6.1D, for a straight-in approach procedure mentioned in paragraph 8.1.6.1A, which is not a straight-in approach procedure aligned with runway centreline, the minimum RVR, or visibility, for the procedure is the greater of the following:
(a) 
;
(b) 1 500 m.
8.1.6.1D Use of RVR minimum. For paragraphs 8.1.6.1B and 8.1.6.1C, an RVR minimum may be used only for a procedure to approach a runway equipped with electronic RVR measuring equipment.
8.1.6.2 Maximum RVR or visibility. For a straight-in approach procedure, the maximum RVR, or visibility, for the procedure is 5 km.
8.1.6.2A Minimum Values for Precision Approach Category II and III procedures. For an approach type mentioned in column 1 of Table 8-1A, the minimum RVR values approved for precision approach Category II or III procedures are those in column 2 of the Table which, subject to the runway capability conditions mentioned in column 3 of the Table, correspond to the approach type.
Table 8-1A: Category II and III minimum visibility based on runway capability
Approach type (Column 1) | Minimum RVR (metres) (Column 2) | Runway capability (Column 3) |
Precision approach Category II | 350 | Precision approach runway Category II. Precision approach Category II and III lighting system. Touchdown Zone (TDZ) RVR sensor and at least 1 RVR sensor at either the MID point or END zone. |
300 | In addition to the runway capability requirements for operations with a minimum RVR of 350 m, the runway has: (a) runway centreline lighting with a longitudinal spacing that applies to a runway intended for use in RVR conditions less than a value of 350 m; and (b) either: (i) an ILS classified at least II/D/2; or (ii) taking into account any associated operating limitation, a precision approach facility that has performance characteristics at least equivalent to an ILS classified at least II/D/2. |
Precision approach Category IIIA | 175 | Precision approach runway Category III. Precision approach Category II and III lighting system. RVR sensors at all zones. |
Precision approach Category IIIB | 75 |
Precision approach Category IIIC | Not applicable in the Australian environment. |
8.1.6.3 Circling. Circling visibility must be determined from Table 8-2. (The basis upon which the values for circling visibility have been determined are contained in Table 8-2A.)
Table 8‑2: Circling visibility
Aircraft Category | A | B | C | D | E |
Circling Visibility (km) | 2.0 | 2.4 | 4.00 | 5.00 | 7.00 |
Note: The values in Table 8-2 have been determined allowing for an omni directional wind of 25 knots, an achieved bank angle of 25°, an OAT of ISA + 15, an altitude of aerodrome elevation plus 1,000 ft and the average visual manoeuvring speed for the aircraft category. Subject to an absolute minimum value of 2 km, the values were derived using the following formula:
V = 0.9D
Where V = circling visibility
D = diameter of turn at the average manoeuvring speed for category
0.9 = minimum downwind spacing, in nautical miles, to achieve alignment on final approach.
The circling visibility recognises that the pilot of the aircraft must be able to see the runway from the downwind position.
Table 8-2A: Circling visibility values
Category | A | B | C | D |
IAS (kt) | 90.00 | 125.00 | 170.00 | 195.00 |
TAS (1 000 ft, ISA + 15) | 93.70 | 130.14 | 176.99 | 203.01 |
r (km) | 0.51 | 0.98 | 1.81 | 2.38 |
E (km) | 0.21 | 0.29 | 0.39 | 0.45 |
D=2r +2E | 1.43 | 2.54 | 4.41 | 5.67 |
0.9D | 1.29 | 2.29 | 3.97 | 5.11 |
Minimum Circling Visibility | 2.00 | 2.40 | 4.00 | 5.00 |
8.1.6.4 Where a procedure terminates outside the circling area, a visual segment may be provided. The visibility for a visual segment must be 5,000 m.
8.1.7.1 Visibility. The State visibility minima must be the value determined by paragraph 8.1.6, adjusted as follows:
(a) for RVR values up to 400 m, the calculated values must be rounded-up to the nearest multiple of 25 m;
(aa) for RVR values greater than 400 m and up to 800 m, the calculated values must be rounded-up to the nearest multiple of 50 m;
(b) for RVR values greater than 800 m and visibility values up to 1,000 m the calculated values must be rounded-up to the nearest multiple of 100 m;
(c) for visibility values greater than 1,000 m, the calculated value must be rounded-up to the nearest multiple of 200 m.
Exception. For runway approaches it must not be less than the minimum values permitted at paragraphs 8.1.6.1B, 8.1.6.1C, 8.1.6.2A, 8.1.14 and 8.1.15.
Note: The rounding in paragraph 8.1.7.1 may give inappropriate values when determining visibility for foreign procedures. In such cases, the value determined under paragraph 8.1.6 may be rounded to any value within the following range:
1. for RVR values up to 800 m = 25 m;
2. for RVR values greater than 800 m = 50 m;
3. for visibility values greater than 1,000 = 100 m
8.1.7.2 DA/MDA. The State DA/MDA must not be less than any of the following:
(a) the OCA determined in accordance with ICAO PANS‑OPS Vol II or ICAO Doc 9905 for RNP AR APCH and paragraph 8.1.5;
(b) the visual segment limitations contained in paragraph 8.1.4;
(c) the OCA plus any margin deemed necessary to account for poor ground equipment performance or local conditions;
(d) for Category I operations — threshold elevation plus 200 ft;
(e) for SA Category I operations — threshold elevation plus 150 ft;
(f) for Category II and SA Category II operations — threshold elevation plus 100 ft.
8.1.7.3 RA Height. A radio altimeter (RA) height must be determined and published for each SA Category I, SA Category II and Category II instrument flight procedure.
Note: A DH or RA height is not required for Category III procedures. If an operator’s approval requires use of a DH for a particular Category III operation, the flight crew will apply the DH specified in the approval.
8.1.8.1 AOM must be the higher of the OCA corrected for the factors listed in ICAO Annex 6 or the State DA/MDA. For precision approaches, the State DA must be adjusted for pressure error to determine the AOM. Aircraft pressure error correction must be applied or, alternatively, at least 50 ft added to the DA.
8.1.9.1 The general alternate minima must be calculated by adding the tolerance for the forecast ceiling and visibility to the circling minima (500 ft and 2 km).
8.1.10.1 Airborne Equipment. Special Alternate Minima are available only for operations by aircraft with dual ILS/VOR navigation capability (that is, with duplicated LLZ, G/P, Marker and VOR receivers). Although not specified and not required, it is assumed that such aircraft will also have duplicated ADF systems.
8.1.10.2 Ground Equipment. For a location to be considered it must be served by ILS, LLZ or straight in VOR instrument approach procedures to at least two runway directions which are suitable for use by all aircraft likely to use the special low alternate minima.
8.1.10.3 The instrument approach procedures should preferably utilise different VHF ground equipment. However, the use of the same ground equipment for both approaches is acceptable provided the equipment meets the requirements of ICAO Annex 10, Volume 1, Attachment C, Table C2 or Attachment F, as applicable, and an alternative straight in instrument approach procedure which utilises a different aid is available.
8.1.10.4 Other Requirements. Only controlled aerodromes qualify. The Special Alternate Minima shall not be available during any period when ATC and Bureau of Meteorology (BoM) observations and forecasting services are not provided at the aerodrome concerned.
8.1.10.5 Calculation of Special Alternate Minima. To calculate Special Alternate Minima:
(a) add 500 ft ceiling and 1.5 km visibility to the ceiling and visibility minima of the VHF runway aligned instrument approach procedure which provides the greatest advantage.
(b) add 400 ft ceiling and 1.5 km visibility to the ceiling and visibility minima of the VHF runway aligned instrument approach procedure to an alternative runway.
(c) when required by paragraph 8.1.10.3, add 300 ft ceiling and 1.5 km visibility to the ceiling and visibility minima of any other straight-in instrument approach procedure which utilises an aid other than those used in paragraphs 8.1.10.5(a) and 8.1.10.5(b) above.
8.1.10.6 The alternative minimum is the highest of those obtained above. Ceiling values should be rounded out to the nearest 50 ft. Visibility values should be rounded up to the next higher kilometre or half kilometre.
8.1.10.7 An extra margin over and above those mentioned above may be added if believed to be necessary because of peculiarities in the local weather patterns and/or difficulties in forecasting.
8.1.10.8 Invalidation of Special Alternate Minima. Instructions shall be promulgated in appropriate operational documents requiring aircraft operators/pilots-in-command to monitor the availability of required navigation aids and BoM meteorological services. These will include issuing of appropriate instructions requiring the reversion to standard alternate minima during periods when:
(a) local BoM METAR/SPECI are not available;
(b) BoM forecasting services are not available;
(c) protracted unserviceability (ie. greater than 7 days) of any ground equipment associated with the approach aid exists;
(d) an aerodrome control service is not provided.
8.1.11.1 Alternate minima must be determined:
(a) in accordance with paragraph 8.1.9; or
(b) by adding forecast tolerances for ceiling and visibility to the minima of the second lowest independent approach procedure suitable for the operation and for which the aircraft is equipped.
Note: If State forecast tolerances cannot be determined, or there is a doubt on the availability/reliability of the approach aid, a ceiling tolerance of 500 ft and visibility tolerance of 2 km must be used.
8.1.11.2 Except for ILS with approved Category I minima, the procedures used by each navigation system must be independent of each other. In determining alternate criteria, minima lower than ILS Category I must not be considered.
8.1.11.3 If the aerodrome has straight-in procedures to a runway that is not suitable for the operation and if circling is approved, the alternate minima must not be lower than the circling minima plus the forecast tolerances.
8.1.11.4 The approved alternate minima must be the greater of:
(a) the values determined by the foregoing paragraphs;
(b) the values approved by the State operating the aerodrome;
(c) 400 ft ceiling and 1,600 m visibility where the values determined in paragraph 8.1.11.4(a) above are based entirely on precision landing minima; or
(d) 800 ft ceiling and 3,000 m visibility where the values determined for paragraph 8.1.11.4(a) above are not based solely on precision landing minima.
Notes: 1. Independent means that the two procedures will not utilise a common radio navigation aid.
2. Where provided, a terminal area radar control service may be considered as an independent radio navigation aid for an approach to a point not later than 2 NM prior to the FAF.
8.1.11.5 The alternate minima determined above will vary with aerodrome, aircraft and radio aid serviceability and may be assessed only immediately prior to departure.
Notes: 1. Independent means that the two procedures will not utilise a common radio navigation aid.
2. Where provided, a terminal area radar control service may be considered as an independent radio navigation aid for the following parts of the procedure
a. approach. To a point defined by CASA which shall not be later than the FAF
b. missed approach. After a point defined by CASA which shall not be before the acceleration segment.
3. A categorised ILS may be considered as two independent procedures.
4. Operators may select nominal alternate values for ports. However, this does not absolve the captain of the pre-flight planning responsibility referred to in paragraph 8.1.11.5. Further, the operator must demonstrate that the value selected will satisfy paragraph 8.1.11 for all operations, both scheduled and unscheduled which may occur during the calendar period of application of the values selected. The demonstration must account for the three standard deviation wind values for both landing and crosswind components and may account for a downwind landing to the value allowed in the relevant aircraft certification.
8.1.12.1 Circling Area. Where the circling area has been segmented to facilitate a lower minima and the missed approach point is located within the NO CIRCLING area, the area should be extended by an arc of no less than 2 NM to include the missed approach point within the applicable circling area. (See Figure 8‑3.)
Figure 8‑3: Circling area modified to exclude MAPT
8.1.12.2 Height Above Aerodrome (HAA) and Height Above Threshold (HAT). The minima for non-precision approach procedures shall include a HAA, and for precision approach procedures shall include a HAT.
8.1.12.3 GPS Non-Precision Approach Missed Approach Procedures—Use of Secondary Areas. This instruction clarifies the application of secondary areas in the design of GPS NPA missed approach procedures within the Australian FIR.
(a) ICAO PANS-OPS Vol II Part III paragraph 33.7.2 and Appendix paragraph 6.5 support the use of secondary areas for GPS NPA missed approach design. However, the text following the asterisks in Figures III-33-6 and III-33-7 state that, until further operational experience is obtained with basic GNSS receivers, the full width of the missed approach area should be treated as the primary area.
(b) Until the ICAO position is reviewed, the following standards are to be applied to GPS NPA missed approach design within the Australian FIR. The provisions of PANS-OPS Vol II Part III paragraph 7.2.2 may be used for straight missed approach segments. Secondary areas will not apply to turning missed approach procedures after the earliest turn point on the inner edge of the turn and the intersection of the extended secondary splay and the wind spiral on the outer edge of the turn. Refer to PANS-OPS Vol II Part III paragraph 7.3.5.5 and Figure III-7-23 and III-7-27.
8.1.12.4 Location of missed approach point
8.1.12.4.1 For a runway-aligned approach, the missed approach point (MAPt) must be located at or before the threshold.
8.1.12.4.2 Where the final approach is not aligned with the runway centre line, the optimum location is the intersection of the final approach course and the extended runway centre line.
8.1.12.4.3 The MAPt may be moved closer to the FAF to provide obstacle clearance in the missed approach area provided that the MDA/H is not lower than the altitude/height on the design descent gradient at the MAPt.
8.1.13.1 The following metres (m) to statute mile (mile (statute)) or feet (ft) value are deemed to be equivalent for operational purposes.
Table 8‑3: Operationally Equivalent Values
Visibility | RVR |
400 m = ¼ mile (statute) | 50 m = 150 ft |
800 m = ½ mile (statute) | 75 m = 250 ft |
1,200 m = ¾ mile (statute) | 100 m = 300 ft |
1,600 m = 1 mile (statute) | 150 m = 500 ft |
2,000 m = 1 ¼ mile (statute) | 175 m = 600 ft |
2,400 m = 1 ½ mile (statute) | 200 m = 700 ft |
2,800 m = 1 ¾ mile (statute) | 300 m = 1,000 ft |
3,200 m = 2 mile (statute) | 350 m = 1,200 ft |
3,600 m = 2 ¼ mile (statute) | 400 m = 1,400 ft |
4,000 m = 2 ½ mile (statute) | 500 m = 1,600 ft |
4,400 m = 2 ¾ mile (statute) | 550 m = 1,800 ft |
4,800 m = 3 mile (statute) | 600 m = 2,000 ft |
| 800 m = 2,400 ft |
| 1,000 m = 3,000 ft |
| 1,200 m = 4,000 ft |
| 1,600 m = 5,000 ft |
| 2,000 m = 6,000 ft. |
8.1.14.1 Scope. Paragraph 8.1.14 provides the requirements for designing and publishing an SA Category I approach procedure at a runway with reduced lighting with:
(a) a DH of 150 ft or higher; and
(b) a visibility minimum of 450 m or longer RVR.
8.1.14.2 Air Traffic Control. The aerodrome at which the runway is located must be a controlled aerodrome.
Note: Aircraft operators will not be permitted to conduct SA Category I instrument approach operations unless aerodrome control is in operation. |
8.1.14.3 Runway Eligibility. An SA Category I approach procedure must not be designed for a runway unless:
(a) the runway has, or is qualified for, a precision approach Category I ILS procedure; and
(b) the aerodrome operator has given the designer information that the runway meets the requirements of the Manual of Standards (MOS) – Part 139 Aerodromes for SA Category I, SA Category II, Category II or Category III instrument approach operations.
Note: The specifications for a runway suitable for supporting SA Category I and SA Category II instrument approach operations can be found in Chapter 2 of the Manual of Standards (MOS) – Part 139 Aerodromes. |
8.1.14.4 Precision Approach Facilities. The relevant aeronautical telecommunications service and radio navigation service provider must have given the designer information that the runway has precision approach facilities suitable for SA Category I operations, including information about whether the precision approach aid is suitable for only HUD-equipped aircraft.
8.1.14.5 Instrument Approach Procedure. The approach procedure must be designed in accordance with the standards PANS‑OPS Category I or II criteria, using the Height loss/altimeter margin for radio altimeters.
8.1.14.6 The SA Category I DH minimum must be the higher of the following:
(a) 150 ft;
(b) the calculated OCH.
8.1.14.7 The RA and DA minima must be calculated directly from the calculated DH value without rounding.
8.1.14.8 The SA Category I RVR minima must be derived in accordance with Table 8‑4, taking into account the type and length of the ALS and the DH.
Table 8-4: SA Category I operation RVR minima
DH (ft) | Type of approach lighting system |
FALS | IALS | BALS | NALS |
RVR (m) |
150 – 170 | 450 | 550 | 650 | 800 |
171 – 185 | 500 | 600 | 700 | 900 |
186 – 200 | 500 | 600 | 750 | 900 |
8.1.14.9 Instrument Approach Chart. On the instrument approach chart for SA Category I approach procedures:
(a) the SA Category I minima must be associated with a chart note stating ‘Special aircrew and aircraft certification required’ or similar words to that effect; and
(b) for procedures that are limited to HUD-only operations — a method must be used to clearly indicate this limitation.
8.1.15.1 Scope. Paragragh 8.1.15 provides the requirements for designing and publishing an SA Category II approach procedure with:
(a) a DH of 100 ft or higher; and
(b) a visibility minimum of 350 m or longer RVR.
Note: As detailed below, for an SA Category II approach procedure, the landing system and some ground facilities must meet all Category II requirements. However, Category II and III approach lighting, TDZ lighting and runway centreline lighting is not necessarily required. |
8.1.15.2 Air Traffic Control. The aerodrome at which the runway is located must be a controlled aerodrome.
Note: Aircraft operators will not be permitted to conduct SA Category II instrument approach operations unless aerodrome control is in operation. |
8.1.15.3 Runway Eligibility. An SA Category II approach procedure must not be designed for a runway unless:
(a) the runway has, or is qualified for, a precision approach Category I ILS procedure; and
(b) the aerodrome operator has given the designer information that the runway meets the requirements of the Manual of Standards (MOS) – Part 139 Aerodromes for SA Category II, Category II or Category III instrument approach operations.
Note: The specifications for a runway suitable for supporting SA Category II instrument approach operations can be found in Chapter 2 of the Manual of Standards (MOS) – Part 139 Aerodromes. |
8.1.15.4 Precision Approach Facilities. The relevant aeronautical telecommunications service and radio navigation service provider must have given the designer information that the runway has precision approach facilities suitable for SA Category II operations.
8.1.15.5 Instrument Approach Procedure. The SA Category II DH minimum must be the higher of the following:
(a) 100 ft;
(b) the calculated OCH.
8.1.15.6 The RA and DA minima must be calculated directly from the calculated DH value without rounding.
8.1.15.7 The SA Category II RVR minima must be the longest of the following:
(a) for a runway with TDZ lights and no runway centreline lights — 400 m;
(b) for a runway with no TDZ lights and no runway centreline lights — 450 m;
(c) the distance derived in accordance with Table 8‑5, taking into account the type and length of the ALS, the aircraft category and the DH.
Table 8-5: SA Category II operation RVR minima
Type of ALS | FALS | IALS | BALS | NALS |
Aircraft category | A – C | D | A – D | A – D | A – D |
DH (ft) | RVR (m) |
100 – 120 | 350 | 400 | 450 | 600 | 700 |
121 – 140 | 400 | 450 | 500 | 600 | 700 |
141 – 160 | 400 | 500 | 500 | 600 | 750 |
161 – 199 | 400 | 500 | 550 | 650 | 750 |
8.1.15.8 Instrument Approach Chart. On the instrument approach chart for SA Category II approach procedures, the SA Category II minima must be associated with a chart note stating ‘Special aircrew and aircraft certification required’ or similar words to that effect.
8.2.1.1 ICAO Annex 11 Chap 2 outlines the requirement for the publication of Lowest Safe Altitudes (LSALT) and the criteria to be used for their determination. In particular, it states that the LSALT determined shall be at least 1,000 ft above the highest obstacle located within the area concerned.
8.2.1.2 The purpose of this standard is to outline the rules and parameters to be used for the calculation of LSALT for IFR en-route operations. The particular issues addressed are:
(a) effective areas;
(b) charts;
(c) altitude tolerances;
(d) failure of radio navigation aids;
(e) applicability.
8.2.2.1 Route defined by Radio Navigation Aids or by Dead Reckoning. The area to be considered for the LSALT calculation for a particular route or route segment must be a 5 NM area surrounding and including the route navigation tolerance area. The navigation tolerance must be based on an expanding track tolerance of ± 10.3° from the navigation aids which provide track guidance, and ±15° when no track guidance is available and DR navigation is required to be used. The maximum width of the route navigation tolerance area is 50 NM. For route or route segments served by VORs, the navigation aid coverage to be applied for the determination of the route navigation tolerance area must be the lesser of 60 NM or the maximum coverage published in ERSA. The effective areas for various circumstances are shown at paragraph 8.2.5.
8.2.2.2 Operations with Area Navigation Systems (including GPS). The area to be considered in specifying the LSALT applicable to any route or route segment must be as defined in paragraph 8.2.2.1 with an expanding track tolerance of ±10.3° to a maximum width of 30NM either side of track for conventional area navigation (RNAV) systems and 7 NM for GPS.
8.2.2.3 RNP operations. For routes flown by aircraft operating under a RNP approval, LSALT may be calculated in accordance with the standards contained in ICAO Doc 8168.
8.2.2.4 Navigation Charts. In specifying the LSALT for any latitude/longitude grid, only the area within the latitude/longitude grid need be considered.
8.2.3.1 The chart recommended for plotting navigation tolerance areas and the extraction of terrain/obstacle information is the ICAO 1:1,000,000 WAC Series chart. However, whenever doubt exists concerning the accuracy of the information on the WAC, larger scale maps must be used. The RAAF Joint Operations Graphic (Air) Chart, at a scale of 1:250,000, is ideal for this purpose.
8.2.3.2 The terrain to be considered in the determination of the LSALT for any route segment must be:
(a) when heights are shown on charts by spot heights and hachuring only—the highest spot height within the navigation tolerance area.
(b) where heights are shown on charts as spot heights, contours and hypsometric tints—the highest spot height within the navigation tolerance area or, where there is no spot height, the highest terrain within the intruding contours.
8.2.3.3 As spot height information shown on charts may not necessarily indicate the highest terrain in that area, it is necessary to examine the contour information to ensure that no higher terrain exists that would control the LSALT. Further, whenever contour intervals are used to determine the highest terrain, then the highest terrain must be assumed to be at the level of the next higher contour.
8.2.3.4 Obstacles shown on Australian produced WACs are generally limited to those having a height of 360 ft (110 m) or more. Therefore, whenever these charts are used for the determination of LSALTs an obstacle allowance of 360 ft must be made. Further, due to this allowance, caution must be exercised when a published tower/mast appears at first to be the critical obstacle. With the addition of the 360 ft obstacle allowance it is possible that the corrected highest terrain within the navigation tolerance area may be higher than the tower/mast first identified as the critical obstacle.
8.2.4.1 Where the corrected highest terrain (refer paragraphs 8.2.3.3 and 8.2.3.4) in the navigation tolerance area for a particular route or route segment is not above 500 ft, and there are no obstacles above 500 ft, the LSALT must be 1,500 ft.
8.2.4.2 In Australia, where the corrected highest terrain or obstacle in the navigation tolerance area for a particular route or route segment is above 500 ft, the LSALT must be 1,000 ft higher than the corrected terrain or obstacle.
8.2.4.3 For operations outside Australia where the highest terrain or obstacle in a particular route or route segment is:
(a) above 500 ft but not above 15,000 ft, the LSALT must be 1,000 ft higher than the highest terrain or obstacle, except that where the topographic reliability as shown in the WAC for any portion of the navigation tolerance area for the route or route segment is not ‘A’ (that is, compiled from accurate topographic maps and surveys), the LSALT must be 2,000 ft higher than the highest terrain in the navigation tolerance area;
(b) above 15,000 ft, the LSALT must be 2,000 ft higher than the highest terrain or obstacle in the navigation tolerance area.
8.2.4.4 The altitude calculated in accordance with the above must be rounded up to the next highest 100 ft increment.
Figure 8‑4: Overlapping nav-aid coverage on route segment with each coverage half length of segment or more or coverage of destination nav-aid half length of segment or more
Figure 8‑5: Coverage of destination nav-aid less than half-length of segment
Figure 8‑6: No nav-aid at departure aerodrome, nav-aid at destination with coverage such that 10.3° lines intersect 15° lines from departure aerodrome
Figure 8‑7: No nav-aid at departure aerodrome, nav-aid at destination with coverage such that 10.3° lines do not intersect 15° lines from departure aerodrome
Figure 8‑8: Nav-aid at departure aerodrome, no nav-aid at destination—segment distance not exceeding 275 NM (10.3° diverges 50 NM in 275 NM)
Figure 8‑9: Nav-aid at departure aerodrome, no nav-aid at Destination—segment distance exceeding 275 NM
Figure 8‑10: Route segment without nav-aids — segment distance not exceeding 186 NM (15° diverges 50 NM from track in 186 NM)
Figure 8‑11: Route segment without nav-aids—segment distance exceeding 186 NM
Figure 8‑12: As for Figure 8‑5, but 10.3° lines expand to maximum distance of 50 NM either side of track—in no case is the maximum width of basic area inside 5 NM buffer are greater than 50 NM either side of track
Figure 8‑13: Route segment with intermediate reporting point (no positive fix) basic area for A-B is ADEF and for B-C is GDCF
Figure 8‑14: Route segment with change of direction at D.R position — coverage of destination nav-aid not less than length of second sector of route segment
Figure 8‑15: Route segment with change of direction at D.R position—coverage of destination nav-aid less than length of second sector of route segment
Figure 8‑16: Route segment with change of direction at DME/azimuth aid fix—coverage of destination nav-aid not less than length of second sector of route segment (NB: diagram shows DME at A; DME fix area would be different if DME at another position)
Figure 8‑17: Route segment with change of direction at DME/azimuth aid fix—coverage of destination nav-aid less than length of second sector of route segment (NB: diagram shows DME at A. DME fix area would be different if DME at another position)
8.3.1.1 A DME/GPS arrival procedure is designed to permit an aircraft to descend from an en-route altitude at or above the lowest safe altitude to a minimum altitude at an aerodrome using DME or GPS distance measurement and ground based azimuth guidance facilities. The procedure is prescribed for particular tracks or sectors and takes the form of a series of descending steps at appropriate distances.
8.3.1.2 The procedure normally uses a DME that is located close to the azimuth facility but in some cases use is made of a remote beacon. Procedures must be contained within the demonstrated coverage of the navigation aids used. Where more than one tracking aid exists at an aerodrome, tracking is normally permitted to either aid. However, only one GPS reference waypoint is nominated as the GPS distance source. The GPS reference waypoint is either the position of the azimuth aid nearest the DME for DME/GPS procedures, or the position of the primary azimuth aid for GPS only procedures. Azimuth and distance tolerances must be accounted for when determining obstacle or airspace clearance.
8.3.1.3 In designing a DME/GPS arrival, allowances are to be made for terrain clearance, navigational tolerances and errors in DME/GPS distance measurement. In addition, steps are to be designed to maintain an aircraft in controlled airspace where this is applicable to the particular route. Details of the allowances are set out in the following paragraphs.
8.3.2.1 DME/GPS arrivals are instrument approach procedures. DME and DME/GPS arrival procedures are not included in ICAO DOC 8168 – OPS/611 Volume II, but are designed using the criteria contained in that document applicable to non-precision approaches and therefore have initial, intermediate and final approach segments. To account for control area steps, the step information is frequently extended beyond the initial approach fix (IAF) into the en-route segment. The method of blending the en-route segment to the procedure is shown in Figure 8‑18. Should the procedure be for a sector, the centreline of Figure 8‑18 is expanded by the size of the sector (Figure 8‑19).
Figure 8‑18: Track DME/GPS arrival
Figure 8‑19: Sector DME/GPS arrival
8.3.2.2 DME/GPS arrivals shall:
(a) not terminate below the circling minima.
(b) normally have the following segment lengths (variations must be noted on charts by reference to DME distance):
(i) initial segment—5 NM;
(ii) intermediate segment—5 NM;
(iii) final segment—as required;
Example:
If a procedure is based on a DME which is 1 NM beyond the azimuth aid and the procedure has standard length segments, the DAP would have to show ‘IAF 16 DME, FAF 6 DME’.
(c) be designed with a MAPT;
(d) assume that manoeuvring across sectors is minimised after the intermediate fix;
(e) not utilise the 15% horizontal gradient provisions of PANS-OPS Vol II paragraph 2.8.4 for sector procedures except in the final segment.
8.3.2.3 The navigation tolerances applicable to the facility which may be used to assist azimuth guidance are contained in ICAO PANS-OPS Chap 2, as are those applicable to DME. The GPS fix tolerance is 2NM for segments at or beyond 25NM from the nominated reference aid (based on GPS receiver operating in the en-route mode) and 1 NM for segments within 25NM of the nominated reference aid (based on the receiver operating in the terminal mode).
8.3.3.1 Minimum obstacle clearance is as follows:
(a) initial approach and en-route segments – 1,000 ft;
(b) intermediate approach segment – 500 ft;
(c) final approach segment – 300 ft.
Note: 1. No allowance may be made in the final segment MOC for the use of a FAF.
2. When determining the height of terrain from contours, the next highest contour to that included in this splay will be used for clearance purposes.
8.3.4.1 These steps are determined by the radius of an arc drawn from the DME beacon or GPS reference waypoint through the primary and secondary areas. It will determine the passage of obstruction and/or control area steps or boundaries significant to the last prescribed altitude. To this radius is applied the appropriate DME or GPS fix tolerance as specified in paragraph 8.3.2.3.
8.3.4.2 Except in cases of control area boundaries, DME/GPS steps will provide descent to altitudes lower than the lowest safe altitude for the route segment.
8.3.4.3 The design of the steps should be such as to ensure that an aircraft will be able to conduct a normal type of descent without detriment to the efficiency of the procedure. For instance, the steps should be so arranged that a steady descent will result, rather than a series of steps, which if followed by an aircraft, would require large variations in the rate of descent. Figure 8‑20 shows an example of good design.
Figure 8‑20: DME/GPS arrival steps
8.3.5.1 The minimum altitudes applicable to DME/GPS arrivals will normally be the circling minimum altitudes associated with the azimuth facility. In many cases, however, it is not possible for an aircraft to descend to these altitudes, due to limitations imposed by preceding DME/GPS steps. In such cases a higher MDA may be necessary. Depending on the direction of approach it may be decided to integrate the DME/GPS arrivals with a procedure already prescribed in AIP DAP.
8.3.6.1 The MAPT is either the azimuth facility or a point prior to this facility, and is identified for each procedure together with the ‘Missed Approach’ instruction on the procedure plate.
8.3.6.2 The missed approach areas and the obstacle clearance criteria are the same as those for Instrument Approach and Landing Procedures and are outlined in ICAO PANS-OPS, Vol II Part 3 Chap 7.
8.3.7.1 The following steps must be followed in designing DME/GPS Arrivals.
(a) Obtain appropriate WAC, 1:250 000 Military Map, 1:100,000 MAP, ERC (Area Chart VTC if available) and instrument approach chart. Ensure that the latest issue of each chart is obtained.
(b) Plot the required track or sector on the WAC and largest scale map available.
(c) Plot the primary and secondary axes around the required track or section in accordance with Figure 8‑18 and Figure 8‑19.
(d) From the ERC or Area Chart determine En-route, LSALT and airspace steps (CTA).
(e) List the elevation and DME/GPS distances of terrain and obstructions in descending order within the tolerance areas, commencing at the point where descent below the LSALT first becomes possible. In the calculation of obstacle heights, additional clearance should be made for chart error, mountainous terrain, vegetation and built-up areas.
(f) Add to the identified obstacles the applicable MOC required by paragraph 8.3.3.
(g) Plot the obstacles on a sheet of graph paper, after the determination of a suitable DME distance v Altitude scale. Then, at the top of each obstacle construct a vector parallel to the DME/ALT line and toward the navigation aid, equal to the applicable DME or GPS tolerances (see paragraph 8.3.2.3).
(h) Construct MOC DME/GPS steps by drawing a broken line from en-route LSALT to each of the corrected obstacle positions to minimum altitude (see Figure 8‑21).
Figure 8‑21: DME/GPS steps
(i) If the route or sector is in controlled airspace, it will be necessary to arrange the descent steps so that an aircraft is kept 1,000 ft or 500 ft (as applicable) above the lower limit of the controlled airspace at all times, as well as maintaining the minimum terrain clearance.
(j) It is desirable to provide a steady rate of descent through the steps, (that is, one that can be comfortably achieved by unpressurised aircraft and easily achieved by pressurised aircraft). For this purpose 160 ft per NM is a satisfactory figure. This rate of decent, represented by the full line in Figure 8‑21, extends to the minimum altitude without infringing any of the terrain clearance steps that are represented by the dotted line.
8.4.1.1 Standard Terminal Arrival Routes (STARs) must be designed in accordance with the following standards:
(a) RNAV systems are not to be used as the primary navigation reference below the en-route Lowest Safe Altitude;
(b) STAR procedures employing RNAV waypoints must be identified as RNAV procedures on the associated STAR charts;
(c) STARs should be seamless from the en-route cruise level to:
(i) the initial fix of an instrument approach; or
(ii) A fix from which radar vectors to the runway centreline are given; or
(iii) for domestic flights only, a fix from which a visual approach is given.
(d) holding patterns must be restricted to one per STAR.
(e) the minimum crossing angle between STAR and Standard Instrument Departure tracks should be 45°.
In this section:
ATP means approach termination point that is for a specialised helicopter operation that is to or from:
(a) an off-shore installation; or
(b) a point in space above the surface of the ocean used for operations connected with the off-shore installation.
CAR 1988 means the Civil Aviation Regulations 1988.
G/S means ground speed.
ISA means International Standard Atmosphere.
low terrain means a coastal land feature, including a structure on a feature, provided that the maximum height of the feature and the structure (if any) does not exceed 500 ft AMSL inclusive of any allowance made for vertical errors.
Note Coastal land features include, for example, islets, shoals and cays.
OIP means offset initial point.
TAS means true air speed.
VF means validation fix.
8.6.2.1 For subparagraph 173.030 (b) (ii) of CASR 1998, except as provided for in paragraph 8.6.6.6, 30 NM is the closest distance from the nearest land to an off shore installation that is applicable in carrying on design work on a TIFP that is:
(a) permitted by a procedure design authorisation under Part 173 of CASR 1998; and
(b) for use by Australian aircraft operating under the IFR at or in the vicinity of the installation.
8.6.2.2 The distance mentioned in paragraph 8.6.2.1 may only be used for design work on a TIFP if the requirements of this section are met.
8.6.2.3 The approach criteria for a TIFP provided for in this section represent minimum design standards that must be complied with.
Note Variations to approach designs occasioned by technological change may be presented to CASA and, in the light of aviation safety evaluation, may result in amendment of the MOS or the issue of appropriate instrument.
8.6.3.1 Airborne radar equipment. An airborne radar system must be used for a TIFP under this section, in accordance with the following requirements:
(a) range settings for airborne radar approach procedures must maximise the displayed area around the ATP;
(b) the secondary return from a radar beacon:
(i) must not obscure the primary return; and
(ii) must occur behind the primary return; and
(iii) must not be so remote from the primary return as to cause confusion with a second primary return;
(c) the primary return must be displayed throughout the radar procedure once established inbound.
8.6.3.2 Ground equipment. Subject to paragraph 8.6.3.1, a radar transponder may be used for a TIFP under this section to assist target identification.
8.6.4.1 The flight crew techniques mentioned in this paragraph for a helicopter using a procedure must be:
(a) referred to in the TIFP; and
(b) included in the operations manual of an operator using the TIFP.
8.6.4.2 Flight crew. Only a multi-pilot operation may use an airborne radar approach TIFP.
8.6.4.3 Radar interpretation, operating tolerances and tracking. The following must be complied with for the use of radar:
(a) interpretation of radar pictures must be based on the nearest point of the target return;
(b) distances and flight operating tolerances must be measured from the nearest point of the target return;
(c) no allowance may be made for beam width error or spot size error;
(d) allowance must be made for pulse length error;
Note For a radar with a pulse length of 2.35 µs [long-range mode] the error will be 700 m [0.38 NM], and for a radar with a pulse length of 0.5 µs [short-range mode] the error will be 150 m [0.08 NM]).
(e) radar interpretation must be performed by a pilot who:
(i) has access to all radar controls; and
(ii) is seated in a position to interpret the radar presentation without significant parallax error;
(f) operational tolerances interpreted from radar may be rounded up but must not be rounded down;
(g) radar tracking must be maintained from the VF to the ATP.
8.6.4.4 Radio altimeters. For determining landing minima, fluctuations in measured radio altitude caused by ocean swell may be disregarded if the fluctuations are less than 50 ft about the observed mean.
8.6.4.5 Obstacle clearance check. Before descent from the MSA, the obstacle clearance check must be conducted:
(a) to validate the radar ATP return by:
(i) cross-reference to:
(A) another navigation facility (for example, GNSS); and
(B) the last known position reported by the facility; and
(ii) resolving any discrepancy in position before commencing the approach; and
(b) to detect and locate any radar returns:
(i) between the helicopter and the ATP; or
(ii) in the vicinity of the ATP; and
Note For a method to conduct an obstacle clearance check and ensure that the aircraft does not descend below the radar vertical beam width, see AC 173-5.
8.6.5.1 When relying on airborne radar, a TIFP must use the following:
(a) when the ATP is radar-reflective:
(i) the radar — for azimuthal and distance guidance; and
(ii) the GNSS — for confirmation of the radar picture;
(b) when the ATP is not radar-reflective:
(i) GNSS position of the ATP — for azimuthal and distance guidance; and
(ii) the radar — for orientation.
8.6.5.2 The TIFP must be in the form of:
(a) the direct approach described in paragraph 8.6.5.3; or
(b) the overhead approach described in paragraph 8.6.5.4.
8.6.5.3 The direct approach. For the direct approach TIFP, the following apply:
(a) the en route track to the ATP must proceed at or above MSA to the ATP as determined by GNSS via hand-entered coordinates or coordinates extracted from an electronic database;
(b) the procedure must:
(i) commence at the VF, located between 6 NM and 10 NM from the ATP; and
(ii) proceed to the OIP, located 1.5 NM from the ATP;
(c) the descent point must be located such that MDA/H is reached by 2 NM before the ATP;
(d) at the OIP, the aircraft must be turned 15° left or right and proceed to the MAPt, located 0.75 NM radar or GNSS range from the ATP;
Note The MAPt is located 0.8 track miles from the OIP.
(e) if the missed approach procedure is flown — at the MAPt, the aircraft must:
(i) be turned an additional 30° in the same direction as it turned under paragraph (d); And
(ii) commence the missed approach climb.
8.6.5.4 The overhead approach. For the overhead approach TIFP, the following apply:
(a) the en route track to the ATP must proceed at or above MSA to overhead the ATP as determined by GNSS via hand-entered coordinates or coordinates extracted from an electronic database;
(b) during the en route leg:
(i) the obstacle clearance check must be conducted; and
(ii) the inbound track must be calculated;
(c) the outbound leg must be:
(i) offset by a design angle of 20° from the inbound track; and
(ii) flown for a design distance of 7 NM on descent to 1 200 ft AMSL;
Note Pilots are given some latitude to make small variations around 20° and 7 NM, commensurate with piloting accuracy.
(d) the inbound turn must be conducted at 1 200 ft AMSL;
(e) the inbound leg must be flown at 1 200 ft AMSL until the ATP is reconfirmed by radar;
(f) the descent point must be located such that MDA/H is reached by 2 NM before the ATP;
(g) from the descent point the procedure must be conducted in accordance with paragraphs 8.6.5.3 (d) and (e).
8.6.5.5 For a TIFP mentioned in paragraph 8.6.5.3 (the direct approach), the content and layout (other than physical size) of Figure 8-25 in Appendix 1, Helicopter approach templates and supporting diagrams, must be used as a template for the production of the approach chart for the TIFP.
8.6.5.6 For a TIFP mentioned in paragraph 8.6.5.4 (the overhead approach), the content and layout (other than physical size) of Figure 8-26 in Appendix 1 must be used as a template for the production of the approach chart for the TIFP.
8.6.5.7 Figures 8-22, 8-23 and 8-24 in Appendix 1 are illustrative only.
8.6.6.1 Off-shore helicopter TIFPs must be based on the design criteria provided for by this MOS.
8.6.6.2 The position of radar targets identified in the TIFP must be validated by navigation systems independent of the airborne radar.
Note Validation may be from the last reported position of the ATP under paragraph 8.6.4.5, or from an independent navigation system that complies with AIP Australia Gen 1.5 – 5, Aircraft Instruments, Equipment and Flight Documents, clause 2, Radio Navigation Systems. GNSS is also an example of an independent source of validation.
8.6.6.3 In the final segment of the approach:
(a) radar must be used to detect and locate obstacles; and
(b) once radar contact is established, it must be maintained for the remainder of the approach.
8.6.6.4 Radar target validation must be completed:
(a) before the VF during a direct approach; or
(b) before entering the outbound leg of an overhead approach.
8.6.6.5 Data requirements. Distance, bearing and coordinate data must comply with the quality control requirements specified in Chapter 2 of Annex 11, and in Chapter 2 of Annex 14 — Aerodromes, Volume II, of the Convention on International Civil Aviation, published by ICAO.
8.6.6.6 Reduction of closest distance to nearest land to 15 NM. Despite paragraph 8.6.2.1, the closest distance to nearest land of a TIFP may be reduced to 15 NM but only if:
(a) radar target validation is completed by 10 NM from the ATP; and
(b) there is no terrain (other than low terrain, if any) within 15 NM of the ATP; and
(c) the helicopter flight crew is automatically presented with the VF location as an offset from the ATP; and
Note The VF location is not determined by hand-entered latitude and longitude.
(d) any obstacle greater than 500 ft AMSL:
(i) within a 15 NM radius of the ATP; and
(ii) within 4 NM of the aircraft track;
is identified by the crew; and
(e) the amount by which any obstacle exceeds 500 ft AMSL is added to the holding and initial approach altitudes.
8.6.6.7 Overlap of land. If:
(a) during a direct approach procedure, an ATP located between 30 NM and 15 NM from the coast, results in the holding area overlapping land; and
(b) relocation of the VF and associated holding area does not prevent the overlap;
then, the method for calculating the overlap is as set out in Appendix 2, Calculation of a holding area/land overlap in direct approach procedures.
8.6.6.8 If:
(a) a land overlap cannot be eliminated by:
(i) relocation of the VF; or
(ii) the reorientation of the direct approach direction; and
(b) the nature of the land does not meet the low terrain requirement; and
(c) a holding pattern is to be flown;
then, only an overhead approach procedure may be flown.
8.6.7.1 Secondary areas do not apply to a TIFP area.
8.6.7.2 For navigation specification RNP 0.3, RNP 1, RNP 2 and RNAV 1 and 2, the area semi-width is 2.4 NM.
Note The area semi-width of 2.4 NM is adhered to because RNP 2 and RNAV 2 area primary area semi-width is 2 NM and is fully contained by the procedure area.
The development of the 2.4 NM area semi-width is based on an area length of 8.4 NM. This distance allows a helicopter transit time of 9.4 minutes to the OIP at a G/S of 44 kt for the crew to assess the obstacle situation and determine the MDA/H.
The area semi-width is derived from the distance that would be travelled by a notional surface ship moving at 15 kt towards the MAPt at right angles to the procedure axis, during the time it takes a helicopter to travel 8.4 NM to the OIP.
8.6.7.3 In the missed approach, the procedure is a semi-circle of 4 NM radius centred on the ATP and extending down-track from the ATP, as shown in Figure 8-22.
8.6.8.1 Radar tracking tolerance for a TIFP must not exceed 0.75 NM.
8.6.8.2 The radar tracking tolerance mentioned in paragraph 8.6.8.1 must be included in the operations manual of an operator using the TIFP.
8.6.9.1 Obstacle clearance before the VF. The following applies:
(a) minimum obstacle clearance over obstacles and low terrain must be 1 000 ft; and
(b) if the elevation of an obstacle or low terrain, including small structures on the obstacle or terrain, exceeds 500 ft AMSL, then the elevation must be added to the initial approach altitude.
Note Vertical errors associated with mapping or a database must be included in the 500 ft obstacle clearance.
8.6.9.2 Obstacle clearance after the VF. Minimum obstacle clearance must be applied to the sea surface, and include a minimum wave height of 50 ft, in accordance with PANS-OPS such that the final segment minimum obstacle clearance and the MDA are, respectively, as follows:
(a) 300 ft and 350 ft, using pressure altimetry (BAROALT); and
(b) 200 ft and 250 ft using radar altimetry (RADALT).
8.6.9.3 For observed obstacles (other than ATP) either in the procedure area or radially within 4 NM of the ATP in the missed approach, additional obstacle clearance allowance must be applied in the TIFP, being the greater of:
(a) 200 ft; or
(b) the known obstacle height.
8.6.9.4 If a wave height is forecast, or observed, to exceed 50 ft, the MDA/H must be increased by the amount by which the forecast wave height, or the observed radio altimeter fluctuations, exceed 50 ft.
In determining minima:
(a) minimum altitudes must be rounded up to the nearest 10 ft; and
(b) visibilities must be rounded up to the nearest half kilometre.
A TIFP must account for a tidal rise and fall of up to 50 ft by restricting helicopter descent in the visual segment of the approach to not less than 50 ft above the height of the landing deck.
The TIFP must require visibility which is the greater of the following:
(a) the nominal distance from the MAPt to the ATP;
(b) the distance required to decelerate from the maximum permitted TAS on final at ISA+15°C to the hover;
(c) the distance as defined by the formula under paragraph 8.6.13.
Note The visibility data shown in Figures 8-25 and 8-26 are based on calculations inparagraph 8.6.13 for the indicated MDA and a G/S of 70 kt. Operators must adjust the calculations for actual conditions in accordance with paragraph (a), (b) or (c), whichever is the greater.
For paragraph 8.6.12.1 (c), the formula is in Appendix 3, Determination of obstacle avoidance, in this section.
Note To determine obstacle avoidance, calculations in accordance with the formula in Appendix 3 must be undertaken by the TIFP designer, as part of the process of determining the visibility required for the TIFP. Results from the formula are compared with the visibility requirements in paragraphs 8.6.12.1 (a) and (b) to arrive at the correct applicable visibility. (Figure 8-27 is illustrative only.)
For a TIFP, the minimum distance from a radar defined MAPt to the reference target is the airborne radar’s near echo suppression range.
CASA Head Office is responsible for issuing design authorisations in accordance with Part 173 of CASR 1998 and this MOS.
Note The relevant CASA Area Office will normally be the first point of contact and will advise, review and otherwise assist applicants’ requests for approvals.
Appendix 1 Helicopter approach templates and supporting diagrams
Note See paragraph 8.6.5.
Figure 8‑22: Plan – Final and Missed Approach – direct and overhead approaches
Figure 8‑23: Elevation — direct approach
Figure 8‑24: Plan and elevation — overhead approach
Figure 8‑25: Offshore facility — direct airborne radar approach
Figure 8‑26: Offshore facility — overhead airborne radar approach
Appendix 2 Calculation of a holding area/land overlap in direct approach procedures
The relocation distance for the VF is:
VFA = ATP - VFI - HoldSL
Where:
VFA = relocation distance of the VF location (NM)
ATP = the ATP track distance from land (NM)
VFI = Initial VF distance from ATP (10 NM)
HoldSL = simplified length of the holding pattern (9.1 NM).
The VF is relocated towards the ATP by the amount of VFA, as limited by the 10 NM to 6 NM window.
Example 1: ATP = 15 NM
VFI = 10 NM
HoldSL = 9.1 NM
VFA = 15 - 10 - 9.1 = - 4.1 NM (i.e.; a 4.1 NM overlap).
However, the maximum adjustment for the VF is 4 NM. Therefore, the holding area will overlap land by 0.1 NM.
Example 2: ATP = 21 NM
VFI = 10 NM
HoldSL = 9.1 NM
VFA = 21 – 10 - 9.1 = 1.9 NM.
Therefore, there is a 1.9 NM clearance between land and the holding pattern.
Appendix 3 Determination of obstacle avoidance
Note 1 See paragraph 8.6.12.1 (c) and paragraph 8.6.13.
Note 2 Calculation of the minimum visual segment visibility is based on paragraph 157 (3) (b) of CAR 1988 to avoid obstacles by 300 m horizontally.
Data
Obstacle avoidance (regulation 157 of CAR 1988) | 300 m |
Obstacle recognition | 6 sec + 150 m |
Bank establishment (sec) | 5 |
Bank angle | Rate one turn to 170 kt TAS, thence 25angle of bank |
Wind (kt) | 47 + 2H (where H = altitude/1 000) |
TAS (kt) | Maximum TAS permitted at ISA + 15°C. |
Calculation
Obstacle avoidance | 300 m | = A |
Turn radius (m) (for calculation see PANS-OPS –
Principles for Turn Area Construction) | = B |
Recognition and bank establishment distance (m) 11sec x (TAS + [47+2H]) x 0.51 + 150 m | = C |
Turn point to obstacle distance (m) ((A + B)2 - B2)½ | | = D |
Visibility required (m) | = C + D | |
Figure 8‑27: Determination of obstacle avoidance distance
8.8.1.1 A certified designer may design the instrument approach and landing procedures mentioned in this section for helicopter point-in-space (PinS) operations, provided the procedures are only for operators approved by CASA.
8.8.1.2 The instrument approach and landing procedures in Part IV of PANS-OPS for helicopter PinS RNP APCH approach procedures may be used as an alternative to the instrument approach and landing procedures mentioned in this section.
8.8.2.1 Helicopter procedures under this section are:
(a) classified as specialised helicopter operations; and
(b) must be annotated, in the header and footer, with the following words in upper case bold font: FOR USE BY CASA-APPROVED OPERATORS ONLY.
The use of the specialised helicopter procedures is limited to CASA‑approved operators only.
Note The CASA Area Office forwards to the Manager, CNS/ATM, copies of the relevant parts of each prospective operator’s operations manual. The Manager provides operators with an approval for each TIFP, in accordance with Part 173 of CASR 1998 and this MOS. CNS/ATM also maintains a register of operators authorised to use the procedures, and holds the relevant part of the operators’ operations manuals.
8.8.3.1 All helicopter procedures designed under this section are to be designed in consultation with the local operator. Helicopter procedures are dependent upon visual segment procedures developed by the operator in consultation with the procedure designer. Operational procedures must include key visual features, hazards, routes to be flown and action to be taken in the event that meteorological conditions deteriorate below specified requirements and any other conditions relating to the procedure.
8.8.3.2 The operating procedures are to be included in the Operations Manual of an operator approved to use the procedure.
8.8.4.1 Helicopter procedures will normally be designed with a Visual Approach Area - Helicopter (VAA-H).
8.8.4.2 Procedures that do not provide a VAA-H are to be noted accordingly on the approach chart.
8.8.4.3 The VAA-H criteria are based on the establishment of key visual lead-in features to the HLS. In this respect, each procedure will be unique and requires an operational specification to be included in an operator’s operations manual.
8.8.4.4 The procedure designer must liaise with operators to define key lead-in features.
8.8.4.5 During validation, particular attention has to be considered for local operating procedures and key lead-in features.
8.8.4.6 This area is located between the MAPT and the HLS within which obstacle clearance at MDA is assured.
8.8.4.7 Operations within a VAA-H are visual flight manoeuvres. Once visual contact is established during the instrument approach, the helicopter is positioned within the VAA-H and manoeuvred utilising key lead-in points at altitudes not below the MDA until the HLS is sighted. (See AIP).
8.8.4.8 The missed approach criteria detailed in PANS-OPS are modified to take account of the VAA-H.
8.8.4.9 The centre of the HLS must be surveyed to an accuracy of 1/100th of a second of arc.
8.8.5.1 Area. The VAA-H starts at the commencement of the missed approach segment with a width equal to the width of the final segment primary area at that point. Its boundaries join at a tangent to a circle of 926 m radius centred on the HLS (see Figure 8-28).
Figure 8-28: Visual approach area — helicopter
8.8.5.2 Length. The nominal length of the VAA-H is 3 km. The actual length is determined by the distance from the MAWP to the centre of the HLS. In any event, it should be such as to allow visual reference to be maintained with the HLS or key lead-in points.
8.8.6.1 A minimum obstacle clearance (MOC) of 90 m (295 ft) shall apply throughout the VAA-H. The principle of secondary areas does not apply.
8.8.7.1 In addition to the standard missed approach analysis, a missed approach analysis for the VAA-H is also required. When considering these missed approaches, the obstacle distance (doH) is measured via the shortest distance from the boundary of the VAA-H or missed approach turn initiation area boundary (see Figure 8-29).
Figure 8-29: Turning missed approach
8.8.7.2 Straight Missed Approach. The VAA-H sits within the protected area of the straight missed approach segment. Accordingly, no adjustments are required for the straight missed approach splay (see Figure 8-30).
Figure 8-30: Straight missed approach
8.8.7.3 Turning Missed Approach. Depending on the turn angle, the VAA-H can extend beyond the protected area of the turning missed approach segment (see Figure 8-29) In this event, the turning missed approach area is extended on the outside of the turn by drawing a straight line from the outside edge of the splay at the nominal MAHWP or MATWP at a tangent to the 926 m radius arc around the HLS. The MOC in this extended area is 40 m (130 ft).
8.8.8.1 The MDA for the procedure is the highest calculated OCA of the following the:
(a) final approach;
(b) VAA-H;
(c) missed approach;
(d) VAA-H missed approach.
8.9.1.1 A certified designer must comply with the format and drafting conventions specified in a data product specification, given to the designer under regulation 175.160 of CASR 1998, for the publication of a procedure.
REVISION HISTORY
Note: The Revision History shows the most recent amendment first. Scroll down the table to view details of previous amendment information.
Version | Date | Chapter/ Section/Paragraph | Details |
1.1 | May 2004 | Chapter 8 | Inserted new section 8.1.12.4 Location of missed approach point. |
| | Cover page | Cover page and verso changed to introduce J.S. McMillan as the source of supply for the manual and to reflect version change. |
| | All | Introduced new CASA logo. |
1.0 | February 2003 | All | First issue of MOS Part 173 |
NOTES TO MANUAL OF STANDARDS PART 173
Note 1
The Manual of Standards Part 173 (in force under the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998) as shown in this compilation comprises Manual of Standards Part 173 amended as indicated in the Tables below.
Table of Manual of Standards and Amendments
Year and
number | Date of
notification in Gazette/
registration on FRLI/FRL | Date of
commencement | Application, saving or
transitional provisions |
MOS 173 v1.1 | 1 May 2003 | 1 May 2003 | — |
Manual of Standards Part 173 Amendment (No. 1) 2011 | 29 April 2011
(see F2011L00658) | 30 April 2011 | — |
Manual of Standards Part 173 Amendment (No. 1) 2012 | 30 March 2012
(see F2012L00742) | 1 April 2012 | — |
Manual of Standards Part 173 Amendment Instrument 2015 (No. 1) | 31 March 2015
(see F2015L00381) | 1 April 2015 | — |
Manual of Standards Parts 139, 171, 172 and 173 Amendment Instrument 2016 (No. 1) | 13 January 2016
(see F2016L00042) | 3 March 2016
(see s. 2) | — |
Manual of Standards Part 173 Amendment Instrument 2017 (No. 1) | 8 March 2017
(see F2017L00199) | 9 March 2017
(see s. 2) | — |
Manual of Standards Part 173 Amendment Instrument 2020 (No. 1) | 28 August 2020
(see F2020L01078) | 29 August 2020
(see s. 2) | — |
Manual of Standards Part 173 Amendment Instrument 2022 (No. 1) | 10 August 2022
(see F2022L01052) | 11 August 2022 | — |
Revision History
Version | Date | Chapter
Section
Paragraph | Details |
1.8 | August 2022 Refer to Manual of Standards Part 173 Amendment Instrument 2022 (No. 1) | Paragraph 6.1.4.2 | Amended |
1.7 | August 2020 | Paragraph 1.1.6 | Added |
| Refer to Manual of Standards Part 173 Amendment Instrument 2020 (No. 1) | Subparagraph 2.1.1.1 (oa) (i) | Amended |
| Paragraph 2.1.1.1 (r) | Substituted |
| Paragraph 2.1.1.2 | Amended |
| Paragraph 6.1.2.3 | Amended |
| Paragraph 6.1.3.1 (b) | Amended |
| Paragraphs 8.1.6.1 and 8.1.6.2 | Substituted by new paragraphs 8.1.6.1, 8.1.6.1A, 8.1.6.1B, 8.1.6.1C, 8.1.6.1D and 8.1.6.2 |
| | Paragraph 8.1.6.2A | Amended |
| | Paragraph 8.1.6.2A, Table 8‑1A (first row) | Substituted |
| | Paragraph 8.1.6.2A, Table 8‑1A (first cell in column headed “Runway capability”) | Amended |
| | Paragraph 8.1.6.2A, after Table 8-1A | Note added |
| | Paragraph 8.1.6.3 | Amended |
| | Paragraph 8.1.6.3, after Table 8-2 | Note and Table 8-2A added. |
| | Paragraph 8.1.7.1 | Amended |
| | Paragraph 8.1.7.1, Exception | Amended |
| | Paragraph 8.1.14.8 | Amended |
1.7 contd. | | Paragraph 8.1.14.8, the text after Table 8-4 | Omitted |
| | Paragraph 8.1.15.7, the text after Table 8-5 | Omitted |
| | Paragraph 8.6.1, the Note after the definition of ATP | Omitted |
| | Paragraph 8.6.1, Definitions and abbreviations of AMSL, CASR 1998, GNSS, PANS-OPS, kt, MAPt, MDA, MDH, MDA/H, MSA, NM and TIFP | Omitted |
| | Paragraph 8.6.1, the Note after the definition of VF | Omitted |
| | Section 8.9 | Substituted |
| | Chapter 9 | Omitted |
1.6 | March 2017 | Paragraph 3.2.1.2 (b) | Substituted |
| Refer to Manual of Standards Part 173 Amendment Instrument 2017 (No. 1) | Paragraphs 6.1.1.1 (g) and (h) | Both substituted by a new paragraph 6.1.1.1 (g) |
| Paragraph 6.1.2.1 | Substituted |
| Paragraph 6.1.2.2 | Substituted and a note added |
| Paragraph 6.1.3.2 | Substituted and a note added |
| Paragraph 6.2.1.2 (b) | Substituted |
| Section 8.6 | Entire section substituted |
| | Section 8.7 | Entire section omitted |
| | Section 8.8, the heading | Substituted |
| | Paragraph 8.8.1 | Substituted, including the accompanying paragraphs 8.8.1.1 and 8.8.1.2 |
| | Paragraph 8.8.2.1 | Substituted |
| | Paragraph 8.8.2.2 | Substituted and a note added |
| | Paragraphs 8.8.2.3, 8.8.2.4 and 8.8.2.5 | Omitted |
1.6 contd. | | Paragraph 8.8.4.8 | Substituted |
| | Paragraph 8.8.5.1 | Omit (see Figure 8-30) and insert (see Figure 8-28) |
| | Paragraph 8.8.5.1, title of Figure 8-30 | Substituted |
| | Paragraph 8.8.7.1 | Omit (see Figure 8-31) and insert (see Figure 8-29) |
| | Paragraph 8.8.7.1, title of Figure 8-31 | Substituted |
| | | |
| | Paragraph 8.8.7.3 | Omit (see Figure 8-31) and insert (see Figure 8-29) |
1.5 | March 2016 | Paragraph 8.1.4.1 | Amended |
| Refer Manual of Standards Parts 139, 171, 172 and 173 Amendment Instrument 2016 (No. 1) | Paragraph 8.1.6.1 | Amended |
| | Paragraph 8.1.6.2 | Amended |
| Before paragraph 8.1.6.2A | Inserted a note |
| Paragraph 8.1.6.2A (including Table 8-1A) | Substituted |
| | Paragraph 8.1.7.1 (a) | Substituted with paragraphs 8.1.7.1 (a) and 8.1.7.1 (aa) |
| | Paragraph 8.1.7.1 | Amended |
| | Paragraph 8.1.7.2 | Substituted with paragraphs 8.1.7.2 and 8.1.7.3 |
| | Paragraph 8.1.11.2 | Amended |
| | Paragraph 8.1.11.2 | Amended |
| | Paragraph 8.1.11.5, Note 2.a. | Amended |
| | Paragraph 8.1.11.5, Note 2.b. | Amended |
| | Paragraph 8.1.11.5, Note 4 | Amended |
| | After paragraph 8.1.13.1 | Inserted new subsections 8.1.14 and 8.1.15 |
1.4 | April 2015 | Paragraph 1.1.1.2 | Substituted |
| Refer Amendment Instrument 2015 (No. 1) | Section 1.1.2, the title | Substituted |
| Paragraph 1.1.5.1 | Substituted |
| | Paragraph 2.1.1.1 (m) | Omitted and inserted text |
| | Paragraph 4.1.1.1 | Substituted |
| | Paragraph 6.1.1.1 | Substituted |
| | After paragraph 7.1.5.3 | New paragraph 7.1.5.4 inserted |
| | Paragraph 7.1.6.2 | Substituted |
| | Paragraph 7.1.24.3 | Substituted |
| | Paragraph 8.1.1.4 (c) (i) (A) | Omitted and inserted text |
| | Paragraph 8.1.1.5 (b) (iii) (A) | Omitted and inserted text |
| | Paragraph 8.1.3.1 | Omitted and inserted text |
| | Paragraph 8.1.5.1, the chapeau | Omitted and inserted text |
| | Paragraph 8.1.7.2 (a) | Omitted and inserted text |
1.3 | May 2012 | Paragraph 2.1.1.1 | Substituted text |
| Refer Amendment (No. 1) 2012 | After paragraph 2.1.1.1 (o) | Inserted paragraph 2.1.1.1 (oa) and note |
| After paragraph 2.1.1.1 | Inserted paragraph 2.1.1.2 |
| | After paragraph 6.1.3.2 | Inserted paragraphs 6.1.3.3 and 6.1.3.4 |
| | Paragraph 6.1.4.1 | Substituted text |
| | After paragraph 6.1.4.1 | Inserted paragraph 6.1.4.1A |
1.2 | April 2011 | Subsection 8.1.6.1 | Inserted text |
| Refer Amendment (No. 1) 2011 | Subsection 8.1.6.2 | Inserted text |
| Subsection 8.1.6.2, Table 8-1 | Substituted table |
1.2 contd. | | After subsection 8.1.6.2, (including Table 8-1) | Inserted text and table |
| | Subsection 8.1.7.2 | Substituted text |
| | After paragraph 8.1.7.2 (d) | Inserted paragraph |
1.1 | May 2003 | All | Reissued |