U.S. Department Advisory of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration Circular Subject: Instrument Flight Procedure Validation Date: 03/20/2019 AC No: 90-113B (IFPV) of Performance Based Navigation (PBN) Initiated By: AFS-400 Instrument Flight Procedures (IFP)
1. Purpose.
This advisory circular (AC) provides guidance for conducting IFPV of satellite-enabled PBN instrument flight procedures for both fixed-wing and helicopter aircraft. It also addresses validation of helicopter wide area augmentation system (WAAS) special IFP. This AC supplements and does not change the requirements of FAA Order 8200.1, United States Standard Flight Inspection Manual (USSFIM). Ground validation, pre-flight validation (including simulator evaluation and obstacle assessment), and flight validation are described in this document. Occasionally, the word “must” or similar language is used within this AC where the desired action is deemed critical. The use of such language is not intended to add to, interpret, or relieve a duty imposed by 14 CFR.
2. Applicability.
The primary audience for this AC is non-FAA service providers performing IFPV of PBN IFPs.
The secondary audience is Flight Standards Service Aviation Safety Inspectors (ASIs) and Air Traffic Organization (ATO) personnel within the FAA who are directly associated with the FAA IFPV process or charged with the responsibility to authorize and provide oversight of non-FAA IFPV service providers.
3. Cancellation.
This advisory circular cancels FAA AC 90-113A, Instrument Flight Procedure Validation (IFPV) of Satellite-based Instrument Flight Procedures (IFP), dated 05/01/15.
4. Principal Changes.
The implementation of the Flight Standards changes, nomenclature, and office alignment, as well as Group designations. Organizational changes include the elimination of regional Flight Standards offices and the creation of four functional organizations within Flight Standards: Air Carrier Safety Assurance, General Aviation Safety Assurance, Safety Standards, and
Foundational Business. Flight Procedure Implementation and Oversight Branch (previously referred to as AFS-460) realigns under Safety Standards and is now the Flight Procedures and Airspace Group. This AC incorporated the organizational changes described above as well as other administrative changes. As well as, some clarifying and/or substantive changes.
iii CHAPTER 1. INSTRUMENT FLIGHT PROCEDURE VALIDATION (IFPV)
OVERVIEW1-1
1.1 Process1-1
1.2 Authorization1-1
1.3 Notification of Planned IFPV Activity1-1
1.4 Record Data Format1-1
1.5 Data Accuracy and Sources1-2
1.6 Library1-2
1.7 Records1-2
CHAPTER 2. SERVICE PROVIDER REQUIREMENTS2-1
2.1 Operational Guidance2-1
2.2 Safety Management System (SMS)/Operational Safety Assessment (OSA)2-3
CHAPTER 3. INSTRUMENT FLIGHT PROCEDURE VALIDATION (IFPV)3-1
3.1 Process3-1
3.2 Requirements3-3
3.3 Flight Validation of SBAS/GBAS (WAAS) IFP3-6
CHAPTER 4. IFPV EVALUATOR TRAINING REQUIREMENTS4-1
4.1 Initial Training Requirements for IFPV Authorization4-1
4.2 Recurrent Training Requirements4-3
APPENDIX A. ADMINISTRATION INFORMATIONA-1
APPENDIX B. EXAMPLE BRIEFING FOR NON-IFPV AUTHORIZED PILOTSB-1
1-1 CHAPTER 1. INSTRUMENT FLIGHT PROCEDURE VALIDATION (IFPV) OVERVIEW
1.1 Process.
IFPV is a series of actions involving several distinct elements including:
Ground validation;
Preflight validation, and Flight validation.
Figure 1-1. IFPV Overview
1.2 Authorization.
Non-FAA service providers must be authorized by the FAA prior to conducting IFPV activities. Approval to conduct IFPV activities consists of approved training and on-site observation of IFPV activities completed in accordance with the company’s IFPV manual. Specific FAA authorization is required for ground obstacle assessment, simulator validation, airborne obstacle assessment, and flight validation. See FAA Order 8900.1, Volume 11, chapter 12 for examples of IFPV Letters of Authorization (LOA).
1.3 Notification of Planned IFPV Activity.
Non-FAA service providers must notify the Flight Technologies and Procedures Division’s representative by an approved notification method (e.g., Knowledge Services Network (KSN) Activity Tracker or email 9-amc-fsifp-oversight@faa.gov) 14 calendar days prior to conducting any IFPV activity. Upon receipt of the entry/email, an ASI will notify the operator of the level of oversight for that activity.
1.4 Record Data Format.
Records required by current IFPV guidance must be submitted electronically to Flight Standards. The preferred format is electronic transmittal of a TARGETS project file.
1-2
1.5 Data Accuracy and Sources.
Satellite-based PBN IFP, RNAV (GPS), and RNAV (RNP) require highly accurate data based on the World Geodetic System 1984 (WGS84). This requires all survey data used in the flight procedure to meet FAA Order 8260.19, Flight Procedures and Airspace, standards. It is mandatory that a quality assurance system covering all domains of data collection (surveys), processing, publication, and navigation database development be maintained. Input errors, particularly within the final approach segment (FAS) data block, can result in significant changes to the flight path in relation to the runway/pointin-space. The validation must ensure use of correct data for a valid flight procedure analysis. Sources of terrain, obstacle, and aeronautical data used, to include the source, type, date, version, and resolution of the data must be documented in accordance with FAA Order 8260.19.
1.6 Library.
A current copy of all relevant FAA documents (print or electronic), FAA-accepted IFPV operations manuals, publications, and correspondence pertinent to IFPV must be maintained by the non-FAA service provider. At a minimum, this library must contain the publications listed in Appendix A, paragraph A.2.
1.7 Records.
Records of the items listed below must be maintained for two years after an IFP is canceled and must be made available to the FAA for audit purposes upon request.
1.7.1 Obstacle assessment records.
1.7.2 Detailed survey reports.
1.7.3 Autonomous Global Positioning System Recording System (AGRS) recordings from ground and/or airborne obstacle assessment and flight validation activities.
1.7.3.1 Furnish the AGRS electronic file (compatible with FAA computer systems) from both the obstacle assessment and the flight validation to Flight Standards.
1.7.3.2 Submit the report in conjunction with the procedure package. The report must contain, at a minimum, the following elements:
Processing data and time;
Maximum number of satellites;
Minimum number of satellites;
Average position dilution of precision (PDOP);
1-3 Vertical protection level (VPL) [WAAS procedures only];
Maximum observed horizontal DOP (HDOP) [WAAS procedures only];
Horizontal protection level (HPL) [WAAS procedures only];
Maximum observed vertical DOP (VDOP) [WAAS procedures only];
For each segment, the maximum and minimum altitude, ground speed, climb rate, and climb gradient, and A printed graphic of sufficient detail that depicts the flight track flown referenced to the desired track of the approach procedure, including procedure fixes.
1.7.4 Helicopter IFP utilizing FAS data block SBAS/GBAS (WAAS). A documented analysis of the FAS data in relation to the landing threshold point or desired point-in-space for lateral and vertical path, and the cyclic redundancy code (CRC).
1.7.5 All IFPV activities. Use FAA Forms 8260-30.1, Simulator Validation Checklist;
8260-30.2, Obstacle Assessment Checklist, and 8260-30.3, Flight Validation Checklist.
1. The evaluator will use FAA Forms 8260-30.1, 8260-30.2, and 8260-30.3 for Simulator Validation, Obstacle Assessment, and Flight Validation respectively.
2. Include all of the original forms in the initial procedure package submitted to Flight Standards.
3. Forward signed copies of FAA Form 8260-30.2 to Flight Standards upon the completion of a periodic (540-day) obstacle assessment in the inspection window.
Digital signatures will be accepted.
4. Forms are located in FAA Order 8900.1, Flight Standards Information Management System (FSIMS), Volume 11, chapter 12, section 1, table 11-1, and figures 11-30 through 11-32. Additionally, you can contact Flight Standards for current editions.
1.7.6 Personnel training records related to IFPV.
1.7.7 Individual and company IFPV letters of authorization.
1.7.8 Any additional items listed in the non-FAA service provider’s Operation Manual.
1-4 Figure 1-2. IFPV Process Flow
Note: Some of the steps may not be required or may be accomplished in a different order.
2-1 CHAPTER 2. SERVICE PROVIDER REQUIREMENTS
2.1 Operational Guidance.
The non-FAA service provider must have guidance acceptable to the Administrator
(e.g., operations manual) describing the processes and policies the non-FAA service provider must follow when conducting IFPV activities. The guidance must, as a minimum, contain the following information:
2.1.1 General information containing:
1. Contact person/persons in charge and physical address of all saved records.
2. List of individuals authorized to conduct IFPV and their relevant endorsements (simulator evaluation, ground obstacle assessment, airborne obstacle assessment, and flight validation).
3. Process for periodic internal audits.
4. Process for communicating and coordinating with appropriate FAA offices to include the transfer of data, forms, and documents.
5. Process for acquiring and maintaining regulatory guidance material associated with each authorized function, to include processes for maintaining the currency of all reference material.
6. Process to ensure all personnel authorized to perform IFPV activities are current and trained in accordance with current IFPV guidance.
7. Training attendance, including recurrent training documentation.
8. Process for ensuring that all IFPV processes are approved and current.
9. Procedures for revising the operations manual including a revision tracking system.
2.1.2 Ground validation information. PBN IFP Quality Assurance (QA) review process (outline internal review process).
2.1.3 Pre-flight validation information containing:
2.1.3.1 Simulator validation process (if applicable).
2.1.3.1.1 QA review process of the Flight Management System (FMS) navigation database for correct coding of the PBN IFP (outline process used to compare and ensure matching data).
2.1.3.1.2 Simulator use requirements (i.e., methodology as to when a simulator check would be completed or required).
2-2
2.1.3.2 Obstacle assessment process, to include accuracy codes, achievable using company-specific equipment and process.
2.1.3.2.1 Ground obstacle assessment information (if applicable) containing:
1. Complete equipment list (hardware) to include type, make, model, software version, and revision if applicable (e.g., GPS Receiver – Global Sat BU-353).
2. Complete equipment list (software) to include software manufacturer, title, version, and purpose (e.g., Magellan Mobile Mapper Office, current version) used to post process recorded GPS data.
3. Step by step process for obstacle verification.
4. Process for ensuring any new or different obstacles identified during ground obstacle assessment are documented and IFP re-evaluated, if necessary.
2.1.3.2.2 Airborne obstacle assessment information (if applicable) containing:
1. Complete equipment list (hardware) to include type, make, model, software version, and revision if applicable (e.g., GPS Receiver - Global Sat BU-353).
2. Complete equipment list (software) to include software manufacturer, title, version, and purpose (e.g., TARGETS current version) used for in-flight referencing of controlling obstacles and recording obstacle assessment tracks.
3. Step by step process for obstacle verification.
4. Company-specific obstacle evaluation area (OEA) evaluation processes, if applicable.
5. Process for ensuring any new or different obstacles identified during an airborne obstacle assessment are documented and IFP re-evaluated, if necessary.
6. Process for briefing pilots, without IFPV authorization, on airborne obstacle assessment mission (e.g., briefing the pilot of a rented helicopter) [see appendix B].
2.1.4 Flight validation information containing:
1. Quality assurance review process of IFP chart, FAA Order 8260-series forms comparison with navigation database (outline process used to compare and ensure matching data).
2-3
2. Complete flight validation equipment list (hardware) and software version and revision if applicable, e.g., GPS Receiver - Global Sat BU-353.
3. Complete equipment list (software) to include software manufacturer, title, version, and purpose (e.g., TARGETS current version) used for recording flight tracks.
4. Process for addressing issues concerning obstacles or flyability discovered during flight validation.
5. Process for assessing airport/heliport infrastructure.
2.2 Safety Management System (SMS)/Operational Safety Assessment (OSA).
The SMS/OSA must define the safety policies, processes, and practices for managing all aspects of all IFPV processes. The SMS/OSA must include the following elements.
2.2.1 Definition of the organization’s safety objectives.
2.2.2 Ability to present the safety situation in respect to compliance with all relevant FAA, internal, and other safety related standards.
2.2.3 Definition of the safety accountabilities of all personnel.
2.2.4 Continual review process for effectiveness by all personnel.
2.2.5 Process for staff to identify safety hazards or concerns and to suggest methods for enhancement of safety.
2.2.6 Established internal procedures for the communication and processing of safety concerns within the organization as they relate to IFPV.
2.2.7 Definition of the interface arrangements between internal groups of the organization as they relate to IFPV.
2.2.8 Compliance process applicable to all personnel of the organization.
2.2.9 Safety hazard/risk analysis and risk control/mitigation assessment in accordance with an established methodology endorsed by the FAA.
2.2.10 Quality management system based on those elements of ISO 9001 relevant to IFPV.
2.2.11 Oversight and audit program.
Note: The SMS/OSA guidance will be located in the Operational Guidance referenced in paragraph 2.1.
3-1 CHAPTER 3. INSTRUMENT FLIGHT PROCEDURE VALIDATION (IFPV)
3.1 Process.
IFPV consists of three elements: ground validation, pre-flight validation, and flight validation.
3.1.1 Ground validation is a quality assurance review of the entire IFP package. The purpose is to identify areas with the potential to impact the flyability and safety of the IFP (e.g., ARINC 424 coding errors, obstacles, OE/AAA and charting). The evaluator should address issues identified during the ground validation phase prior to the pre-flight validation phase.
3.1.2 Pre-flight validation will include an obstacle assessment and may include a simulator evaluation. Any issue identified during the pre-flight validation phase must be addressed prior to flight validation.
3.1.2.1 Determine any special operational issues specific to the IFP (e.g., climb gradients, close proximity to restricted areas, speed restrictions, etc.).
3.1.2.2 Although encouraged for all fixed wing procedures, simulator evaluations are required whenever there is a request for a waiver or request for Flight Standards approval for deviations from standard criteria for Special RNAV (RNP) Authorization Required (AR) Approach IAPs. Simulator evaluations are a valuable tool to test the procedure flyability and to compare database coding. They have the ability to test the procedure at the design limit and should be conducted where factors such as challenging terrain or specific operational considerations exist. All areas listed on FAA Form 8260-30.1 should be evaluated.
Provide feedback to the procedure designer who, if feasible, should be involved in the simulator evaluation. The simulator evaluation must be conducted in a FAA-qualified Level “C” or Level “D” flight simulator capable of flying the procedure. Information on simulator capabilities is available in 14 CFR Part 60 and from the FAA National Simulator Program. Additionally, desktop simulators are a valuable tool to verify coding and evaluate basic flyability.
Note: For Special PBN IFP designed for a specific make/model/series and specific Flight Management System (FMS), software part number, software version, and revision, the simulator evaluation must be flown in an FAA-qualified Level “C” or Level “D” simulator with the exact configuration specified.
3.1.2.2.1 Verify the navigation database for correct coding of the performance based navigation (PBN) instrument flight procedure (IFP). Comparisons must be made between the area navigation (RNAV) or FMS navigation data as displayed on the control display unit and the applicable FAA
3-2 8260-series forms, and the flight inspection graphic (FIG). Additionally, any notes and/or charted requirements and restrictions such as altitudes, speeds and courses must be validated.
3.1.2.3 Conduct an obstacle assessment verifying the height and location of the documented controlling obstacle for each segment of the IFP.
Perform a visual inspection of the obstacle evaluation area (OEA) to determine the presence of undocumented or inaccurately documented obstacles. Obstacle assessment must be performed in accordance with FAA Order 8200.1 and must be documented on FAA Form 8260-30.2.
Ground obstacle assessment may be used to satisfy the requirement of periodic (540-day) inspections.
3.1.2.3.1 A ground obstacle assessment may produce the most accurate results;
however, circumstances may prevent ground obstacle access.
3.1.2.3.2 An airborne obstacle assessment provides easier access to obstacles and OEA boundaries. Airborne obstacle assessments can be flown in any type of manned aircraft; however, assessments performed in helicopters or slow moving/small category aircraft are preferred. Obstacle assessment flight activities must comply with the flight rules contained in 14 CFR Part 91.
Any deviation from a rule during an obstacle assessment (e.g., 14 CFR Part 91.119 minimum safe altitudes – general) must be authorized by the geographically respective Flight Standards District Office. Consistent with FAA Order 8260.19, an airborne obstacle assessment will result in an accuracy code of 4D being assigned to that obstacle.
3.1.2.3.3 Document incorrect obstacle data such as obstacles that no longer exist or obstacle data that is inaccurate or is missing from the FAA obstacle databases. This information must be provided to the IFP designer and documented on the FAA Form 8260-30.2. All supporting information including photos and survey data must be retained by the organization.
Obstacle data inaccuracies, of any type, must be documented and accuracy codes assigned in accordance with FAA Order 8260.19.
3.1.2.3.4 If desired, a lower accuracy code specific to the process used by the IFPV provider may be coordinated with Flight Standards. This authorization is specific to both the company and the individual performing the obstacle assessment. This accuracy code determination will be based upon the type of equipment used, its specifications, and a determination of process effectiveness.
3.1.3 Flight validation (FV).
1. Review the results of the simulator and obstacle evaluations, and review any specific training, operational, or equipment requirements. Review the PBN IFP package per guidelines established in FAA Order 8200.1.