Page 1 of 13

WAAS OVERVIEW
HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The FAAs Wide-Area Augmentation System (WAAS) was recently commissioned (July 2003) for navigational
Initial Operational Capability (IOC) within the U.S. National Airspace System (NAS). WAAS IOC provides
performance improvements (accuracy, availability, integrity, and continuity) in both the lateral and vertical position
estimation over raw GPS. These performance improvements offer varying degrees of operational benefits
depending on an aircraft's operational environment and the capability of its existing avionics.
In the near term, the most significant benefit provided by WAAS is the vertical guidance provided to those aircraft
without barometric VNAV capability (primarily light general aviation). WAAS augmentation will allow general
aviation aircraft currently limited to non-precision dive-and-drive approaches the ability to fly with precision
vertical guidance, a capability that, absent a traditional ILS, is not available today. This not only enhances safety,
but also creates opportunities for lower minimums in certain terrain and/or obstacle-limited environments.
There are also potential benefits to corporate aviation, regional airlines and air transport over the next two to five
years, but the operational improvement and ultimately the business case for adding WAAS capability to these
aircraft is unclear. Todays advanced navigation capabilities on upper tier aircraft rely on multi-sensor
configurations that can provide various levels of navigation performance depending on the available sensors and
their level of integration. Flight management and navigation systems are evolving to efficiently utilize available
sensors to provide overall navigation solutions that meet performance requirements with high integrity. The WAAS
is another possible sensor in the task to achieve those performance goals. GPS receiver technology will also evolve
rapidly and WAAS augmentation will be introduced into navigation solutions over the next few years. Other
notable tools that support enhanced navigation capabilities are; FMS aided by GPS, Baro-VNAV, Inertial Reference
Systems (IRS), the Local Area Augmentation System (LAAS) and other Area Navigation (RNAV) equipment.
The development of operational procedures that make use of specific WAAS capability is currently lagging the
commissioning of the system by several years. Area Navigation (RNAV) operational procedures are being updated
to include both non-precision (Circling, LNAV) and precision minima (LNAV/VNAV, LPV), however the schedule
and rate at which these procedures will be developed has not been established. As a result, the overall benefits and
acceptance and adoption of the system by other than general aviation users remain uncertain. Work is also ongoing
in the expansion and re-definition of Required Navigation Performance (RNP) criteria for all phases of flight. It's
possible that within the RNP concept, WAAS performance levels could be exploited to create additional operational
benefits. This, however, remains to be determined.

This paper focuses on several questions regarding the FAAs WAAS and the use of SBAS systems as a form of GPS
augmentation, and touches on elements of other augmentation systems with respect to the WAAS.
What is GPS augmentation and why is it needed?
The Global Positioning System (GPS) is a relatively new navigation paradigm for nearly all modes of transportation
worldwide. Its popularity as a navigation alternative has steadily increased since its introduction in the mid-1980s,
and the technology promises to provide a robust replacement for most traditional aviation related navigation aids.
Navigation based solely on the airborne reception of ranging signals from the orbiting GPS satellite constellation
provides performance levels adequate for basic en route navigation through non-precision approach capability.
These types of airborne GPS navigators are commonplace today, and are certified by the FAA under TSO-C129a.
Due to more stringent accuracy and integrity requirements, however, GPS based navigator capability must be
augmented to provide the performance required for precision approach vertical guidance. In other words, to achieve
approach capability that provides vertical guidance with minimums comparable to or lower than current Instrument
Landing Systems (ILS), the GPS signals must be augmented, or corrected, to further improve the accuracy, integrity,
continuity, and availability of the navigation service. There are three methods used to augment the GPS based
Page 2 of 13
approach capability: Space-based (SBAS), Ground-based (GBAS), and Aircraft-Based (ABAS) Augmentation
Systems. The FAAs WAAS program is an example of a SBAS architecture, and the FAAs LAAS program is an
example of a GBAS architecture. ABAS refers to augmentation methods that rely upon multiple aircraft sensors
that provide additional ranging sources that aid in the position estimate of the aircraft. An FMS augmented with
GPS and INS would be an example of this type of system.
The performance of GPS navigation equipment is specified with respect to accuracy, integrity, continuity, and
availability. Accuracy specifies the precision of the position estimate of the GPS receiver with respect to the true
location of the aircraft, and is expressed as a requirement for a given phase of flight. Integrity is the assurance that
the GPS solution is not corrupted and providing potentially hazardously misleading navigation information to the
pilot. Todays aviation GPS receivers provide integrity monitoring by use of Receiver Autonomous Integrity
Monitoring (RAIM) algorithms that alert the pilot to integrity issues with the GPS receiver solution. More
sophisticated receivers can detect and exclude satellites with errors in their ranging signals from the overall position
estimate through the use of Fault Detection and Exclusion (FDE) algorithms. Availability requirements assure that
the navigation function can support a particular phase of flight or operation. Continuity requirements provide
assurance that the pilot will not lose the navigation capability, once available, during a particular phase of flight or
operation. To accommodate the desire for increased airspace capacity, efficiency, and safety, the ability to operate
in the oceanic, en route, terminal and non-precision and precision approach airspace environments are requiring
increasingly demanding levels of the four basic performance metrics. An overview of the various performance
requirements with respect to each of the operational phases of flight are included for reference in Table 4 and Table
1 at the end of this paper.
What is the WAAS? Why is it necessary and how is it different from the GPS systems used
today?
A SBAS, or WAAS, is a satellite-based system that provides regional augmentation of GPS signals unlike
traditional ground-based navigation aids. In traditional navigation systems, ground-based transmitters produce
navigation information relative to the terrestrial location and direction from the aircraft. The complementary
airborne equipment consists of receivers that determine the relative direction and/or distance from the ground
stations. In contrast, basic GPS airborne navigation equipment requires no terrestrial based infrastructure, but
instead determines absolute latitude and longitude of the aircraft by triangulation of ranging information from
numerous GPS satellites orbiting the earth. To achieve higher levels of performance however, terrestrial based GPS
equipment is necessary to provide fixed references for use in assessing real-time errors in the satellite-only position
estimates. The calculated errors in turn are used to produce differential corrections and additional integrity
information for broadcast to the airborne equipment. WAAS airborne navigation sensors (WAAS/GPS receivers)
are currently certified by the FAA under TSO-C145a, and airborne navigation equipment (WAAS/GPS navigators)
are certified under TSO-C146a.
The WAAS ground infrastructure consists of many Wide-Area Reference Station (WRS) sites located throughout
the continental US (CONUS) and Alaska. These WRS locations are precisely surveyed so that their location with
respect to the GPS coordinate system is absolutely known. Each of the WRS sites process the ranging information
from the GPS constellation and calculate a position estimate. The WRS position estimates are then forwarded to the
WAAS Master Station (WMS) via a ground-based communications network. At the WMS, the estimates from each
reference station are compared to the actual WRS survey positions, the differences calculated, and the WAAS
augmentation messages generated. In addition to position correction messages, the WMS also calculates and
provides integrity information regarding the GPS constellation. In general, the messages contain error and
performance information that allow WAAS capable GPS receivers to remove errors in the GPS signal and flag
specific satellites in the GPS constallation that are providing degraded or misleading information, allowing for a
significant increase in location accuracy and integrity.
Once processed by the WMS, the augmentation messages are sent to uplink stations to be transmitted to
geostationary communications satellites (currently INMARSAT). There are currently two satellites in orbit that are
transmitting the WAAS signal-in-space, with plans for a third to provide a level of redundancy for the system. The
navigation payloads provide bi-directional communications to the WMS and convert and re-broadcast the
augmentation messages to aircraft on GPS L1 spectrum in a WAAS message format. WAAS capable GPS receivers
on aircraft then process both ranging information from the raw GPS constellation and the augmentation message to
Page 3 of 13
provide corrected position estimates for the current position, and integrity information for the GPS constellation.
The GPS-like signal from the WAAS geostationary transponder can also be used by an airborne receiver as an
additional ranging source for calculation of the position estimate, i.e. the WAAS geostationary satellite doubles for
another GPS satellite. Integrity information provided in the WAAS augmentation message allows the airborne
navigator to isolate malfunctioning satellites and exclude them from the overall navigation solution. With this
information included in the WAAS messages, the RAIM and FDE algorithms of the raw GPS navigator are non-
essential, but can be used to augment the integrity and fault isolation capabilities of the airborne receiver. Figure 1
provides a pictoral overview of the WAAS operation.
In comparison to Space-based augmentation, Ground based GPS augmentation systems like the FAAs LAAS
provide local augmentation by collecting information from the GPS constellation with a locally surveyed ground
station, typically located at an airport. GPS correction, integrity, and approach information is then transmitted via a
terrestrial VHF datalink to the aircraft operating within range of the transmitter, typically 20 to 30 nautical miles.
Airborne GPS solutions must have the capability to receive and interpret these VHF transmissions and apply the
correction information to the overall navigation solution. The principle and implementation of differential
augmentation is the same, but the operational performance achievable with the LAAS is greater than that of the
WAAS since the augmentation service is confined to a smaller region of coverage.
Figure 1: WAAS Architecture and Operation (Ref. Performance Specification FAA-E-2963, WAAS Geostationary
Communication and Control Segment, Draft, J une 2002)
Accuracy and Integrity How much is better? Whats the difference?
The accuracy achievable with raw GPS navigation is incredible when compared to traditional navigation aids, and
the capability to navigate directly between to arbitrary points on the earth has changed the way we look at operations
in the future airspace environment. Differentially corrected GPS positions provide nearly another order of
magnitude better accuracy. Table 1 provides a comparison of the accuracy achievable with raw GPS and the WAAS
and LAAS. Accuracy however, is only part of the equation when assessing performance of GPS-based navigation
systems.
Page 4 of 13
Table 1: GPS Position Accuracy Performance
95%
Horizontal (Meters)
95%
Vertical (Meters)
GPS Position Accuracy
Performance
Goal Observed Goal Observed
Raw GPS with S/A Active
*
100 45 100 156 156
Raw GPS with S/A Off 100 6 156 16
GPS with SBAS (WAAS) 7.6 2 7.6 3
GPS with GBAS (LAAS CAT I) 1.0 0.4 2.0 0.6
*
Selective Availability (S/A) dithering removed fromGPS Signal on May 1, 2000
The basic design of GPS makes accuracy an intrinsic capability of the performance equation and is therefore the
easiest element to achieve. The remaining performance elements, i.e. Integrity, Continuity, and Availability also
need to be addressed when assessing the overall navigation capability. The real challenge and limiting factor to
WAAS performance, and GPS navigation in general, is the systems ability to the meet the integrity requirements
for precision vertical navigation operations.
As GPS satellites change their orbital positions and ionospheric conditions fluctuate, the WAAS coverage and
performance levels experience slight fluctuations. If the performance degrades below the minimum requirements,
the WAAS must provide notification to airborne receivers within several seconds to alert the pilot of a potential loss
of service. Although the WAAS accuracy performance typically exceeds the specifications as shown in Table 1, the
integrity performance can only protect to 40m horizontal and 50m vertical.
Continued improvements are planned for WAAS to further expand the benefits it provides. The first set of
improvements will focus on the expansion of the WAAS. Current FAA plans include the addition of 10 WAAS
reference stations and 3 geostationary satellite communication links to replace the INMARSAT satellites used today.
This continued development would increase the availability of the WAAS signal to pilots, and expand the broadcast
coverage area to include 100% of the continental U.S. and most of Alaska. Other improvements may be made to
incorporate changes associated with GPS modernization, but the FAAs commitment and schedule for all of the
upgrades is uncertain.
What types of WAAS receivers are available?
An overview of functional and operational classes and capabilities for WAAS equipment is given in Figure 2. Most
GPS sensors in service today do not have WAAS capability, but many designs are being updated to accommodate
the WAAS signal-in-space. Several current receiver designs can be upgraded with software modifications but are
limited to Class 2 operations, and only two commercially available receivers can support Class 3 operations. It is
fully expected that within the next several years, most GPS sensors in new and retrofit products will have Class 3
capability.
Page 5 of 13
Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Class 4
Class
(Sensor)
TSO-C145a
Oceanic, En route,
Terminal, NPA
Oceanic, En route,
Terminal, NPA,
LNAV/VNAV
Oceanic, En route,
Terminal, NPA,
LNAV/VNAV, APV, LPV
N/A
Class
(Equipment)
TSO-C146a
Oceanic, En route,
Terminal, NPA
Oceanic, En route,
Terminal, NPA,
LNAV/VNAV
Oceanic, En route,
Terminal, NPA,
LNAV/VNAV, APV, LPV
N/A
Class
(Equipment)
N/A N/A N/A
Precision Approach
(APV, LPV)
Operational Class
F
u
n
c
t
i
o
n
a
l

C
l
a
s
s
WAAS Equipment Classes
TSO-C145a/C146a
Figure 2: WAAS Receiver Types
What is the status of the WAAS program?
The WAAS program reached a milestone in J uly 2003 by receiving commissioning for operational use in the US
national airspace (NAS). Although the initial operational capability (IOC) does not meet the original design goal of
Category I minimums, the current performance will provide some operational benefit to light general aviation users
and potential for others when reduced minimums using WAAS are introduced as modifications to the current RNAV
approach procedures. Some of the high-level milestones for past and future capability for the WAAS development
include:
WAAS Initial Operational Capability IOC (LNAV/VNAV) - July 2003
- 95% of Continental U.S. (CONUS), portions of Alaska
- Equivalent capability to Baro-VNAV operations with Class 2/3 receiver
- 350-ft minimums
This provides aircraft equipped with Class 2 or 3 WAAS capability to fly RNAV approaches with vertical
guidance and LNAV/VNAV. This is equivalent to flying an LNAV/VNAV approach today with an aircraft
equipped with Baro-VNAV capability.
WAAS Operational (Initial LPV) September/October 2003
- 7 procedures drafted to publish in Sept./Oct. database cycle
- Remaining LPV procedures TBD (2003 through 2006)
- 250-ft minimums
Seven LPV procedures will be published in the Sept./Oct. 2003 database update cycle. Of those seven,
several have come very close to reaching the desired 250-ft minimums, and all have resulted in lower
minimums than LNAV/VNAV. These seven approaches however provide a narrow sampling of LPV
minimums to ascertain the exact improvement over LNAV/VNAV operations today. Therefore the
cost/benefit of the airspace design and aircraft investment for LPV approaches is impossible to quantify at
this time. Aircraft equipped with Baro-VNAV and WAAS augmentation capability will provide equivalent
vertical guided approach capability on all RNAV (GPS) approaches to LNAV/VNAV minimums.
WAAS Full Operational Capability FOC (LPV) - 2006
- Full Continental U.S.
- Most of Alaska
- <250-ft minimums
It is planned that by 2006 the majority of current RNAV approaches will be updated with WAAS LPV
minimums. A roadblock to this goal is the availability of obstacle surveys that can be used to apply the
Page 6 of 13
LPV TERPS criteria. For those airports with ILS approach capability to some runway end, much of the
obstacle survey data is available, but adding WAAS LPV at those airports has limited utility to operators.
Airports without ILS approaches will have the largest benefit by the addition of precision vertical
guidance, but unfortunately do not have the appropriate obstacle data to support the procedure design.
The FAA is currently investigating methods that can expedite this process, however 2006 may be an
optimistic estimate for completion of the entire process.
WAAS FOC+ (GLS L5) 2013
- WAAS 200 Minimums
- Interference Mitigation
- Addition of a 3
rd
Geostationary satellite
Long-term WAAS improvements require an additional GPS frequency (L5 in addition to L1, L2) and
modified equipment capable of receiving the new signals. This is required for SBAS to reach Category I
landing capability without other forms of augmentation.
The addition of a third geostationary satellite and/or replacement of the current INMARSAT payloads are
also much-needed improvements to the system. With the two-satellite system currently in operation, the loss
of one satellite would in effect result in the loss of half of the WAAS augmentation signal coverage. A third
satellite is necessary to mitigate this failure mode. Procurement of the third satellite is under way, and will
probably occur well before 2013.
What approach procedures are available today that make use of WAAS capability? Are there
really over 500 approaches available for WAAS capability?
There indeed are over 500 RNAV (GPS) instrument approach procedures defined and published by the FAA today.
These approaches have been previously designed for aircraft equipped with raw GPS navigators, or a Flight
Management System (FMS) that may or may not have barometric VNAV (baro-VNAV) capability. Each of the
procedures has published minimums for non-precision (Circling and LNAV) approaches, and for vertical navigation
operations (LNAV/VNAV). Aircraft equipped with GPS equipment certified to TSO-C129a IFR capability may
perform these RNAV approaches to non-precision minimums, and those equipped with baro-VNAV capability may
perform the approaches to any of the non-precision or vertical navigation minimums.
With the introduction of WAAS, the RNAV (GPS) approaches will be modified to contain minimums for another
type called LPV. LPV is an acronym that has evolved into one with no true meaning, but loosely refers to Lateral
guidance with Precision Vertical, or Localizer Performance with Vertical guidance. Currently, there are seven
(7) approaches that have been designed for LPV minimums that are to be published in the September or October
2003 database update cycle. Table 2 lists the locations and details for each of these approaches. The intent is to
provide a set of approach minimums specifically for use by WAAS equipment that result in lower minimums than
that of the baro-VNAV approaches. Of the seven approaches, all LPV types have resulted in lower minimums than
LNAV/VNAV, and some have come very close to achieving 250 minimums. The true extent of this improvement
to the broader scope of RNAV (GPS) approaches however is unknown at this time.
It is of interest to note that several of the seven LPV amended RNAV approaches have resulted in LNAV minimums
that have increased when compared to the currently published procedures. This is true for cases where the approach
geometry required modification to accommodate the obstacle clearance requirements of LNAV/VNAV and LPV.
Others that did not require geometric modification are unaffected. The extent to which this will occur in the overall
RNAV approach redesign process is not known.
Page 7 of 13
Table 2: Proposed Amendments to RNAV IAP(s) with LPV Minimums (Sept./Oct. 2003)
A B C D
LPV (DA)
LNAV/VNAV (DA) 1020 - 2 1/2 724
LNAV (MDA) 1000 - 2 704 1000 - 2 1/4 704
Circling 1080 - 2 1/2 777
LPV (DA)
LNAV/VNAV (DA)
LNAV (MDA) 1200 - 2 677 1200 - 2 1/4 677
Circling 1200 - 2 661 1200 - 2 1/4 661
LPV (DA)
LNAV/VNAV (DA)
LNAV (MDA) 1080 - 2 698 1080 - 2 1/4 698
Circling 1080 - 2 691 1080 - 2 1/4 691
LPV (DA)
LNAV/VNAV (DA)
LNAV (MDA) 640 - 3/4 448 640 - 1 448
Circling 720 - 1 3/4 528 760 - 2 568
LPV (DA)
LNAV/VNAV (DA)
1600/40
318 (400-3/4)
LNAV (MDA)
1840/50
558 (600-3/4)
1840/60
558 (600-1 1/4)
Circling
1840 - 1 1/2
545 (600-1 1/2)
1860 - 2
565 (600-2)
LPV (DA)
LNAV/VNAV (DA)
LNAV (MDA)
Circling
1740 - 1
445 (500-1)
1760 - 1
465 (500-1)
1760 - 1 1/2
465 (500-1 1/2)
1860 - 2
565 (600-2)
LPV (DA)
LNAV/VNAV (DA)
LNAV (MDA) 1240/40 432 1240/50 432
Circling 1260 - 1 1/2 451 1360 - 2 551
8+ ...TBD
1020 - 2 1/2 724
1110/24 302
1160/40 352
1240/24 432
1260 - 1 451
1840 - 1 545 (600-1)
1530/50 253
1580/50 303 (300-1)
1580/50 303 (300-1)
700 - 1 3/4 508
1540/24 258
1600/24 318 (400-1/2)
1840/24 558 (600-1/2)
6
7
Type
640 - 1 257
740 - 1 1/4 358
1080 - 1 698
1080 - 1 1/4 691
480 - 1/2 287
720 - 1 1/4 528
640 - 1/2 448
2
3
4
5
Oshkosh, WI Wittman Regional
(ILS)
KOSH RNAV (GPS) RWY 36
Oklahoma City, OK Will Rogers World
(ILS)
KOKC RNAV (GPS) RWY 35L
Oklahoma City, OK Will Rogers World
(ILS)
KOKC RNAV (GPS) RWY 17R
Manassas, VA Manassas Regional /
Harry P. Davis Field
(ILS)
KHEF RNAV (GPS) RWY 16L
Leesburg, VA Leesburg Executive
(ILS)
KJ YO RNAV (GPS) RWY 17
Gaithersburg, MD Montgomery County
Airpark
KGAI RNAV (GPS) RWY 14
1200 - 1 677
1200 - 1 1/2 661
Frederick Municipal
(ILS)
KFDK RNAV (GPS) RWY 23
1000 - 3/4 704
1020 - 2 1/2 717
780 - 1 257
920 - 1 1/2 397
#
Aircraft Performance Category
690 - 1 1/2 394 Frederick, MD 1
City Airport Identifier RNAV Approach
Is the WAAS service available worldwide?
No, the WAAS provides regional augmentation and at this time is intended to provide coverage only within the
continental US and Alaska. There are however, several SBAS systems similar to the FAAs WAAS that are
planning to provide basic interoperability with avionics that are designed for WAAS operation. These include the
European Geostationary Navigation Overlay Service (EGNOS) and J apans Multi-Transport Satellite (MT-SAT)
based Augmentation System (MSAS). India has also begun some preliminary work on its own SBAS, the GPS and
GEO Augmented Navigation (GAGAN) system.
In terms of WAAS capability for the CONUS and Alaska, Figure 3 and Figure 4 show snapshots of the Vertical
Navigation Service for the WAAS coverage area for a typical morning and afternoon on J uly 23, 2003. The
snapshots provide information regarding the Vertical Protection Level (VPL) provided by WAAS augmentation as
colored contours, and outlined service contours for LNAV/VNAV (dashed) and LPV (red) vertical navigation
service levels. Figure 3 represents a near best case scenario, whereas Figure 4 is representative of the lower limit of
capability. As shown in each of the figures, availability of the WAAS augmentation necessary for precision vertical
navigation is not assured to the extents of the intended coverage areas and varies dramatically throughout the day.
The continental U.S. has fairly good coverage, however coastal areas and many border fringes of the country have
periods where vertical navigation service will be limited to LNAV/VNAV (Baro-VNAV) or LNAV (NPA)
minimums. Alaska on the other hand has periods where the vertical navigation service will not support any
LNAV/VNAV capability and will be limited to LNAV only operations. Note that aircraft equipped with Baro-
VNAV capability will still be able to operate in these situations to LNAV/VNAV minimums regardless of the
WAAS VPL performance at the time of the approach.
Page 8 of 13
Figure 3: WAAS VPL on July 23, 2003, 10:58am Figure 4: WAAS VPL on July 23, 2003, 4:17pm
Reference: http://www.nstb.tc.faa.gov/vpl.html
In general, what benefit does the WAAS provide for me as an operator? What changes to my
aircraft are necessary?
The actual benefits and the changes required to provide those benefits will vary depending on whether operations
utilize Air Transport, Regional, Business, and/or Light GA aircraft, and where the bulk of the operations occur. The
following table attempts to address the affects of WAAS upgrades to current equipage for the various aircraft types.
Table 3: Notional Operational Benefits and Upgrades to WAAS or Equivalent Capability
Aircraft Type
Typical Operational
Environment
Description of WAAS or Equivalent Capabilities and Upgrade
With Baro-VNAV capability:
All air transport aircraft are suitably equipped with ILS precision approach and many will
have Baro-VNAV capability provide by FMS.
- Upgrade to WAAS capability will most likely require new Class 3 receiver design for
Multi-Mode Receiver type LRU. This would also require integration with other
aircraft navigation systems such as an FMS.
- Upgrade provides extremely limited benefit over Baro-VNAV capability currently
available since reduction of minimums will not have much impact at majority of
airports served. ILS is already available, and LPV minima provide questionable
improvements that justify investment in modification.
- Most operators will likely continue to use existing ILS service until GBAS (LAAS)
capability is available, and mitigate ILS outages with Baro-VNAV capability.
- Investment in RNP and RNP-RNAV capability will continue to improve the RNAV
approach capabilities.
Air Transport High-Altitude En route
Terminal Area
Approach
Surface Movement
Upper Tier airports with ILS
(CAT I/II and some CAT III)
approach capability.
Without Baro-VNAV capability:
All air transport aircraft will be suitably equipped with ILS precision approach and some
will NOT have Baro-VNAV capability provide by FMS.
- Upgrade of FMS to provide Baro-VNAV capability. This typically requires software
modification and would be lowest cost alternative to provide vertical guidance in
addition to ILS. This upgrade also provides worldwide vertical navigation coverage
due to autonomy of the capability in the airborne equipment.
- Upgrade to WAAS capability will most likely require new Class 3 receiver design for
Multi-Mode Receiver type LRU.
- WAAS upgrade provides marginal benefit when compared to Baro-VNAV upgrade.
ILS is already available for the majority of airports served and absence of published
LPV approaches
- Most operators will likely continue to use existing ILS service until GBAS (LAAS)
capability is available.
Page 9 of 13
Aircraft Type
Typical Operational
Environment
Description of WAAS or Equivalent Capabilities and Upgrade
Aircraft with Inertial Reference Systems (IRS):
Many air transport aircraft will be equipped with Inertial Reference Systems (IRS) that may
be integrated with FMS/GPS to provide enhanced approach capability as part of an Aircraft
Based Augmentation System(ABAS).
- WAAS/SBAS upgrade to these systems would provide potential benefit depending on
the level of integration with other navigation systems.
- Most operators will likely continue to use existing ILS services until GBAS (LAAS)
capability is available. LAAS upgrades alone will most likely achieve Performance
Type I (Category I service levels), but tightly integrated IRS augmentation may be
one method of achieving requirements for LAAS Performance Type II and III
approaches (Category II and IIIa,b,c service levels).
Aircraft without GPS capability:
Many air transport aircraft will not be equipped with raw GPS capability.
- Upgrade to future GPS capability will most likely include WAAS and potential LAAS
capability.
- Investment in RNP and RNP-RNAV capability without GPS sensors will continue to
provide and improve RNAV approach capabilities.
With Baro-VNAV capability:
All regional aircraft are suitably equipped with ILS precision approach and some will have
Baro-VNAV capability provide by FMS.
- Upgrade to WAAS capability will most likely require new Class 3 receiver design for
federated navigation radio package or integrated avionics system. This would also
require integration with other aircraft navigation systems such as an FMS.
- Upgrade provides extremely limited benefit over Baro-VNAV capability currently
available since reduction of minimums will not have much impact at majority of
airports served. ILS is already available, and LPV minima provide questionable
improvements that justify investment in modification.
- Most operators will likely continue to use existing ILS service until GBAS (LAAS)
capability is available and mitigate ILS outages with Baro-VNAV capability.
- Continued investment by operators in RNP and RNP-RNAV capability will erode
benefit of WAAS equipment upgrades.
Without Baro-VNAV capability:
All regional aircraft are suitably equipped with ILS precision approach and many will NOT
have Baro-VNAV capability provide by FMS.
- Upgrade of FMS to provide Baro-VNAV capability. Typically requires software
modification and would be lowest cost alternative to provide vertical guidance in
addition to ILS.
- Upgrade to WAAS capability will most likely require new Class 3 receiver design for
federated navigation radio package or integrated avionics system.
- Upgrade may provide some questionable benefit in lieu of Baro-VNAV within the
continental U.S.
- For the majority of airports served, the WAAS capability may provide mitigation of
ILS outage situations. In these cases however, LNAV approaches are typically
available, and LPV minimums provide marginal benefit to justify investment in an
upgrade.
- Most operators will likely continue to use existing ILS service until GBAS (LAAS)
capability is available.
Regional Mid/High-Altitude En route
Terminal Area
Approach
Surface Movement
Mid to upper-tier airports with
ILS, VNAV and NPA
approach capability.
Aircraft with Inertial Reference Systems (IRS):
Most regional aircraft will most likely NOT be equipped with Inertial Reference Systems
(IRS). Some regional aircraft WILL be equipped with Inertial Reference Systems (IRS)
that may be integrated with FMS/GPS to provide enhanced approach capability as part of
an Aircraft Based Augmentation System(ABAS).
- WAAS/SBAS upgrade to these systems would provide potential benefit depending on
the level of integration with other navigation systems.
- Most operators will likely continue to use existing ILS services until GBAS (LAAS)
capability is available. LAAS upgrades alone will most likely achieve Performance
Type I (Category I service levels), but tightly integrated IRS augmentation may be
one method of achieving requirements for LAAS Performance Type II and III
approaches (Category II and IIIa,b,c service levels).
Page 10 of 13
Aircraft Type
Typical Operational
Environment
Description of WAAS or Equivalent Capabilities and Upgrade
With Baro-VNAV capability:
Most business aircraft will be suitably equipped with ILS precision approach and many will
have Baro-VNAV capability provide by FMS.
- Upgrade to WAAS capability will most likely require new Class 3 receiver design
upgrade and/or replacement of federated navigation radio package or integrated
avionics system.
- Upgrade to WAAS provides extremely limited benefit over Baro-VNAV capability
currently available. Reduction of minimums will not have much impact at majority of
airports served. ILS is already available, and LPV minima provide questionable
improvements that justify investment in modification.
- Most operators will likely continue to use existing ILS service until GBAS (LAAS)
capability is available.
- Potential but limited benefit at airports that currently do not have ILS services due to
Baro-VNAV capability.
Without Baro-VNAV capability:
Most business aircraft will be suitably equipped with ILS precision approach and some may
NOT have Baro-VNAV capability provide by FMS.
- Upgrade of FMS to provide Baro-VNAV capability. Typically requires software
modification and would be lowest cost alternative to provide vertical guidance in
addition to ILS.
- Upgrade to WAAS capability will most likely require new Class 3 receiver design
upgrade and/or replacement of federated navigation radio package or integrated
avionics system.
- Upgrade to WAAS provides questionable benefit in lieu of Baro-VNAV within the
continental U.S.
- For the majority of airports served, the WAAS capability may provide mitigation of
ILS outages. Baro-VNAV capability would provide similar mitigation and would be
lower cost solution to current equipage.
- Most operators will likely continue to use existing ILS service until GBAS (LAAS)
capability is available.
Corporate/
Business
Mid/High-Altitude En route
Terminal Area
Approach
Surface Movement
Potentially all airport types,
but typically mid to upper-
tier, most with ILS and many
with a minimumVNAV and
NPA approach capability.
Aircraft with Inertial Reference Systems (IRS):
Many business aircraft will be equipped with Inertial Reference Systems (IRS) that may be
integrated with FMS/GPS to provide enhanced approach capability as part of an Aircraft
Based Augmentation System(ABAS).
- WAAS/SBAS upgrade to these systems would provide potential benefit depending on
the level of integration with other navigation systems.
- Most operators will likely continue to use existing ILS services until GBAS (LAAS)
capability is available. LAAS upgrades alone will most likely achieve Performance
Type I (Category I service levels), but tightly integrated IRS augmentation may be
one method of achieving requirements for LAAS Performance Type II and III
approaches (Category II and IIIa,b,c service levels).
Without TSO-C129a GPS Navigator Capability:
Many Light GA aircraft within the U.S. do not have GPS navigation capability today.
- Upgrade to TSO-C129a IFR navigation equipment would provide en route, terminal
area, and non-precision (NPA) RNAV approach capability to LNAV minimums.
- Upgrade to TSO-C146a, Class 2 WAAS/GPS navigation equipment would provide en
route, terminal area, NPA, and RNAV/VNAV capability to LNAV/VNAV minimums
equivalent to Baro-VNAV. These approaches are available today.
- A Class 3 WAAS/GPS navigator would provide additional RNAV/VNAV capability
to LPV minimums. Only 7 of these approaches have been designed with others to be
determined over the next 2 to 3 years.
General
Aviation
Low/Mid-Altitude En route
Terminal Area
Approach
All airport types, but typically
lower to mid-tier, some with,
and some without ILS
capability. Many with RNAV
(GPS) approaches, and most
with at least NPA approaches.
With TSO-C129a GPS Navigator Capability:
Many Light GA aircraft within the U.S. have been equipped with TSO-C129a VFR/IFR
GPS navigation capability.
- Units without approach capability would require replacement if vertical guidance is
desired and/or required.
- Upgrade of existing IFR approved equipment may require replacement of unit since
GPS engines may not be WAAS capable. Some receivers may have provisions to be
upgraded to WAAS Class 2, which would provide approach capability to
LNAV/VNAV minimums.
- If LPV approach performance is desired, replacement or addition of a TSO-C146a
Class 3 navigator is required.
Assumptions:
- Regional, and Business is aircraft with Flight Management Systems (FMS) include raw-GPS (TSO-C129a) capability
Page 11 of 13
REFERENCE MATERIAL
Table 4: Navigation Performance Requirements
Integrity
Operational
Phase-of-Flight
Accuracy
(95%)
Time-to-Alert Alert Limit
Probability of
HMI
Availability
(Range)
Continuity
(Loss of Nav.)
Associated
RNP Type
(H/V)
Oceanic,
En route
& Remote
12.4 nm
2 min 12.4 nm 10
-7
/ hr
0.99
0.99999
1 x 10
-5
/ hr
5 20
(No Vertical)
Domestic
En route
2.0 nm
(3.7 km)
1 min 2.0 nm 10
-7
/ hr
0.99
0.99999
1 x 10
-6
/ hr
2 10
(No Vertical)
Terminal
0.4 nm
(0.74 km)
30 sec 1.0 nm 10
-7
/ hr
0.99
0.99999
1 x 10
-6
/ hr
1
(No Vertical)
Non-Precision
(LNAV)
220 m
(720 ft)
10 sec 0.3 nm 10
-7
/ hr
0.99
0.99999
1 x 10
-5
/ hr
0.5 0.3
(No Vertical)
APV-1
(LNAV/VNAV)
100m 8 sec
556m(H)
50m(V)
10
-7
/ hr
0.99
0.99999
1-5 x 10
-5
Approach
0.3/125
LPV
(WAAS)
7.6 (16) m(H)
7.6 (20) m(V)
6 sec
40m(H)
50m(V)
1-2 x 10
-7
/
Approach
0.99
0.99999
1-5.5 x 10
-5
/
Approach
0.03/125
APV-2 (TBD)
(Notional)
XXm(H)
XXm(V)
5.2 sec
40m(H)
20m(V)
6 x 10
-8
/
Approach
0.99
0.99999
Y x 10
-Z
/ hr 0.03/50
Precision (PT-1)
Category I
16 m(H)
4.0 m(V)
6 sec
40 m(H)
10 m(V)
2 x 10
-7
/
Approach
0.99
0.99999
8.0 x 10
-6
/
Approach
0.02/40
Precision (PT-2)
Category II
6.9 m(H)
2.0 m(V)
2 sec
17.3 m(H)
5.3 m(V)
2 x 10
-9
/
Approach
0.99
0.99999
4 x 10
-6
/ 15s 0.01/15
Precision (PT-3)
Category III
6.2 m(H)
2.0 m(V)
2 sec
1 sec (goal)
15.5 m(H)
5.3 m(V)
2 x 10
-9
/
Approach
0.99
0.99999
2 x 10
-6
/ last 15s
1 x 10
-7
/ last 15s
(vertical)
0.003/z
Page 12 of 13
Table 5: Existing and Proposed RNP Operational Types
Required Accuracy
(95% Containment)
RNP
Type
Horizontal Vertical
Description
20
(No Vertical)
20.0 NM N/A
The minimumcapability considered acceptable to support ATS route
operations.
12.6
(No Vertical)
12.6 NM N/A
Supports limited optimized routing in areas with a reduced level of
navigation facilities.
10
(No Vertical)
10.0 NM N/A
Supports reduced lateral and longitudinal separation minima and
enhanced operational efficiency in oceanic and remote areas where
the availability of navigation aids is limited.
5
(No Vertical)
5.0 NM N/A
An interimtype implemented in ECAC airspace to permit the
continued operation of existing navigation equipment. Equates to B-
RNAV in ECAC airspace.
4
(No Vertical)
4.0 NM N/A
Supports ATS routes and airspace based upon limited distances
between navaids. Normally associated with continental airspace but
may be used as part of some terminal procedures.
2
(No Vertical)
2.0 NM N/A Domestic Enroute.
1
(No Vertical)
1.0 NM N/A
Supports Arrival, Initial/Intermediate Approach and
Departure; also envisaged as supporting the most efficient ATS route
operations. Equates to P-RNAV in ECAC airspace.
0.5
(No Vertical)
0.5 NM N/A
Supports Initial/Intermediate Approach and Departure. Only
expected to be used where RNP 0.3 cannot be achieved (poor navaid
infrastructure) and RNP 1 is unacceptable (obstacle rich environment)
0.3
(No Vertical)
0.3 NM N/A
Supports Initial/Intermediate Approach, 2D RNAV Approach, and
Departure. Expected to be the most common application.
0.3/125 0.3 NM 125 ft
RNAV/VNAV Approaches using Barometric inputs or SBAS inputs.
(APV-1)
0.xx/xxx 0.03 NM 125 ft
LPV
0.03/50 0.03 NM 50 ft
RNAV/VNAV Approaches using SBAS or GBAS. (APV-II)
0.02/40 0.02 NM 40 ft
Proposed for CAT I Precision Approach to 200 ft DH
(ILS, MLS, GBAS and SBAS)
0.01/15 0.01 NM 15 ft
Proposed for CAT II Precision Approach to 100 ft DH
(ILS, MLS and GBAS)
0.003/z 0.003 NM z ft
Proposed for CAT III Precision Approach and Landing including
touchdown, landing roll and take-off roll requirements.
(ILS, MLS and GBAS). No vertical requirement specified to date.
Reference:
Eurocontrol Document , Guidance Material for the Design of Terminal Procedures for Area Navigation (DME/DME, B-GNSS,
Baro-VNAV & RNP-RNAV, Version 3.0.
ICAO Annex 10, Aeronautical Telecommunications, Volume 1, 5
th
Edition, Radionavigation Aids, J uly 1996.
Page 13 of 13
Table 6: Navigation System Performance metrics and their relationship to Operational Considerations
SAFETY ECONOMY
Integrity
Accuracy
Continuity
Availability
Integrity
The integrity of a systemis a quality that indicates the trust that can be placed in the correctness of the information supplied by the total
system. Integrity risk is the probability of an undetected (latent) failure of the specified accuracy. Integrity includes the ability of the
systemto provide timely warnings to the user when the systemshould not be used for the intended operation.
Integrity is uniquely related to safety since misleading information without warning is a safety of flight situation. Integrity is the glue
for the remaining performance metrics of Accuracy, Continuity, and Availability for operational capability.
Accuracy
The degree of conformance between the estimated or measured value and the true value at the time of the measurement.
Accuracy is more closely related to safety since the lack of conformance could result in a potential safety of flight situation. Accuracy
is a trade-off favoring the required performance for safe operations and economic cost to provide that operational performance.
Continuity
The ability of the total system(comprising all elements necessary to maintain aircraft position within the defined airspace) to perform
its function without interruption during the intended operation. More specifically, continuity is the probability that the specified system
performance will be maintained for the duration of a phase of operation, presuming that the systemwas available at the beginning of
that phase of operation.
Continuity is more closely related to economic considerations since loss of function once committed to an operation does not
necessarily result in an unsafe condition. With integrity, loss of function during an operation does not necessarily result in a safety of
flight situation. Continuity is a trade-off favoring the economic cost to provide continuity of function and the required performance for
safe operations.
Availability
The ability of the navigation systemto provide the required function and performance at the initiation of the intended operation. Short-
termsystemavailability is the probability that the aircraft can conduct the approach at the destination given that the service at the
destination was predicted to be available at dispatch. Long-termservice availability is the probability that the signal in space fromthe
service provider will be available for any aircraft intending to conduct the approach.
Availability is more closely related to economic considerations since loss of function prior to an operation does not necessarily result in
an unsafe condition. With integrity, loss of function prior to an operation does not result in a safety of flight situation. Availability is
uniquely related to the economic considerations of the design, i.e. a system that exhibits low availability provides little utility and
operational benefit, but is not a safety issue.