Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
LPV procedures for HEMS Mountain Rescue (HEDGE WP2)
LPV procedures for HEMS Mountain Rescue (HEDGE WP2)
LPV procedures for HEMS Mountain Rescue (HEDGE WP2)
LPV procedures for HEMS Mountain Rescue (HEDGE WP2)
LPV procedures for HEMS Mountain Rescue (HEDGE WP2)
LPV procedures for HEMS Mountain Rescue (HEDGE WP2)
LPV procedures for HEMS Mountain Rescue (HEDGE WP2)
LPV procedures for HEMS Mountain Rescue (HEDGE WP2)
LPV procedures for HEMS Mountain Rescue (HEDGE WP2)
LPV procedures for HEMS Mountain Rescue (HEDGE WP2)
LPV procedures for HEMS Mountain Rescue (HEDGE WP2)
LPV procedures for HEMS Mountain Rescue (HEDGE WP2)
LPV procedures for HEMS Mountain Rescue (HEDGE WP2)
LPV procedures for HEMS Mountain Rescue (HEDGE WP2)
LPV procedures for HEMS Mountain Rescue (HEDGE WP2)
LPV procedures for HEMS Mountain Rescue (HEDGE WP2)
LPV procedures for HEMS Mountain Rescue (HEDGE WP2)
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

LPV procedures for HEMS Mountain Rescue (HEDGE WP2)

771

Published on

Presentation at the AIRMED World Congress, in Brighton, May 2011 …

Presentation at the AIRMED World Congress, in Brighton, May 2011
Presenter: Philip Church of Helios
philip.church@askhelios.com
_______________________________________________________________________
Follow Helios via Linkedin, www.twitter.com/askhelios and www.facebook.com/askhelios

Published in: Economy & Finance, Business
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
771
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
14
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Mountain Rescue - LPV approaches Unlocking EGNOS benefits Philip Church, Helios Marc Torres, Pildo Labs AIRMED 2011 – 25 May 2011 27/05/2011
  • 2. SCOPE What is HEDGE? Benefits of LPV Procedure Implementation Process Validation Results 2
  • 3. What is HEDGE? HElicopters Deploy GNSS in Europe Project commissioned by the GSA and partfunded under the EU’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7) Aim to develop and demonstrate: • new helicopter approach procedures • other EGNOS applications for general aviation 3
  • 4. RNAV approaches are being worldimplemented world-wide for the benefits of airspace users Widespread use of GPS based RNAV procedures (particularly in US and Canada) Many conventional approaches can be flown as an RNAV overlay Lower minima available compared to NPA Benefits to airspace users In many cases RNAV approaches can use existing avionics for little additional cost Existing FMS New generation panel mount GPS 4
  • 5. RNAV approaches offer lower minima NDB NPA VOR NPA GPS NPA APV Baro-VNAV APV SBAS (LPV) ILS CAT I 450ft 370ft 287ft 270ft 231ft Lower minima give airport capacity gains in low visibility Example, Finland EFRO 03, Cat D aircraft. Calculated using Eurocontrol Minima Estimator Tool 5
  • 6. The HEMS benefit Steep approaches Improved access in low visibility operations Increased availability Improved operational resilience to enable 24hr Improved operational resilience to enable 24hr operations operations 6
  • 7. Procedure Design Procedure specifications: • 5.3 NM FAS • 5.96º GPA (10.4%) • 464 ft OCH Aerodrome limitations: • • • • No ATC A/A frequency No lighting VFR aerodrome 7
  • 8. Avionics architecture Cushions removed Stand-alone platform 8
  • 9. Avionics equipment preparation Garmin CDI/VDI installed 9
  • 10. Procedure validation 7 LPV approaches were successfully flown: • • • • • • • App1. Approach flown down to DH/A App2. Approach flown to helipad (landing) App3. Approach flown down to DH/A [problem in data recording system] App4. Approach flown to helipad (landing) App5. Approach flown down to DH/A App6. Approach flown to helipad (landing) App7. Approach flown to helipad (landing) 10
  • 11. Validation – lateral profile GNS480 LatLon @ App1 GNS480 LatLon @ App4 GNS480 LatLon @ App2 42.4 42.39 42.39 42.39 42.38 42.38 42.38 42.37 42.36 42.35 42.37 42.36 42.33 42.33 1.65 1.7 1.75 Longitude(º) 1.8 1.85 42.32 1.6 1.9 42.36 42.34 42.34 42.33 42.37 42.35 42.35 42.34 42.32 1.6 42.41 Latitude(º) 42.4 Latitude(º) 42.41 42.4 Latitude(º) 42.41 1.65 GNS480 LatLon @ App5 1.7 1.75 Longitude(º) 1.8 1.85 42.32 1.6 1.9 1.7 1.75 Longitude(º) 1.8 1.85 1.9 GNS480 LatLon @ App7 GNS480 LatLon @ App6 42.4 42.4 42.4 42.39 42.39 42.39 42.38 42.38 42.38 42.37 42.36 42.35 42.37 42.36 42.33 42.33 1.65 1.7 1.75 Longitude(º) 1.8 1.85 1.9 42.32 1.6 42.36 42.34 42.34 42.33 42.37 42.35 42.35 42.34 42.32 1.6 42.41 Latitude(º) 42.41 Latitude(º) 42.41 Latitude(º) 1.65 1.65 1.7 1.75 Longitude(º) 1.8 1.85 1.9 42.32 1.6 1.65 1.7 1.75 Longitude(º) 1.8 1.85 1.9 11
  • 12. Validation - lateral profile 12
  • 13. Validation – vertical profile Stable descending at 750 ft/min at 70 KIAS Height loss after the MAPt very small High Climb gradient achieved after MAPt (>800 ft/min) GNS Altitude @ App6 GNS Altitude @ App5 1320 2200 1310 1300 1290 1800 Altitude(m) Altitude(m) 2000 1600 1280 1270 1260 1250 1400 1240 1230 1200 1220 2.1195 2.12 2.1205 2.121 time(s) 2.1215 2.122 2.1225 5 x 10 2.11242.11242.11242.11252.11262.11262.11262.11272.11282.11282.1128 5 time(s) x 10 13
  • 14. Validation – vertical profile 14 14
  • 15. Conclusions Flyability: • The helicopter was only VFR equipped and did not have an autopilot. Hence, it is no adequate for IMC flight and requires higher piloting skills. In spite of this, the procedure was easy to fly. Operational advantages: • The designed LPV is an IFR approach simple to fly. It does not need ground installation. It is as well helpful in case of bad weather, during night and easy to set. Limitations observed: • for the Missed Approach, with a target altitude of 10000 ft, and at the IAF, at 7400 ft, it might be dangerous to fly in winter time without deicing systems. Guidance presented to the pilots: • screen too small, low resolution. The CDA is not in direct field of view of the pilot. AS 350 B3 used for the test was not an IFR helicopter with 15 stability augmentation, AP.
  • 16. Questions? philip.church@askhelios.com 16 http://hedge.askhelios.com
  • 17. The project has received Community research funding under the 7th Framework Programme This material reflects only the author’s views and the Community and the GSA are not liable for any use that may be made of the information contained herein 17

×