ATTACHMENTS
C.5-1: RNAV Routes & Holds
T
e
r
m
i
n
a
l
A
i
r
s
p
a
c
e
D
e
s
i
g
n
G
u
i
d
e
l
i
n
e
s
-
P
a
r
t
C
5
.
1
I
N
T
R
O
D
U
C
T
I
O
N
This chapter presents Design Guidelines for Routes and Holding Patterns. They are intended to support creation of the design concept for Routes and Holds for a specific Terminal Airspace. This concept would be based on certain assumptions. Given the phased approach described in Chapter 4, constraints and enablers would be identified in a phased manner as per para. 5.4.1. Furthermore, the design would be qualitatively assessed against the selected safety and performance criteria as well as the Reference Scenario, if appropriate.
5
.
2
R
O
U
T
E
S
A
N
D
H
O
L
D
I
N
G
A
R
E
A
S
Whilst the generic ICAO definition of ATS Route is broad, (see grey shaded area in Figure 5-1, below), ATS routes within Terminal Airspace are usually arrival and departure routes. These arrival and departure routes may be -
.
designated, as is the case with IFR departure and arrival routes which are usually published as SIDs/STARs (based upon RNAV or conventional navigation means), designated VFR routes (promulgated, for example, by visual reporting points) or VFR corridors; and/or
.
those which are not designated, as is the case with tactical routeing ‘created’ by ATC in the form of Radar Vectors or instructions to proceed “direct to” an RNAV way-point.
Since B-RNAV became mandatory in the upper airspace of the member states of ECAC, RNAV has been increasingly used as a basis for the design of RNAV-based instrument approach or departure procedures. Usually, the RNAV-based instrument approach procedure does not include the final approach and/or missed approach segment. In many cases, the tracks depicting these procedures are designed to replicate radar vectoring patterns because these procedures are used as a substitute for radar vectoring by ATC. These are depicted in Figure 5-1 in the blue-red box beneath the SIDs/STARs and discussed in para. 5.2.1.
Note: Whilst instrument approach procedures based upon conventional navigation are sometimes used as a substitute for Radar Vectoring, this is less common.
Note: For more general information on RNAV Routes, see Attachment C.5-1.
Although Radar Vectoring has been used by ATC for traffic separation and sequencing for several decades, the increased use RNAV in Terminal Airspace has resulted in ATC being able to provide tactical instructions to a way-point. Unlike Radar Vectors, instructions to a way point result in aircraft flying a particular track (as opposed to heading). Whilst Radar Vectors and instructions to proceed direct to a way-point are not considered to be ATS Routes (in the traditional sense), they have been included in Figure 5-1 because Terminal Airspace designers are required to consider all routes when designing an airspace, whether these are ‘created’ in a strategic or tactical manner.
中国航空网 www.aero.cn
航空翻译 www.aviation.cn
本文链接地址：EUROCONTROL MANUAL FOR AIRSPACE PLANNING 2(35)
