1 / 10

CLARIFICATIONS FROM ICAO - ICAO EUR FPL2012 Workshop

CLARIFICATIONS FROM ICAO - ICAO EUR FPL2012 Workshop. Kiev, Ukraine 29 June – 1 July 2010. Questions & Comments. Mainly from the ICAO FPL2012 Task Force General topics: Inconsistencies or errors in the amendment Requests for additional explanations Requests for additional provisions

valtina
Télécharger la présentation

CLARIFICATIONS FROM ICAO - ICAO EUR FPL2012 Workshop

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. CLARIFICATIONS FROM ICAO-ICAO EUR FPL2012 Workshop Kiev, Ukraine 29 June – 1 July 2010

  2. Questions & Comments Mainly from the ICAO FPL2012 Task Force General topics: • Inconsistencies or errors in the amendment • Requests for additional explanations • Requests for additional provisions • Regional requirements • Requests to change the amendment

  3. Inconsistencies/Errors • Appendix 3, Field 10b inconsistency with Appendix 2, Item 10 – missing “N” in Appendix 3 • Appendix 3, Field 13b, messages transmitted before departure – should only refer to “messages” • Appendix 3, Field 13b not included – paragraphs 2.3.6.2 and 2.3.6.3 missing reference to 13b • Appendix 3, Field 16 – missing RQP • Field 17 – arrival aerodrome when no ICAO indicator assigned

  4. Inconsistencies/Errors • Significant Point –defined in relation to itself • Degrees True/Degrees Magnetic –when to use Degrees True in position information • Paragraph 4.4.2.1.1 - Difference between Russian and English Language versions All inconsistencies and errors will be corrected in the amendment

  5. Additional Explanations • Guidance Material - Item 18 DAT – translating from NEW to PRESENT correctly - S, H, V and M • Syntax for information following RMK/ • Date of Flight (DOF) • In CHG messages • Relationship between DOF and EOBT FITS provides examples • How to amend DOF The process to amend DOF and any other information in flight plan message not changed

  6. Additional Explanations • Changes to current Regional and State documents Regional coordination is encouraged. Follow current procedures and recommendations concerning differences from PANS-ATM.

  7. Additional provisions? • Phraseology to describe equipment capabilities • Advising originators when flight plans are rejected/not processed • Advising of limitations in acceptance of flight plans ahead of time of flight Use current provisions. Ensure AIP provides necessary information • Limiting AIRAC changes effective on 15 November 2012 Consider Regional coordination

  8. Regional Requirements • Reasons for special handling • Plain text following RMK/ • Do not repeat STS following RMK/ • Create special codes – publish in AIP and/or Doc 7030 • Exemptions • Plain text following RMK/ • Create special codes – publish in AIP and/or Doc 7030

  9. Change the Amendment? • Appendix 2, Item 10a – no limit on number of characters that could be in Item 10a Amendment deliberately does not specify limit. Regional coordination is encouraged.

  10. New Questions/Issues Any questions or concerns may be forwarded to the EUR/NAT Office of ICAO: Carole Stewart-Green CStewart @paris.icao.int

More Related