Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Required navigation performance

Required Navigation Performance (RNP) is a specification within performance-based navigation (PBN) that defines the navigation accuracy, integrity, continuity, and functionality required for aircraft operations in a given airspace or procedure, expressed as a containment value (e.g., RNP 1 indicating the aircraft must remain within ±1 nautical mile of the intended path 95% of the flight time). It mandates onboard performance monitoring and alerting (OBPMA) to ensure the system detects and notifies the crew if performance degrades below required levels, distinguishing RNP from area navigation (RNAV) specifications that lack this alerting capability. RNP enables precise and repeatable flight paths, supporting enhanced airspace capacity, reduced separation minima, and improved safety in diverse environments such as oceanic routes, en-route segments, terminal areas, and approaches. Common RNP values range from RNP 10 for oceanic and remote operations (requiring ±10 NM accuracy) to RNP 0.3 for final approach segments (±0.3 NM accuracy), with integrity requirements typically set at a malfunction probability of less than 1×10⁻⁵ per flight hour and continuity ensuring minimal loss of function during critical phases. Aircraft must be equipped with certified systems like GNSS or multi-sensor navigation, and operational approval is required based on aircraft flight manuals and regulatory standards from bodies such as the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). Advanced variants, such as RNP Authorization Required (RNP AR), allow for curved paths and lower minima in challenging terrain, further optimizing procedures like approaches with vertical guidance (APV). Overall, RNP contributes to global harmonization of navigation standards, as outlined in ICAO Doc 9613, facilitating efficient air traffic management and fuel savings through optimized routing.

Overview

Definition and principles

Required Navigation Performance (RNP) is a navigation specification within the International Civil Aviation Organization's (ICAO) Performance-Based Navigation (PBN) framework, which establishes performance requirements for aircraft operations along (ATS) routes, terminal procedures, or in designated . It defines the level of accuracy, integrity, continuity, and availability needed for safe navigation, ensuring that aircraft can follow precise flight paths while maintaining separation from and other . These requirements apply to both lateral (cross-track) and longitudinal (along-track) dimensions, with RNP values expressed in nautical miles (NM), such as RNP 1 indicating a performance level suitable for certain en route or terminal operations. The foundational principles of RNP center on total error (TSE), which comprises path definition error (PDE)—the difference between the defined path and the desired path; sensor error (NSE)—the error in the aircraft's estimated position relative to its actual position; and flight technical error (FTE)—the error due to pilot or actions in following the display. RNP mandates that the aircraft's achieves a TSE no greater than the specified RNP value (e.g., 1 for RNP 1) for at least 95% of the total , providing a high probability of within a defined . Additionally, the must ensure by alerting the flight if the probability of exceeding 2 times the RNP value (e.g., 2 for RNP 1) surpasses 10^{-5} per hour, while requires the probability of an unintended loss of to be less than 10^{-4} per hour over a specified period (typically 15 seconds for RNP values ≤1 ), and ensures the meets requirements greater than 99.999% of the time during operations, often through redundant like dual long-range in operations. Unlike (RNAV), which permits flexible flight paths within the coverage of navigation aids or self-contained systems but lacks mandatory onboard verification, RNP incorporates onboard performance monitoring and alerting (OBPMA) to continuously assess and report deviations in real-time. This distinction enables RNP to support reduced separation minima and more efficient use, as the self-detects and alerts for shortfalls without relying solely on intervention. Navigation specifications in performance-based navigation (PBN) are standardized by the (ICAO) and aligned with (FAA) criteria to define required levels of accuracy, integrity, continuity, and availability for aircraft navigation systems. PBN encompasses two primary categories: (RNAV) and Required Navigation Performance (RNP). RNAV specifications enable flexible routing using waypoints without reliance on ground-based aids, focusing on basic accuracy for en-route and terminal operations. In contrast, RNP specifications build on RNAV by mandating onboard performance monitoring and alerting, ensuring enhanced accuracy and system reliability, particularly for operations in low-surveillance environments. ICAO's PBN framework, outlined in Doc 9613 (5th ed., 2023), identifies RNP specifications ranging from RNP 0.3 to RNP 10, each tailored to flight phases such as en-route, terminal, and approach. Common types include RNP 1 for en-route and terminal areas, RNP 2 for continental en-route, RNP 4 for oceanic and remote regions, and RNP 10 for oceanic operations. Approach-specific specifications comprise RNP APCH, which supports lateral (LNAV), LNAV/VNAV, or (LPV) minima, and RNP AR APCH, requiring special aircraft authorization for complex procedures in challenging terrain. Performance metrics for RNP emphasize total system error (TSE) accuracy, where the aircraft must remain within the specified navigation accuracy 95% of the time. Integrity requires the probability of exceeding containment limits (typically twice the accuracy value) to be less than 10^{-5} per flight hour, with stricter thresholds like 10^{-7} per approach for RNP AR APCH. Continuity demands the probability of loss of function less than 10^{-4} per hour over the operational period (e.g., 15 seconds for RNP ≤1 NM), often achieved through redundant systems like dual long-range navigation systems in oceanic operations. Availability is ensured by infrastructure such as GNSS, with predictive tools verifying compliance prior to flight. The following table summarizes common RNP specifications, their key metrics, and typical uses, based on ICAO and FAA standards (as per Doc 9613, 5th ed., 2023):
SpecificationAccuracy (95% TSE, NM)Integrity (Probability)Availability (>)Typical Uses
RNP 11<10^{-5}/hour99.999%En-route/terminal SIDs/STARs
RNP 22<10^{-5}/hour99.999%Continental en-route
RNP 44<10^{-5}/hour99.999%Oceanic/remote en-route
RNP 1010<10^{-5}/hour99.999%Oceanic en-route
RNP APCH1 (initial), 0.3 (final)<10^{-5}/hour or <10^{-7}/approach99.999%Approaches with LNAV/VNAV or LPV minima
RNP AR APCH0.1–1 (scales to 0.3 final)<10^{-7}/approach99.999%Authorization-required approaches in terrain-challenged areas
RNP 0.30.3<10^{-5}/hour or <10^{-7}/approach99.999%Final approach segments, helicopters

History

Development and early adoption

The concept of Required Navigation Performance (RNP) originated in the early 1990s as an extension of (RNAV) advancements from the , driven by the need to establish quantifiable accuracy standards for operating in and remote airspace lacking ground-based aids. The (FAA) and the (ICAO) collaborated on this development to enable safer and more efficient operations by reducing reliance on procedural separations, initially focusing on inertial systems (INS) for long-range flights. This foundational work built on RNAV routes introduced by the FAA in the , aiming to support performance-based criteria that included accuracy, , and continuity requirements tailored to specific airspace constraints. A notable early application was the first RNP Authorization Required (RNP AR) approach developed by in 1996 for , enabling safer operations in rugged terrain. Key early milestones in the 1990s marked the transition from concept to operational use, particularly with the introduction of RNP 4 for North Atlantic organized tracks. In 1998, the ICAO North Atlantic Systems Planning Group (NAT SPG) endorsed RNP 4 to permit reduced lateral track spacing, allowing aircraft equipped with compliant navigation systems to operate more flexibly across the busy transatlantic corridor. Initial adoption of RNP focused on oceanic and remote continental areas, where it facilitated significant efficiency gains by enabling lateral separations to be halved from 60 nautical miles (NM) to 30 NM for RNP 4-equipped flights on North Atlantic tracks. This implementation prioritized high-traffic routes, with early approvals granted to operators demonstrating system reliability through INS or multi-sensor fusion, leading to broader capacity increases without compromising safety. However, early adoption faced challenges stemming from the heavy reliance on INS technology prior to widespread GPS integration, as INS systems could suffer from cumulative position errors due to gyroscopic drift over extended oceanic legs, potentially exceeding 10 NM after several hours. These limitations necessitated rigorous pre-flight monitoring and periodic position updates via high-frequency radio aids when available, constraining the scalability of RNP until satellite-based augmentation became viable in the late 1990s.

Key milestones and regulatory evolution

In 2008, the (ICAO) published the Performance-Based Navigation (PBN) Manual (Doc 9613), which standardized Required Navigation Performance (RNP) specifications globally by defining navigation accuracy, integrity, continuity, and availability requirements for RNAV and RNP operations. This document marked a pivotal shift from disparate regional standards to a harmonized framework, facilitating international and paving the way for widespread PBN implementation. The U.S. (FAA) accelerated RNP adoption through its NextGen program, with significant milestones in 2011 including the expanded deployment of RNP approach procedures at major airports, which improved efficiency and access in challenging terrain or weather conditions. Building on this, FAA updates from 2023 to 2025 included the release of (AC) 91-70D in March 2025, providing updated guidance on RNAV and RNP applications for and remote operations to enhance and procedural consistency. Additionally, in July 2024, the FAA proposed revisions to terminology and authorizations, aiming to streamline RNP-related procedures and align with global PBN advancements. Parallel developments by ICAO and the (EASA) in 2023 involved the EASA Notice of Proposed Amendment (NPA) 2023-04, which proposed integrating RNP 4 and RNAV 10 specifications for oceanic operations to replace legacy requirements and improve performance in remote . In 2024, the RTCA (SC)-227 updated the Minimum Aviation System Performance Standards (MASPS) for RNP (DO-236E), incorporating enhancements for multi-constellation GNSS and resilience to support advanced PBN applications. Emerging research in 2023 extended RNP concepts to operations, proposing specifications that include vertical performance metrics to enable safe integration of unmanned into . By 2025, ICAO emphasized GNSS interference resilience for RNP through regional initiatives, such as the Asia-Pacific DGCA/60 meeting, focusing on mitigation strategies to maintain navigation integrity amid rising spoofing and threats. Global adoption trends reflect robust growth, particularly in , where RNP approaches reached 44% implementation across ECAC states as of 2023, with ongoing progress toward targets delayed to 2027 to enhance network efficiency and safety.

Technical Description

Performance requirements

Required Navigation Performance (RNP) establishes quantitative criteria for aircraft navigation systems to ensure safe and efficient operations in specified airspace or procedures. These requirements encompass accuracy, integrity, and continuity, tailored to the phase of flight such as en route, terminal, or approach. Accuracy is defined such that the lateral and along-track navigation performance meets the RNP value for at least 95% of the flight time, while integrity and continuity ensure reliable operation with low failure probabilities. Lateral navigation accuracy requires that total system error (TSE) remains within the specified RNP value (e.g., ±1 for RNP 1) for 95% of the total , with ensuring TSE does not exceed 2×RNP with very high probability, typically supported by a assumption where 95% aligns with approximately 2 standard deviations and 99.7% within 3 standard deviations for error modeling. Along-track accuracy is similarly specified at 95% within 1×RNP, ensuring the position remains within the longitudinal bounds of the . These accuracy levels apply across RNP specifications like RNP 4, RNP 2, and RNP APCH, scaling with the designated value. The error budget for RNP is composed of total system error (TSE), which is the root-sum-square approximation of the vector sum of navigation system error (NSE), flight technical error (FTE), and path definition error (PDE): \text{TSE} \approx \sqrt{\text{NSE}^2 + \text{FTE}^2 + \text{PDE}^2} Containment requires that TSE ≤ 2×RNP to bound errors within protected volumes, with NSE representing and computation inaccuracies, FTE the pilot or deviations, and PDE errors in route definition. This decomposition allows allocation of performance budgets during certification and operations. Integrity requirements vary by operation but generally mandate a probability of undetected malfunction not exceeding 10^{-5} to 10^{-8} per flight hour, classified as or hazardous depending on the ; for example, RNP APCH requires <10^{-5} per hour for failures and <10^{-7} for hazardous in precision-like minima. is the capability to perform the RNP function without unscheduled interruptions during the intended period of operation, typically ensured through system redundancy (e.g., dual independent systems) for critical phases like or critical phases to mitigate loss-of-function risks. For vertical performance in RNP APCH with (VNAV), such as LNAV/VNAV procedures using baro-VNAV, accuracy at the final approach fix is ±125 ft and at the decision altitude ±75 ft for 99.7% of the , ensuring safe clearance and alignment with the glidepath. These vertical requirements support approach minima down to approximately 350 ft above threshold, with deviations monitored to maintain integrity. Onboard monitoring verifies compliance with these metrics in .

System components and error sources

The Required Navigation Performance (RNP) system relies on a combination of core components to achieve precise positioning and guidance. The primary navigation sensors include Global Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSS) such as GPS and Galileo, which provide the foundational positioning data through signals. Inertial Reference Units (IRUs), often integrated as part of Inertial Systems (), offer self-contained dead-reckoning capabilities using accelerometers and gyroscopes to track position changes over time, particularly useful during GNSS outages. The (FMS) serves as the central integrator, fusing data from GNSS, IRUs, and other sensors like (DME) for multi-mode operations, while incorporating navigation databases for route planning and performance computation. Multi-sensor fusion enhances redundancy, allowing seamless transitions between sensors to maintain continuity in remote or environments. Error sources in RNP systems are categorized into three main types that contribute to deviations from the intended flight path. arises from inaccuracies in the positioning sensors, including satellite geometry limitations in GNSS, which can degrade accuracy due to poor distribution of satellites in the sky, and ionospheric delays that refract signals as they pass through Earth's atmosphere. stems from deviations in control, such as pilot inputs or tracking inaccuracies relative to the commanded path, typically limited to 0.5 or less in -equipped during en-route phases. results from discrepancies in the navigation database, such as inaccuracies in coordinates or route geometry definitions, though it is often considered negligible with modern high-integrity databases. These errors combine to form the Total System Error (TSE), which represents the overall lateral deviation and must remain within RNP limits for 95% of the ; in practice, TSE is computed as the vector sum—approximately the root-sum-square—of NSE, FTE, and PDE components to account for their contributions. Mitigations are essential to counter these errors and ensure system integrity. (RAIM) for GNSS detects and excludes faulty satellite signals by cross-checking measurements from multiple satellites, providing availability predictions to avoid operations in low-integrity scenarios. Dual FMS configurations offer , allowing between units to maintain , particularly in long-range RNP applications like routes. External threats, such as GPS , exemplify NSE impacts in real-world operations; 2025 ICAO reports highlight increased jamming incidents in conflict zones, such as those near and . where deliberate disrupts GNSS signals, potentially inflating NSE by orders of magnitude and forcing reliance on IRUs, which drift at rates up to 2-3 per hour without correction. This underscores the need for multi-sensor to bound TSE during such events, preserving RNP .

Monitoring and Alerting

Onboard performance monitoring

Onboard performance monitoring in Required Navigation Performance (RNP) systems involves the continuous assessment of the aircraft's navigation accuracy to ensure compliance with specified performance criteria during flight. This process primarily compares the actual navigation performance (ANP), which represents the current estimated uncertainty in the aircraft's position, against the required navigation performance (RNP), defined as the lateral accuracy needed for a given procedure or airspace, typically contained within a specified 95% of the time. ANP is derived from real-time position estimates that account for various error sources, such as inaccuracies and environmental factors, ensuring the system can detect deviations that might compromise . The core method for computing ANP relies on the (FMS), which fuses data from multiple sensors, including GPS, inertial reference units, and distance-measuring equipment, to generate a blended position solution. This fusion process incorporates error models that quantify uncertainties, such as navigation system error (NSE) from onboard components and path definition error (PDE) from procedure design, allowing the FMS to update ANP dynamically at rates sufficient for the operational phase, often every few seconds. Integrity monitoring complements this by verifying the reliability of the position data; traditional (RAIM) uses redundant satellite measurements to detect and exclude faulty signals in GPS-based systems, while advanced RAIM (ARAIM) extends this capability to multi-constellation environments (e.g., GPS and Galileo) by providing improved fault detection and exclusion through probabilistic models. Key requirements mandate that ANP remain less than or equal to the applicable RNP value throughout the operation, with the total system error (TSE)—encompassing NSE, flight technical error, and PDE—not exceeding RNP 95% of the time. If ANP exceeds RNP, the system must detect this condition and initiate an alert, though the focus here is on the monitoring function rather than the alert response. For approaches, additional prediction is required, assessing the probability of maintaining performance without interruption (e.g., less than 10^{-5} per hour failure rate) over the remaining flight segment, often using FMS algorithms to forecast availability and error growth. In specialized applications like RNP Authorization Required (RNP AR) approaches, monitoring incorporates enhanced checks, such as alert limits set at twice the RNP value (e.g., 0.6 for RNP 0.3 in the final approach segment) to bound TSE with high probability (exceeding 10^{-5}), and evaluations of path conformance including to ensure the follows curved segments without excessive deviation, as defined by standards like RTCA DO-236C. These features enable tighter integration of onboard systems for complex procedures in challenging terrain.

Alerting mechanisms and requirements

Alerting mechanisms in (RNP) systems are designed to notify flight crews of deviations or in accuracy, ensuring the remains within specified boundaries. These mechanisms form a critical part of onboard monitoring and alerting (OBPMA), which continuously assesses total system error (TSE) components, including error, definition error, and flight error (FTE). Alerts are categorized into three types: warnings, cautions, and advisories. A warning is issued for immediate deviations exceeding twice the RNP value (2x RNP), indicating a high risk of breach with an requirement of no more than one undetected error per 100,000 flight hours (10^{-5}/hour); note that 10^{-7}/hour applies to GNSS signal-in-space errors in specific operations like oceanic routes. Cautions signal approaching RNP limits, such as when estimated position uncertainty nears or exceeds the required value, with an integrity of 10^{-5}/hour. Advisories provide predictive , such as anticipated or changes in , to support proactive crew actions without immediate safety implications. Regulatory requirements for RNP alerting are mandated by both ICAO and FAA standards to maintain navigation integrity and continuity. ICAO's Performance-Based Navigation (PBN) Manual (Doc 9613) specifies that alerts must be reversible for FTE-related errors, allowing pilots to correct deviations through manual intervention without system lockdown, while non-reversible alerts are required for irreversible system failures, such as equipment malfunctions or loss of RNP capability. The FAA's 90-105A aligns with this, emphasizing that alerts for system performance degradation must not automatically monitor FTE but should integrate with crew procedures to ensure timely response. Warning alerts must activate in a timely manner consistent with RTCA DO-236 requirements upon detecting a deviation beyond 2x RNP to minimize and support containment, with overall system alerting thresholds derived from RTCA DO-236E (approved December 2024, superseding DO-236C). These mandates ensure that RNP operations achieve 95% accuracy within the specified value while providing high-confidence alerting for the remaining 5%. Implementation of RNP alerting typically involves a combination of visual, aural, and integrated displays to enhance . Annunciator lights on the indicate alert levels, with red for , amber for cautions, and green or cyan for advisories; aural tones accompany high-priority alerts to prompt immediate attention. Engine Indication and Alerting (EICAS) or equivalent messages provide detailed diagnostics, such as "RNP - DEVIATION" or "CAUTION - PERFORMANCE DEGRADED." Integration with systems may include automatic disconnect upon alert issuance for non-reversible failures, preventing continued operation outside RNP limits. These elements ensure alerts are unambiguous and prioritized per FAA AC 25.1322 standards for alerting. Recent updates in 2024 by RTCA's SC-227 committee have enhanced alerting for Advanced (ARAIM)-based RNP in GNSS-denied environments, introducing refined integrity risk models and multi-constellation support to improve alert reliability during signal outages, with emphasis on multi-sensor fusion including DME for robust performance. These enhancements, outlined in revised (Revision 18, December 2024) and incorporated into DO-236E (approved December 2024), support ARAIM integration for challenging scenarios such as oceanic or polar routes, while maintaining compatibility with existing ICAO PBN specifications.

Designations and Certification

RNP value designations

Required Navigation Performance (RNP) values are designated using the format "RNP X," where X represents the required lateral navigation accuracy in , indicating that the aircraft's position must be within a of X NM from the intended flight path for at least 95% of the total during the operation. This notation applies to specific procedures, airspace blocks, or segments, ensuring consistent performance requirements across global standards. For approach procedures, the designation "RNP APCH" is used, encompassing sub-values that vary by and minima type. Lateral accuracy for LNAV (lateral navigation) minima typically ranges from 0.3 to 1 , with 1 required in initial and intermediate segments and scaling to 0.3 (or 40 meters with satellite-based augmentation systems) in the final approach . For VNAV () minima using barometric vertical navigation, a vertical deviation limit of ±75 feet (or smaller, per system capabilities) is typically required to support LNAV/VNAV lines and ensure safe descent profiles. RNP values are notated on aeronautical charts published by authorities such as the FAA and providers like , where specific values for route segments are depicted in the plan view, profile view, or procedural notes, often derived from FAA Form 8260-3 for instrument procedures. In flight planning, ICAO-compliant flight plans indicate RNP capability in Item 10 (e.g., NAV/R1 for RNP 1), while FAA domestic plans may use equipment suffixes like /RNP1 in the aircraft identification or remarks to denote compliance with specific values. For procedures involving curved paths, such as radius-to-fix (RF) legs, the RNP value undergoes radius-based scaling to adjust accuracy requirements, ensuring the navigation system maintains the designated relative to the turn radius—typically scaling proportionally to provide equivalent protection area as straight segments. The selection of RNP values is determined by factors including , phase of flight, and associated risk levels, with larger values (lower accuracy) applied in less congested or en-route phases and smaller values (higher accuracy) in or approach phases requiring greater separation. For instance, RNP 10 is commonly designated for legacy operations where reduced longitudinal separation is permitted, while RNP 0.1 is used for high-risk operations in confined or complex environments.

Aircraft and operational authorization

Aircraft certification for Required Navigation Performance (RNP) operations involves meeting specific standards for and systems to ensure the actual navigation performance (ANP) remains at or below the required RNP value. The (FAA) authorizes GPS-based equipment under Technical Standard Order (TSO) C129a for standalone systems and TSO-C145 for systems augmented with (WAAS), which support various RNP levels by providing the necessary accuracy, integrity, and continuity. For advanced RNP Authorization Required (RNP AR) operations, (AC) 90-101A outlines airworthiness approval, requiring demonstration through a combination of analysis, simulation, and that the aircraft's ANP is less than or equal to the RNP value for at least 95% of the , with alerting if performance degrades. Operational authorization for RNP focuses on ensuring operators and crews are qualified to utilize certified in specified procedures. Under FAA regulations, part 121, 125, and 135 operators receive approval via Operations Specifications (OpSpecs) or Specifications (MSpecs), while part 91 operators use Letters of (LOAs), often under paragraph C384 for RNP AR, which verifies compliance with equipment, procedures, and . requirements include instruction on RNP concepts, system limitations, and procedures, plus simulator sessions to practice curved radius-to-fix (RF) legs and anomaly recovery, ensuring proficiency in maintaining performance during critical phases like approaches. Special cases, such as RNP AR approach (APCH) procedures, demand heightened authorization due to stringent lateral accuracy requirements, scaling down to as low as 0.1 nautical miles (NM) to enable operations in challenging terrain or noise-sensitive areas. These require explicit and approvals beyond standard RNP, including validated (FMS) radius-to-fix capability and crew demonstrations of handling low-tolerance paths without deviation. In 2025, FAA AC 91-70D updates guidance for and remote operations, emphasizing Advanced Receiver Autonomous Integrity Monitoring (ARAIM) as a key enabler for future RNP authorizations by improving GNSS integrity prediction and supporting higher availability in multi-constellation environments.

Operational Applications

Oceanic and remote continental areas

In and remote continental areas, where coverage is limited or absent, Required Navigation Performance (RNP) enables to maintain precise navigation for safe procedural separations between flights. The primary specifications include RNP 4, which supports a lateral separation of 30 nautical miles (NM), and RNP 10, which allows 50 NM separations, particularly in the North Atlantic Organized Track System (NAT-OTS). These standards ensure that achieve the required accuracy—within 4 NM for 95% of the time for RNP 4 and 10 NM for RNP 10—using onboard systems to monitor and contain deviations without reliance on ground-based aids. The adoption of RNP in these regions facilitates fuel-efficient user-preferred routing by allowing flexible, direct paths rather than rigid tracks, reducing flight times and emissions through performance-based navigation (PBN). In 2024, the (FAA) updated its Aeronautical Information Manual to implement further reductions in oceanic separations, such as from 30 to 23 in Oakland oceanic airspace for RNP-equipped , enhancing capacity and efficiency in surveillance-sparse environments. Key challenges in oceanic RNP operations include vulnerability to Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) outages caused by , spoofing, or signal interference, which can degrade navigation accuracy and require contingency procedures like . To mitigate these risks, aircraft must be equipped with dual independent long-range navigation systems, such as Inertial Reference Systems (IRS) combined with GPS, ensuring redundancy and cross-checking via the . Operators must report any degradation exceeding RNP limits immediately to air traffic services. Representative examples of RNP applications include the Pacific Organized Track System (PACOTS) and routes in the South Atlantic, where RNP 2 specifications extend continental-like precision into remote oceanic extensions, requiring dual long-range systems with GNSS inputs for operations at accuracies within 2 for 95% of the time. These implementations support seamless transitions from remote areas to denser while maintaining standards.

En-route and terminal airspace

In continental en-route and terminal , where high-density traffic is monitored by surveillance, Required Navigation Performance (RNP) specifications enable precise to support efficient routing and reduced separation. RNP 2, requiring lateral accuracy of ±2 nautical miles () for 95% of the flight time, is applied to en-route continental operations, allowing for route spacing of 5-10 based on safety studies and density. Similarly, RNP 1, with ±1 accuracy, is designated for terminal procedures such as Standard Instrument Departures () and Standard Terminal Arrival Routes (STARs), facilitating seamless transitions between en-route and terminal phases. These RNP levels offer significant advantages in controlled continental airspace, including direct point-to-point routing that minimizes flight distances and fuel consumption, as well as reduced delays through optimized traffic flow. Integration with systems like the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) NextGen program and Advisor enhances predictability, enabling continuous descent arrivals and better coordination between en-route centers and terminal facilities. Procedures in these phases leverage RNP capabilities for advanced path definitions, such as curved paths using Radius-to-Fix (RF) legs in areas to align with abatement corridors or avoidance. (VNAV) supports optimized descents with altitude constraints and flight path angle guidance, often incorporating temperature compensation for barometric altimetry accuracy in varying atmospheric conditions. In the United States, the FAA has implemented RNP 2 for continental en-route operations on T-routes and Q-routes as part of NextGen, with forecasts indicating near-universal equipage by 2025 to support increased capacity. In , Functional Airspace Blocks (FABs) under the European Commission's Performance-Based Navigation Implementing Regulation are transitioning en-route and terminal to RNP 1 and RNP 2 specifications, harmonizing operations across borders for enhanced efficiency.

Approach procedures

Required Navigation Performance (RNP) approach procedures enable precise guidance during the phase, supporting safe operations at lacking traditional infrastructure. These procedures are divided into standard RNP APCH for conventional straight-in approaches and RNP AR APCH for complex scenarios requiring authorization. Both types rely on satellite-based navigation, such as GPS augmented by SBAS, to achieve high accuracy without ground aids like ILS. RNP APCH procedures feature straight segments and support multiple minima options: LNAV for lateral guidance only, LNAV/VNAV for combined lateral and vertical guidance using barometric altimetry, and LPV for angular vertical guidance equivalent to ILS . These allow descents to decision altitudes as low as 200 feet above touchdown zone elevation with LPV minima, provided WAAS-equipped aircraft are used. No special operational authorization is needed beyond standard RNAV approvals, making RNP APCH widely accessible for and commercial operations. RNP AR APCH, by contrast, are designed for challenging environments like steep terrain or obstacle-dense areas, incorporating curved segments and radius-to-fix (RF) legs to maintain safe clearance. These require specific equipage, pilot training, and operational approval from authorities like the FAA, as they demand higher integrity and lower tolerances. RNP AR enables non-straight paths, such as tight turns around mountains, which are not feasible with standard procedures. Performance for both types specifies an RNP of 0.3 nautical miles in the segment, ensuring total system error remains within 0.3 for 95% of the time, with onboard monitoring and alerting if limits are approached. For RNP AR, values can scale to 0.1 or lower in critical segments to support precise maneuvering, while RF legs provide fixed-radius turns for consistent avoidance. Vertical performance uses barometric VNAV or SBAS, with alerting for deviations exceeding twice the RNP at a probability greater than 10^{-5} per hour. These procedures offer significant benefits by providing ILS-like precision to without costly ground installations, improving accessibility and reducing fuel burn through optimized paths. By 2024, hundreds of RNP AR procedures had been published worldwide, as evidenced by FAA-approved international lists, enabling operations at sites previously limited to visual or basic non-precision approaches. A prominent example is (NZQN) in , where RNP AR approaches with multiple RF legs guide aircraft through narrow mountain corridors for safe landings on a short . In , advancements in RNP visual approaches introduced hybrid methods combining RNP precision with visual references, such as guided visuals providing lateral and vertical cues to runways in visual conditions. These innovations, supported by database updates from manufacturers like and regulatory guidance from EASA, enhance efficiency at congested airports by allowing closer aircraft spacing and smoother transitions from instrument to visual flight.

Implementation and Planning

Flight planning requirements

Flight planning for Required Navigation Performance (RNP) operations begins with verifying that the aircraft meets the necessary navigation specifications for the intended route or procedure. Operators must confirm aircraft eligibility through manufacturer documentation, such as the (AFM) or AFM Supplement (AFMS), ensuring compliance with standards like Technical Standard Order (TSO)-C129 or TSO-C196 for GNSS equipment, and the presence of dual independent long-range systems (LRNS), with at least one being GNSS-based. For GNSS-dependent RNP, such as RNP 1 or RNP APCH, the flight crew reviews maintenance logs and performs pre-flight checks to ensure equipment functionality and system initialization with accurate aircraft position. A critical step involves predicting the availability of Receiver Autonomous Integrity Monitoring (RAIM) or equivalent Fault Detection and Exclusion (FDE) for GNSS-based systems to maintain integrity throughout the flight. Using tools like the FAA's Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) Analysis Tool or approved prediction software, operators assess potential outages; RAIM or FDE must be predicted available for all critical phases, with continuous outages exceeding 5 minutes requiring flight plan revision for most operations, while oceanic RNP 4 allows up to 25 minutes FDE outage per event. If predictions indicate insufficient availability, the flight plan must be revised, potentially selecting alternate routes or airports with non-RNP procedures. Navigation databases, compliant with ARINC 424 standards for path terminators and waypoint sequencing, must be current to the latest Aeronautical Information Regulation and Control (AIRAC) cycle, and operators verify procedure compatibility without manual waypoint entry for fixed routes. The flight plan filing incorporates specific indicators of RNP capability, such as the "/G" suffix in Item 10 of the ICAO to denote GNSS equipment, or notations like "RNP2" in the route description (e.g., W1234 RNP2 ABCDE) for or en-route segments requiring that specification. Pre-flight checks are mandatory to identify any GNSS or satellite-based augmentation system (SBAS) outages that could affect performance, ensuring no prohibited procedures are selected. Contingency planning includes designating alternate airports with non-GNSS procedures (IAPs) and allocating additional fuel for potential deviations if actual navigation performance (ANP) exceeds the required RNP. Regulatory frameworks, including FAA (AC) 90-105A and ICAO Doc 9613, mandate RNP confirmation prior to departure for specified airspace or procedures, aligning with 14 CFR Parts 91, 121, and 135, as well as ICAO Annex 6 and (Doc 8168). Operators must hold operational authorization, documented in operations specifications, verifying compliance before filing the .

Global standards and recent developments

The (ICAO) maintains the primary global standards for Required Navigation Performance (RNP) through its Performance-Based Navigation (PBN) Manual, Document 9613, which outlines navigation specifications, implementation guidance, and performance requirements for RNAV and RNP systems. The fifth edition of this manual, released in an advanced unedited version in 2023 and incorporated into ICAO's 2024 publications catalogue, includes amendments addressing enhanced PBN applications, such as improved integrity monitoring and scalability for diverse airspace environments. The FAA has targeted PBN implementation across the (NAS) by 2025, including expanded approaches with vertical guidance (APV). ICAO's earlier global goal was APV at all instrument runway ends by 2016. Harmonization efforts between the (FAA) and the (EASA) have advanced through alignment with ICAO standards, particularly for operations. In 2025, FAA (AIP) amendments incorporated updates to RNP procedures, facilitating seamless operations by standardizing RNP 4 and RNAV 10 specifications across U.S. and European . Complementing this, EASA's 2023 Notice of Proposed Amendment (NPA) 2023-04 addressed legacy RNP specifications by proposing regulatory updates to integrate ICAO's RNAV 10 and RNP 4 navigation specifications into the (SES) framework, allowing their use in and remote continental areas while phasing out non-compliant legacy systems. Recent developments emphasize resilience against emerging threats and expansion to new domains. In response to increasing GNSS , ICAO issued 2025 guidance via State Letters and symposia, recommending strategies such as multi-sensor , procedures for RNP operations, and aircraft-based to maintain performance during spoofing or events. For unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) and drones, 2023 academic research proposed tailored RNP specifications incorporating 4D trajectory management, including on-board performance and alerting (OBPMA) to ensure lateral and vertical accuracy within 0.1 to 1 nautical miles, adapting traditional RNP concepts to low-altitude, beyond-visual-line-of-sight operations. Innovations in advanced RNAV/RNP approaches, highlighted in NBAA's 2025 publications, include RNP authorization required (RNP AR) procedures enabling lower minima and curved visual segments for improved access to challenging airports. As of November 2025, ICAO reports indicate over 40% coverage of APV procedures, with ongoing efforts to enhance GNSS through updated PBN specifications. Looking ahead, the deployment of Advanced (ARAIM) is projected for initial service by 2026, providing multi-constellation GNSS for RNP operations through default integrity support (ISD) based on commitments from GPS, Galileo, and other systems, thereby enhancing and beyond single-constellation limitations.

References

  1. [1]
    Page not found
    No readable text found in the HTML.<|control11|><|separator|>
  2. [2]
    Performance-Based Navigation (PBN) and Area Navigation (RNAV)
    Within PBN there are two main categories of navigation methods or specifications: area navigation (RNAV) and required navigation performance (RNP). In this ...
  3. [3]
    [PDF] Annex III - AMC 20-27 - EASA
    Dec 23, 2009 · The Lateral Total System Error (TSE) is dependent on the Navigation System Error ... Definition Error (PDE), and Navigation System Error (NSE).<|separator|>
  4. [4]
    Required Navigation Performance (RNP) | SKYbrary Aviation Safety
    RNP refers to the level of performance required for a specific procedure or a specific airspace block. An RNP of 0.3 means the aircraft navigation system ...
  5. [5]
    [PDF] UNITED STATES STANDARD for Required Navigation Performance ...
    Dec 30, 2002 · containment at 2 x RNP and 99.9999996% at 3 x RNP. Most RNP definitions, however, imply that the containment includes longitudinal (along ...
  6. [6]
    [PDF] Performance-based Navigation (PBN) Manual
    The PBN concept specifies that aircraft RNAV and RNP system performance requirements be defined in terms of the accuracy, integrity, continuity and ...
  7. [7]
    AC 90-96 - Approval of U.S. Operators and Aircraft to Operate Under ...
    This document provides guidance on BRNAV equipment requirements for U.S. aircraft operating in European BRNAV airspace, but it was cancelled on 2005-01-13.
  8. [8]
    Required Navigation Performance-4 (RNP-4) - Code 7700
    Dec 14, 2020 · RNP-4 is the specification designed for oceanic and remote continental navigation applications. While RNP-10 and North Atlantic High Level Airspace (the old ...
  9. [9]
    [PDF] AC 91-70B - Oceanic and Remote Continental Airspace Operations
    Apr 10, 2016 · This advisory circular (AC) contains general information and detailed guidance for operators planning flights in oceanic and remote ...
  10. [10]
    [PDF] FAA's NextGen Implementation Plan, March 2011
    the transformation of the National Airspace System (NAS) is going to enhance safety, increase access and efficiency, and improve aviation's overall ...
  11. [11]
    [PDF] AC 91-70D - Advisory Circular
    Mar 4, 2025 · This manual provides practical guidance on how to implement Area Navigation (RNAV) and Required Navigation Performance (RNP) applications, and ...
  12. [12]
    FAA Proposes 'Revamp' of International Operations Terms - NBAA
    Jul 31, 2024 · An FAA proposal to revamp certain terminologies, procedures and authorizations for operations in oceanic and remote continental airspace.Missing: RNAV/ | Show results with:RNAV/
  13. [13]
    NPA 2023-04 - Introduction of ACAS Xa for operations in the ... - EASA
    NPA 2023-04 introduces ACAS Xa for SES airspace and proposes regulatory changes for ACAS X, and PBN specifications for oceanic operations.
  14. [14]
    [PDF] SC-227-TOR-Rev-18-Approved-2024-12-12.pdf - RTCA
    Dec 12, 2024 · The SC-227 ToR calls primarily for updating RNP MASPS and MOPS to ensure more robust support for implementation of PBN operations relying on the ...
  15. [15]
    Required Navigation Performances for Drone Flight Operations - MDPI
    Oct 29, 2023 · The paper proposes a number of Required Navigation Performance (RNP) specifications tailored to drones by assessing the contributing error sources.
  16. [16]
    [PDF] EUROCONTROL Implementation Plan and Report 2024
    Oct 4, 2024 · The EUROCONTROL EIPAR 2024 represents the implementation view for ATM modernization, bringing together actions for the European ATM Master Plan ...<|separator|>
  17. [17]
    [PDF] Doc 9613 - PBN Portal
    Feb 9, 1998 · Doc 9613 is the Performance-based Navigation (PBN) Manual, which defines aircraft RNAV and RNP system performance requirements.
  18. [18]
    [PDF] AC 90-105A - Advisory Circular
    Jul 3, 2016 · This advisory circular (AC) provides guidance for operators to conduct Required Navigation Performance (RNP) operations in the United States, ...
  19. [19]
    [PDF] ADVANCED RECEIVER AUTONOMOUS INTEGRITY MONITORING ...
    Nov 2, 2023 · ARAIM will be used during aircraft flight operations to assure integrity of the satellite signals, which will permit aircraft to safely navigate ...
  20. [20]
    Navigation Performance - PBN Portal
    These three errors combined are the Total System Error (TSE) and it is against this that the certifying authority will issue an endorsement of that level of ...
  21. [21]
    [PDF] Manual on Required Navigation Performance (RNP)
    Mar 1, 2001 · 3 System use accuracy is based on the combination of the navigation sensor error, airborne receiver error, display error and flight technical ...
  22. [22]
    Required Navigation Performance (RNP) - Code 7700
    Dec 10, 2020 · The system defines navigation accuracy as being able to stay within the total system error at least 95% of the total flight time. This applies ...
  23. [23]
    RNP value depiction on Jeppesen approach charts
    These individual route segment RNP values are published on the FAA form 8260-3 and used by Jeppesen to author the coded navdata (FMS) procedure. Note: These ...
  24. [24]
    Understanding Advanced RNP - Honeywell Aerospace
    Advanced Required Navigation Performance (A-RNP) is the latest navigation specification in the evolution of Performance Based Navigation (PBN).
  25. [25]
    [PDF] AC 20-138D - Airworthiness Approval of Positioning and Navigation ...
    Mar 28, 2014 · certified together as a unit under TSO-C129/C129a will need a new certification if antennas meeting the original TSOA are no longer ...
  26. [26]
    [PDF] AC 90-101A CHG 1 - Federal Aviation Administration
    Feb 9, 2016 · This advisory circular (AC) provides airworthiness and operational approval guidance material for aircraft operators conducting Title 14 of the ...
  27. [27]
    [PDF] N 8900.198 - OpSpec/MSpec/LOA C384, Required Navigation ...
    Sep 14, 2012 · OpSpec/MSpec/LOA C384 is for FAA authorization of RNP procedures with authorization required, for operators under 14 CFR parts 91, 91K, 121, ...
  28. [28]
    ENR 7.4 Operational Policy 50 NM Lateral Separation
    RNP 10 is the minimum Navigation Specification (NavSpec) required for the application of 50 NM lateral separation. RNP 4 is an operator option; operators/ ...
  29. [29]
    [PDF] AIM Basic w/ Chg 1, 2, and 3 dtd 9-5-24 - FAA
    Sep 5, 2024 · ... (RNP). This change reduces the lateral separation minima from 30 NM to 23 NM in the oceanic airspaces of Oakland. Air Route Traffic Control ...Missing: revamped July
  30. [30]
    [PDF] 60/DP/04/12 - ICAO
    The result is that aircraft may lose GNSS-based navigation accuracy and integrity—making them unable to meet the RNP criteria for PBN. Spoofed positions can ...
  31. [31]
    [PDF] Part 91 Oceanic and Remote Continental Application Guide
    Jul 23, 2023 · For oceanic RNP 2, you must have at least two LRNS with each system receiving a GNSS source. For RNP 4, at least one of the two LRNS must ...
  32. [32]
    [PDF] PBN NAS NAVIGATION STRATEGY - Federal Aviation Administration
    Table 2 summarizes the air transport capabilities levels forecast for 2020 and 2025, assuming all available options are exercised on new delivery aircraft ( ...
  33. [33]
    Transition to performance-based navigation (PBN) operations - EASA
    On 26 May 2023, EASA published the Notice of Proposed Amendment (NPA) 2023-04, which makes a regulatory proposal that considers the use of the RNP 4 and RNAV 10 ...
  34. [34]
    [PDF] Introducing Performance Based Navigation (PBN) and Advanced ...
    ICAO's Performance Based Navigation (PBN) Concept has replaced the RNP Concept; it was in- troduced through publication of the ICAO PBN Manual (Doc 9613) in ...
  35. [35]
    [PDF] Required Navigation Performance (RNP) Approaches (APCH)
    This fact sheet will focus on the most common navigation specification called “RNP Approach (RNP APCH)” and titled Area Navigation (RNAV), “RNAV. (GPS) Rwy ...
  36. [36]
    Foreign Procedures Approved for RNP AR Operations Master List
    Jun 10, 2025 · Foreign Procedures Approved for RNP AR Operations Master List. Foreign_RNP-AR_Pub_12.xlsx (35.54 KB) Last updated: Tuesday, June 10, 2025.
  37. [37]
    Fly A Curved Approach Through Clouds And Mountains In New ...
    Oct 1, 2015 · Flying a curved instrument approach through clouds and mountains. Fortunately, RNP approaches like this one in Queenstown, NZ make it possible.
  38. [38]
    Spectacular Queenstown Landing From The Cockpit
    Sep 26, 2022 · The RNP approach to Queenstown involves passing through 19 very tight "gates" on the descent from 16,000ft. Those "gates" - or waypoints - are ...
  39. [39]
    Innovations in Advanced RNAV/RNP Approaches - NBAA
    Jul 3, 2025 · FAA Is Considering A-RNP Recommendations. The industry could start seeing more A-RNP enabled approaches in the near future, Boll said. The FAA's ...
  40. [40]
    Garmin adds Guided Visual Approaches to aviation database lineup
    Jul 17, 2025 · A new database offering that provides lateral and vertical guidance for pilots flying visual approaches to challenging airports.Missing: innovations | Show results with:innovations
  41. [41]
    Required Navigation Performance — Visual with Prescribed Track
    May 28, 2025 · This operational safety online event is part of the Summer Safety Campaign 2025 of the European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA).
  42. [42]
    Performance Based Navigation (PBN) Manual (Doc 9613)
    In stockThis manual identifies the relationship between RNAV and RNP applications and the advantages and limitations of choosing one or the other as the navigation ...Missing: download | Show results with:download
  43. [43]
    RELEASED!! - PBN Manual Edition 5 and CS-ACNS Issue 4
    ICAO has just released the 5th Edition of the PBN Manual (Doc 9613). This release is an advanced unedited version but can now be used.
  44. [44]
    [PDF] Products and Services Catalogue – 2024 - ICAO
    Amendment 1 (3/11/22). 24 pp. Order No. 9379/AMEND/01/E. $22.00*. Doc 9613 – Performance-based Navigation (PBN) Manual. This manual identifies the ...
  45. [45]
    [PDF] AIP - Federal Aviation Administration
    Aug 7, 2025 · GEN 0.5 List of Hand Amendments to the AIP - Not applicable ... National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. (NOAA), the National ...Missing: EASA | Show results with:EASA
  46. [46]
    GPS Spoofing in Aviation: Threats, Detection, and Mitigation Strategies
    Jun 30, 2025 · ICAO has released dedicated guidance in Doc 10121 on GNSS interference, encouraging states to develop contingency procedures and awareness ...
  47. [47]
    [PDF] Advanced RAIM - Foundation for robust DFMC GNSS - ICAO
    2026. Initial Service Type B: ca. 2030. 1. Deploy initial ARAIM capability using Default ISD based on core satellite constellation commitments in SARPs.