RNAV Versus RNP

Shakespeare elegantly downplays the importance of naming in Romeo and Juliet, writing: Whats in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet. What matters is the subject and not what the subject is called. But this is an over-simplification because changing the subject would make the quote non-sense: That which we call a fish by any other name would smell as sweet. Words have meaning.

jmiller

Friday, July 14, 2017 at 12:00 AM ET

Verified

Key Takeaways:

ICAO's proposal to re-title RNAV approach charts as RNP is facing significant resistance, particularly from the FAA and other international bodies.
The opposition is driven by concerns over costly avionics updates, increased Air Traffic Control workload, and potential pilot confusion due to the ambiguous nature of "RNAV" and "RNP" having both general and specific navigation specification meanings.
The U.S. is unlikely to adopt ICAO's proposed RNP titling, highlighting the ongoing challenge in standardizing performance-based navigation charts and the critical need for pilots to understand the distinction between general chart titles and specific equipment performance requirements.

See a mistake? Contact us.

Shakespeare elegantly downplays the importance of naming in Romeo and Juliet, writing: “What’s in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet.” What matters is the subject and not what the subject is called. But this is an over-simplification because changing the subject would make the quote non-sense: That which we call a fish by any other name would smell as sweet. Words have meaning.

The meanings that words convey are particularly important in aviation and are the genesis of a food-fight between ICAO and the FAA. ICAO wants to re-name RNAV approaches RNP and the FAA is balking at the idea—as are many other countries. The controversy surrounds defining RNAV/RNP and what those terms mean to pilots.