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:

A conflict exists between ICAO and the FAA regarding the renaming of RNAV approach charts to RNP, intended to standardize performance-based navigation (PBN) terminology and reduce pilot confusion.
The FAA and other international aviation bodies oppose ICAO's proposed change due to high costs for avionics updates, increased workload for implementation and ATC, and safety concerns arising from potential misinterpretation of RNP by pilots.
Given the significant opposition, the U.S. is unlikely to adopt RNP-titled charts, emphasizing the continued need for pilots to understand the difference between general navigation terms in chart titles and specific performance requirements (navigation specifications) detailed on the charts.

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.