I think this only applies to landing in Nantes (LFRS), I don’t think there is an Eurocontrol validation…I don’t think anyone checks, Paris airports have the same story with mandatory DME in Paris TMA airspace, 99% of pilots are not even aware 
To add more to legal carriage pedantry, for private operations, there is no requirement to carry any equipment at all to fly IAP in “visual conditions”, zilch, nada (unless someone can prove pilot landed in IMC? say RVR < 1500m?)
For commercial flyers, here is some harsh truths to understand where EU 2018/1048 and PBN Implementation Rule comes from (not very relevant to GA: it’s hidden agenda by FAA & ICAO to remove CAT dinosaurs who can’t fly 3D on GPS )
https://www.ifr-magazine.com/avionics/most-capable-best-served/
Those links are not applicable to GA and the 1st is for US airspace.
Does anyone know what flight plan codes will be required for
arj1 wrote:
I thought G1000 (GIA-63W) supports Baro-VNAV
For descent planning, yes, but not for approaches.
Peter wrote:
Those links are not applicable to GA and the 1st is for US airspace.
Why are they not applicable to GA? E.g. the ability (or not) to fly RNAV 1 can certainly come to affect the service level offered by ATC, if it hasn’t already in some places.
Does anyone know what flight plan codes will be required for
IFR flying in France
IFR landing in France
If you mean what codes are required to get your flight plan accepted, I have no idea. As you said, some things that supposedly are required are not checked.
If you look at the codes for equipment you are required to have, all IFR traffic in Europe must be able to do RNAV 5, so you need a G and an R in item 10 and at least RNP/B2 in item 18. For some routes/SIDs/STARs, you’ll need RNAV 1, meaning RNP/B2D2. (These codes assume you have a GPS navigator.)
I don’t see how France can require any equipment above this in its airspace. As European airports are not required to accept traffic, they can impose whatever local requirements they want.
I normally use
-TB20/L-SYLDFGOR/S
and that doesn’t get rejected.
I don’t think FPL gets rejected due to lack of RNAV1, L/VNAV…?
LeTouquet & Calais conventional SID have been removed (LYD & DVR are now removed), any flight plan will still validate without RNAV1
E.g. the ability (or not) to fly RNAV 1 can certainly come to affect the service level offered by ATC, if it hasn’t already in some places.
That is definetly the case in Paris, you get bad routings for departures & arrivals without RNAV1 code in TMA (tower will tell you to wait and expect conventional departure to LGL VOR not above 4000ft instead of getting those ATIS RNAV departures & arrivals which are optimised for flow and Orly/CDG runways)
Toussus allow to file RNAV1 without RNAV1 GPS, you can use RNAV5 GPS as long as you can load it & change CDI sensitivity…
I don’t know the details but there is a special background about LFRS.
The 21 approach path is just over Nantes city center and DGAC is under heavy pressure to make something to reduce noise.
The north threshold will be moved down 650m which should put the landing planes higher over the city.
Maybe they want to enforce a strict vertical path, like they do with the lateral path.
The ideal would a London City-style steep approach, but it would reduce a lot the traffic.
Indeed, they also keep landing on ILS03 with 5kts tailwind, it makes a long expensive detour when you come from the east: you get vectored above city at 5000ft before descending over Lac du Grand Lieu…the arrival to RWY 21 need to comply with mandatory 1460ft at 4NM (in order to avoid to overfly Nantes city centre. Callback mandatory at 4 NM DTHR, 4.3 NM NTS or 5.3 NM NT, 1460 ft), no Dive & Drive LNAV
Is the information here still current?
It addresses what declared equipment ATC actually see.
There is the wider issue of how ATC see your route.
It’s very difficult to get ATCOs to post on these topics but maybe @airways @caba @cub (if he’s still out there) @Guillaume can post some information.
We also don’t appear to have clear data on how Eurocontrol uses your declared equipment to determine the route offered. The indications are “very little” apart from chucking out anything without 8.33, and of course RVSM if filing > FL270.
Nobody flies dive and drive any more, hence, whether on a ln RNP approach you have a glidepath indication or not does nothing about noise.
