Question for Jetblue pilots regarding RNAV 13L at JFK

[atcloser]

Looking for information from Jetblue pilots regarding the sudden stop in the special (visual) RNAV 13L approach that you were testing all summer.

I received a briefing that effective immediately that approach was not to be used anymore. It was my understanding that the test period is not over yet, but was stopped prematurely.

Any idea from your side of the fence as to what happened? I can tell you that from our side, there were a few problems with it, but I dont know if our concerns were a factor in it being terminated.

 

[elag777]

Looking for information from Jetblue pilots regarding the sudden stop in the special (visual) RNAV 13L approach that you were testing all summer.

I received a briefing that effective immediately that approach was not to be used anymore. It was my understanding that the test period is not over yet, but was stopped prematurely.

Any idea from your side of the fence as to what happened? I can tell you that from our side, there were a few problems with it, but I dont know if our concerns were a factor in it being terminated.

We were told there were "ATC concerns" flying a RNP as a visual. Makes no sense as we fly the VOR as a visual. The ground track with the RNP compared to the VOR is superb. Traffic ahead and the runway had to be in sight. Baffled as you are.

 

[feitinger]

Inside the Training Dept. the word is the test was "complete"

 

[atcloser]

We were told there were "ATC concerns" flying a RNP as a visual. Makes no sense as we fly the VOR as a visual. The ground track with the RNP compared to the VOR is superb. Traffic ahead and the runway had to be in sight. Baffled as you are.

Very baffled. There were 2 main concerns about the approach amongst the controllers at the TRACON. The first was frequency congestion it was causing. Many pilots were asking for the approach on initial contact with NY approach and at busy times it was creating problems. The second concern was the tailwind issue. The RNP approach keeps you at 3000 much longer than the VOR. On windy days, separation started to become an issue as winds at 3000 were stronger than winds at 1500. So those on the RNP approach would catch the traffic ahead because of a 20-30 knot tailwind. This, for obvious reasons, made us nervous.

HOWEVER, none of these concerns were never voiced officially to the FAA management or Jetblue. We wanted to see where the approach would go, and give JBU an opportunity to test it. I personally thought it was great, which is why I was confused why it disappeared? It definitely wasnt ATC issues that caused it, as our concerns were never voiced.

 

[elag777]

Very baffled. There were 2 main concerns about the approach amongst the controllers at the TRACON. The first was frequency congestion it was causing. Many pilots were asking for the approach on initial contact with NY approach and at busy times it was creating problems. The second concern was the tailwind issue. The RNP approach keeps you at 3000 much longer than the VOR. On windy days, separation started to become an issue as winds at 3000 were stronger than winds at 1500. So those on the RNP approach would catch the traffic ahead because of a 20-30 knot tailwind. This, for obvious reasons, made us nervous.

HOWEVER, none of these concerns were never voiced officially to the FAA management or Jetblue. We wanted to see where the approach would go, and give JBU an opportunity to test it. I personally thought it was great, which is why I was confused why it disappeared? It definitely wasnt ATC issues that caused it, as our concerns were never voiced.

I have heard that the data required has been collected and is under review.