ARINC Aeronautical Navigation Database

AeroNavData codes and maintains the highest-quality and comprehensive aeronautical navigation database with our certified process that is in  accordance with AC 20-153 and DO-200A guidelines and standards.  We hold a current Type 1 Letter of Agreement (LOA) as audited and approved by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).

Because we fully understand that all aeronautical navigation databases must work in concert with the implementation requirements of Flight Management System (FMS) manufacturers, we work with customers to outline their specific data quality requirements (DQRs) for aeronautical data, and adhere to the data preparation and data transmission criteria.

• We work with US DoD, FAA, and foreign Aeronautical Information Publications (AIP) in accordance with published 28 and 56 day Aeronautical Information Regulation and Control (AIRAC) cycles.
• We encode RNAV (GPS and RNP), ILS, LOC, VOR, TACAN, NDB, and DP and STAR procedures to ARINC 424 Supplement standards.
• We encode and maintain all Standard Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs), Departure Procedures (DPs) and Standard Terminal Arrival Routes (STARs) in the U.S., Canada, and Latin America in Aeronautical Radio Inc. (ARINC 424) data format.

Our Navigation Database Coverage:  USA, CAN, LAM, and PAC ARINC Regions

Our Navigation Database includes all Supplemental and Procedure information contained within the Canadian, US and Latin American ARINC Regions.  The data includes Airport, Heliport, Navaid, Waypoint, Enroute, Airspace, Communication, SID/STAR, RNAV and Conventional Procedure information.

Source Ingest, Analysis and Management

Our Aeronautical Analyst teams begin the coding and maintenance of our aeronautical navigation database by performing a thorough analysis of a variety of navigation sources.  Our Type 1 LOA coding process ensures that our database reflects authoritative source information contained in Aeronautical Information Publications (AIP) from around the world.

All navigation procedure data maintenance is performed in accordance with published 28 and 56 day AIRAC cycles.  Through our certified process, and in strict accordance with RTCA DO-272B and DO-200A, we ensure that the procedure coding and supporting data aligns with ARINC 424 data standards for use in Flight Management Systems (FMS).

Working with DO-200A Data Quality Requirements (DQR)

One of the requirements of our LOA process is the definition of the specific Data Quality Requirements (DQR) for the navigation data by the data processing organization and the provision of this DQR by the data suppliers.

Aeronautical Database Validation and Verification

At AeroNavData we use an innovative and unique systematic approach to Validation and Verification processes (V&V). We perform a final V&V after output and publication with our complete Post-Publication Review (PPR).  Our PPR focuses on all procedures that have been initially entered, modified, or corrected since the last AIRAC cycle.

We perform our review, defined by DO-200A Standards as:

Validation:  the activity whereby a data element is checked as having a value that is fully applicable to the identity given to the data element, or a set of data elements that is checked as being acceptable for their purpose.

Verification:  the activity whereby the current value of the data element is checked against the value originally supplied.

In addition to following the DO-200A Standards, AeroNavData’s unique approach includes visually validating the procedures using our Visual Procedure Check (VPC) software to graphically display terminal procedure coding in the ARINC format.

Using this distinctive visualization tool allows the coded flight path to be analyzed using a variety of simulated aircraft performance characteristics and weather scenarios. Our analysts can clearly visualize if the procedure coding is error-free and validate that it meets the procedure designer’s original intent, as well as if the designed procedure can be flown according to the receiving aircraft specifications.

Using the visual check tool also enables our analysts to uncover discrepancies in source documentation. Some examples of issues that may be uncovered during the validation process include:

• Insufficient vertical descent angles
• Misplaced fix or runway threshold coordinates
• Unnecessary or incorrect turn directions
• In-congruent magnetic variations
• Inadequate intercept angles

In all cases the source originator is notified of all discrepancies found in order to enable them to take corrective action.  The process is put on hold for that specific navigation procedure until an acceptable resolution is complete and it is safe for publication.