In VNKT RNP Y Rwy 02 (AR) Approach via IGRIS, the leg between KT552 and KT550 should be a RF leg, but in ND and MCDU, it's just a straight line

KT550 is the last point in approach transition and the first point in final approach. There are two lines in database, the first line is approach transition with path_termination 'RF' and waypoint_description_code 'EE ', while the second line is final approach with path_termination 'IF' and waypoint_description_code 'E F'.

So I think there is something missed when the aircraft processing the path.

Also with RNP AR Z

I think this issue also happens on A340

Edited yesterday at 07:43 AM1 day by Jack Zhu

I'd be curious what the leg is coded as in the Navigraph database, as what is depicted on the chart is not always what actually gets exported into the database - I will take a look.

Regarding the actual approach, did the aircraft fly the procedure within acceptable limits?

28 minutes ago, iniSteven said:

I'd be curious what the leg is coded as in the Navigraph database, as what is depicted on the chart is not always what actually gets exported into the database - I will take a look.

Regarding the actual approach, did the aircraft fly the procedure within acceptable liBecausemits?

RNP AR procedure always require at least RNP 0.3nm, so I think replace the RF leg with a direct leg is not acceptable🤔. Also, there is terrain ahead🙃

6 minutes ago, Jack Zhu said:

RNP AR procedure always require at least RNP 0.3nm, so I think replace the RF leg with a direct leg is not acceptable🤔. Also, there is terrain ahead🙃

So what I'm asking is did the plane fly within RNP .3nm or did it deviate too far? For clarity the radius of that curve is approx .1nm, so again it depends on what exactly is in the database the aircraft is reading from, but for that specific leg it's within the approach specifications.

Did you actually fly the approach?

16 hours ago, iniSteven said:

So what I'm asking is did the plane fly within RNP .3nm or did it deviate too far? For clarity the radius of that curve is approx .1nm, so again it depends on what exactly is in the database the aircraft is reading from, but for that specific leg it's within the approach specifications.

Did you actually fly the approach?

I have flown the approach, the plane just fly follow the path on ND. I calculated the deviation compare to the RF leg, it's about 1.6nm, that's far from 0.3nm. Anyway, just making a RF leg into a direct leg is not acceptable for any RNP (AR) approach

The database is from navigraph.

That's just a part of the database, I think the problem comes to the waypoint_description_code, when the second line of KT530 is "E I", the path is a RF leg, when not, is a direct leg. But navigraph's database is right, Accroding to the ARINC 424, the second line of KT530 can't be "E I", should be 'E F'. So I think there is something wrong when the aircraft processing the path.
Thank you for your patience.