# EGKB RNP03 missing OSVEV1G/J transitions **URL:** \ **Category:** General non MSFS data\ **Created:** [October 30, 2026, 2:05am UTC](https://forum.navigraph.com/t/egkb-rnp03-missing-osvev1g-j-transitions/24672 "2026-10-30T02:05:09Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 5\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![OliverCes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/ac91a4/32.png) [@OliverCes](https://forum.navigraph.com/u/OliverCes)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2026, 2:05am UTC](https://forum.navigraph.com/t/egkb-rnp03-missing-osvev1g-j-transitions/24672/1 "2026-10-30T02:05:09Z")
Hi, The Biggin Hill RNP03 trial requires the use of the OSVEV1G/J transitions, but it is not possible to select this with Navigraph navdata. `1.4 The trial procedure is only available IFR arrivals from the ATS En-Route Structure via JACKO or GODLU (EGKB AD 2.22 FLIGHT PROCEDURES, 4 PROCEDURES FOR INBOUND AIRCRAFT.` `3.2 The IFP is for IFR arrivals from the ATS En-Route Structure via the OSVEV 1G or OSVEV 1J Approach Transition only.` > **[EG\_Sup\_2026\_120\_en.pdf](https://nats-uk.ead-it.com/cms-nats/opencms/en/Publications/aip-supplements/EG_Sup_2026_120_en.pdf)** > > 1404.81 KB It would be appreciated if the OSVEV1G/J transitions could be added as is possible with the ILS21. Currently the only via option is OSVEV, and the “no transition” option is set to FEZUC, which would not and could not be used like that. Kind regards, Oliver ---
**Author:** ![NAVData](https://dub1.discourse-cdn.com/flex013/user_avatar/forum.navigraph.com/navdata/32/30549_2.png) [@NAVData](https://forum.navigraph.com/u/NAVData)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2026, 6:09am UTC](https://forum.navigraph.com/t/egkb-rnp03-missing-osvev1g-j-transitions/24672/2 "2026-10-30T06:09:16Z")
Hi Oliver, Thank you very much for your posting and the details. I have checked your reference, and yes, both transitions are missing, but this is more of a NATS issue (at least what I can verify here). My findings: As you wrote, both transitions are available for RW21 but missing for RW03. NATS does not offer a new coding table, and you can’t use the transitions for RW21 1:1 because of the final leg. The included transition for RW21 ends in a vector (FM leg), but the new transitions should end at OSVEV because the RNP03 starts at OSVEV. Therefore, I would expect a new coding table for these two transitions for RW03, and I can’t find it. Result not included in the charts/data. We can ask Jeppesen, but I am pretty sure that this is the reason why they can’t use the current one for 21 also for 03 - it is the last leg, the vector for 21. We may see new coded transitions in one of the upcoming cycles, but due to the trial status, I am not 100% sure. Hope that helps a little bit. Cheers Richard ---
**Author:** ![OliverCes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/ac91a4/32.png) [@OliverCes](https://forum.navigraph.com/u/OliverCes)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2026, 12:06pm UTC](https://forum.navigraph.com/t/egkb-rnp03-missing-osvev1g-j-transitions/24672/3 "2026-10-30T12:06:24Z")
Hi Richard, The AIP Sup has been reissued multiple times now, so the “trial” has in fact been on going for over a year now, so I doubt NATS will issue anything else. I don’t see it ending for a while either, as Airspace Change Proposals take ages in the UK. As the SUP specifically references the OSVEV1 **G** and OSVEV1 **J** transitions, it would mean that you would have to fly them as currently charted (even though they specify RWY21 in the charts, most likely not yet changed as everything related to the RNP is still a SUP). By my interpretation this should be flow as is normal practice at many other European airports - you shall continue on the FM leg unless cleared for the approach, when cleared for the approach delete the FM leg and discontinuity. ie. Budapest ANEXA2H STAR and the 31L/R T-bar approaches: ![image](https://europe1.discourse-cdn.com/flex013/uploads/navigraph1/original/3X/5/0/50d78cdfb9d9bc939f74559cc73e0a98b9bf11e4.jpeg) ![image](https://europe1.discourse-cdn.com/flex013/uploads/navigraph1/original/3X/3/2/32b9601f91abf5c88552750d95be085f360feae1.jpeg) I hope this can be fixed before WorldFlight even if its just a temporary fix that can be issued to participating pilots, as Biggin Hill is one of the event airfields, and it is forecast to be RWY03. Regards, Oliver ---
**Author:** ![NAVData](https://dub1.discourse-cdn.com/flex013/user_avatar/forum.navigraph.com/navdata/32/30549_2.png) [@NAVData](https://forum.navigraph.com/u/NAVData)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2026, 1:04pm UTC](https://forum.navigraph.com/t/egkb-rnp03-missing-osvev1g-j-transitions/24672/4 "2026-10-30T13:04:18Z")
Hi again Oliver, No, the LHBP is not the same case, even when this STAR also ends on a vector. You can assign a STAR to all runways, so that is not the problem, but then the whole procedure is the same for all runways, like here in LHBP … If I were to do the same for EGKB and the OSVEV1G/J, it would mean that 03 and 21 would end in a vector, which is not the case here, and therefore I can´t use the same STAR identifiers for both runways. That is what I meant with “coding table”. NATS needs to define new STAR identifiers for 03 when the last leg is a terminal-fix leg rather than a vector leg. You can´t use the same arrival for multiple runways with different sequences. When NATS codes this STAR as ie. OSVEV1H/1K for 03 and the TF leg at the end, no problem - but again, there are no coding tables available, so no data provider has this STAR available. I´m sorry. Cheers Richard ---
**Author:** ![system](https://europe1.discourse-cdn.com/flex013/uploads/navigraph1/original/1X/4cc83e90d70ab312b1bd2d7527bddad309607265.png) [@system](https://forum.navigraph.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2026, 3:28am UTC](https://forum.navigraph.com/t/egkb-rnp03-missing-osvev1g-j-transitions/24672/5 "2026-11-03T03:28:57Z")
Closed on November 3, 2026, 3:28am UTC This topic was automatically closed 2 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.