Hoe do you accomplish this?
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: peripatetic
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A big problem up there is the lack of experience. They have tried to overcome this problem by having full time defence civilian positions there (as well as every other base) to kep some local knowledge around
The trafficers give us Visual approach via the 15 mile arc. Very annoying when they use the "Traffic Management Plan" when there is stuff all traffic.
If that is happening with low frequency load, don't accept it!!! If it is busy, that is life, systems are there for safety.
ATC should be safe, orderly AND EXPEDITIOUS. If you are driving a kero burner and the freq is not busy ask for direct the 29OM or 5nm final 11 ("tracking over water south west of the city" by day) or put the onus on them.... "request vectors for [ ] mile final runway [ ]".
ATC is there to serve you not vice versa. I work with STARS, you generally cancel them with bugger all traffic and track shorten. TMPs and STARS are tools, use them when getting busy, back in the box when not.
NFR,
do you have any opinions as to why the experience is always low (ie why the competent leave for AsA, O'seas ATC, other careers)?
Here is a hint:
I took home (yes, after tax) the equivalent of more than the $75KAUD last year (overtime lovers can get way over that!!); and,
Betcha 10 to 1 that will be amongst the many reasons why you left (pay and dissillusionment), which leads back to to the "low experience levels" a cycle that will never end.
Solution:
1. Give it to AsA (forward base? AsA people are security cleared and as patriotic as anyone!).
2. move the TCU to Brisbane ACC (It will stay fully staffed, imagine say 10 approach controllers that have been there for 10-20 years each, the quality of service from experience!)
3. move some traffic sans bullsh!t,
4. local and transit drivers now happy,
5. job done.
Hope you're still enjoying YMML. Best move you ever made (AsA)!!!!
TTFN
Last edited by 3 slips and a gully; 20th Feb 2005 at 14:59.
I don't see any where in the OP where it says it's night time.
Given that it is Darwin I would think that they are expecting you to track to a 10nm final. Yeah I know that doesn't fit in with the visual approach regs, but Darwin atcos expect you to track immediately for a visual approach when so cleared, they don't want you to track to 5nm.
Would probably be best if they just cleared you for a visual approach via a 10nm final not below 3000' till established as that follows the visual approach regs (track via route cleared by ATC till 5nm).
Another odd thing about Darwin is that the tower have no airspace at all to call their own. All airspace from ground up is "owned" by approach.
Given that it is Darwin I would think that they are expecting you to track to a 10nm final. Yeah I know that doesn't fit in with the visual approach regs, but Darwin atcos expect you to track immediately for a visual approach when so cleared, they don't want you to track to 5nm.
Would probably be best if they just cleared you for a visual approach via a 10nm final not below 3000' till established as that follows the visual approach regs (track via route cleared by ATC till 5nm).
Another odd thing about Darwin is that the tower have no airspace at all to call their own. All airspace from ground up is "owned" by approach.
Bottums Up
SWH & AerocatS2A
AIP at Jeppesen ATC, AU706, 1.9.5.4 & 1.9.5.5 refers.
SWH
Why? Because ATC have limited descent below 3000 until established on final, and unless cleared to leave track, one must continue tracking to the aid until within 5nm by day, or the circling area at night as in the case at hand. The 1600 MSA has no relevance in this case due to the ATC altitude limitation.
AerocatS2A
The original post didnt mention the time of day but I know it was at night.
Youre probably right that Given that it is Darwin I would think that they are expecting you to track to a 10nm final. However, that expectation doesnt authorise departure from the cleared track, in this case the 163 radial to Darwin Omni. Ill bet if an incident or accident ensued from tracking via a perceived expectation, the investigation would be interesting.
We used to be able to track direct to the OM, with the MSA of 1600' it was ideally located for turning final. Rumour has it that an influential local mayor has put a stop to it because of too much noise!
AIP at Jeppesen ATC, AU706, 1.9.5.4 & 1.9.5.5 refers.
1.9.5.4 Tracking Requirements Tracking requirements for a visual approach include the following:
a. A pilot-in-command must maintain track/heading on the route progressively authorized by ATC until:
1. by day, within 5 nm of the aerodrome; or
2. by night:
for an IFR flight, within the prescribed circling area; or
for a VFR flight, within 3 nm of the aerodrome; and
the aerodrome is in sight.
b. From this position the circuit must be joined, as directed by ATC for an approach to the nominated runway.
1.9.5.5 Minimum Altitude Requirements
During the conduct of a visual approach, a pilot must descend as necessary to:
a. By day:
1. for an IFR flight, remain not less than 500 ft above the lower limit of the CTA; and
2. for IFR and VFR flights, operate not below the lowest altitude permissible for VFR flight. (CAR 157)
b. By night:
1. for an IFR flight:
maintain an altitude not less than the route segment LSALT/MSA or the appropriate step of the DME/GPS Arrival procedure, or 500 ft above the lower limit of the CTA, if this is higher; or
if being radar vectored, operate not below the last assigned altitude;
until the aircraft is:
within the prescribed circling area and the aerodrome is in sight; or
within 5 nm (7 nm for a runway equipped with an ILS) of the aerodrome, aligned with the runway centreline and established not below on slope on the T-VASIS or PAPI; or
within 10 nm of the aerodrome (14 nm for Runways 16L and 34L at Sydney), established not below the ILS glidepath with less than full scale azimuth deflection.
a. A pilot-in-command must maintain track/heading on the route progressively authorized by ATC until:
1. by day, within 5 nm of the aerodrome; or
2. by night:
for an IFR flight, within the prescribed circling area; or
for a VFR flight, within 3 nm of the aerodrome; and
the aerodrome is in sight.
b. From this position the circuit must be joined, as directed by ATC for an approach to the nominated runway.
1.9.5.5 Minimum Altitude Requirements
During the conduct of a visual approach, a pilot must descend as necessary to:
a. By day:
1. for an IFR flight, remain not less than 500 ft above the lower limit of the CTA; and
2. for IFR and VFR flights, operate not below the lowest altitude permissible for VFR flight. (CAR 157)
b. By night:
1. for an IFR flight:
maintain an altitude not less than the route segment LSALT/MSA or the appropriate step of the DME/GPS Arrival procedure, or 500 ft above the lower limit of the CTA, if this is higher; or
if being radar vectored, operate not below the last assigned altitude;
until the aircraft is:
within the prescribed circling area and the aerodrome is in sight; or
within 5 nm (7 nm for a runway equipped with an ILS) of the aerodrome, aligned with the runway centreline and established not below on slope on the T-VASIS or PAPI; or
within 10 nm of the aerodrome (14 nm for Runways 16L and 34L at Sydney), established not below the ILS glidepath with less than full scale azimuth deflection.
Why? Because ATC have limited descent below 3000 until established on final, and unless cleared to leave track, one must continue tracking to the aid until within 5nm by day, or the circling area at night as in the case at hand. The 1600 MSA has no relevance in this case due to the ATC altitude limitation.
AerocatS2A
The original post didnt mention the time of day but I know it was at night.
Youre probably right that Given that it is Darwin I would think that they are expecting you to track to a 10nm final. However, that expectation doesnt authorise departure from the cleared track, in this case the 163 radial to Darwin Omni. Ill bet if an incident or accident ensued from tracking via a perceived expectation, the investigation would be interesting.
We used to be able to track direct to the OM, with the MSA of 1600' it was ideally located for turning final. Rumour has it that an influential local mayor has put a stop to it because of too much noise!
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: UAE
Age: 48
Posts: 447
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
G'day all,
Clarrie - correct about the visual approach procedures. If the ATC wants you to go via a 10NM final it should be something like 'Cleared visual approach, track direct to a 10NM final, at 5 miles contact......' etc. ATC should know the VSA a procedures inside out - it is their bread and butter (my old approach trainees will testify to this!)
AerocatS2A - Darwin is no different to just about every other international tower - they don't own airspace, but for circuits they can request it off approach. Then the approach controller must ask if the arrivals can descend into the tower's airspace. Most towers with an approach cell operate like this. When the TWR doesn't need the airspace, they give it back to approach - it cuts down on co-ord.
3 slips and a gully - check your PMs mate.
Cheers all,
NFR.
Clarrie - correct about the visual approach procedures. If the ATC wants you to go via a 10NM final it should be something like 'Cleared visual approach, track direct to a 10NM final, at 5 miles contact......' etc. ATC should know the VSA a procedures inside out - it is their bread and butter (my old approach trainees will testify to this!)
AerocatS2A - Darwin is no different to just about every other international tower - they don't own airspace, but for circuits they can request it off approach. Then the approach controller must ask if the arrivals can descend into the tower's airspace. Most towers with an approach cell operate like this. When the TWR doesn't need the airspace, they give it back to approach - it cuts down on co-ord.
3 slips and a gully - check your PMs mate.
Cheers all,
NFR.
Capt,
Every time I have got it the clearance it was cleared for final runway 29, maintain 3000 until on final, make visual approach, contact tower 133.1 established.
i.e tracking instruction are via the ILS, and finals refers to the G/S LOC intercept.
Every time I have got it the clearance it was cleared for final runway 29, maintain 3000 until on final, make visual approach, contact tower 133.1 established.
i.e tracking instruction are via the ILS, and finals refers to the G/S LOC intercept.
Bottums Up
But SWH
if your clearance is
at what point have you been cleared to deviate from your inbound track (which I'd presume is from the south-east)?
if your clearance is
cleared for final runway 29, maintain 3000 until on final, make visual approach, contact tower 133.1 established.
Thread Starter
NFR, gday hope all is well,
Obviously we didn't do as intructed, as much as I would have liked to, just to see what was said etc,
we simply requested track for a 10nm final.
As for speaking to them directly, I gave that up as a waist of my time a while back.
Day or night, who cares and what significance does it have on this case? ZIP!
Like wise with the 1600' MSA ????
It is interesting to note that some pilots would act on an assumption, in this case their assumption may be correct, how ever it does create problems with the big picture and is why these sort of unclear instructions should be addressed.
Obviously we didn't do as intructed, as much as I would have liked to, just to see what was said etc,
we simply requested track for a 10nm final.
As for speaking to them directly, I gave that up as a waist of my time a while back.
Day or night, who cares and what significance does it have on this case? ZIP!
Like wise with the 1600' MSA ????
It is interesting to note that some pilots would act on an assumption, in this case their assumption may be correct, how ever it does create problems with the big picture and is why these sort of unclear instructions should be addressed.
Last edited by RENURPP; 21st Feb 2005 at 04:46.
Capt,
Sent via HWS by approach prior to being cleared visual approach. Been ages since I have been there, that basically what I got every time the Wx was good irrelevent on inbound course to DN.
Sent via HWS by approach prior to being cleared visual approach. Been ages since I have been there, that basically what I got every time the Wx was good irrelevent on inbound course to DN.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RENUPP,
Let me guess and see how close I am:
1. Inbound on the DN 163 VOR Radial
2. Around 2030hrs local
3. 146 driver
4. Given track shortening on the DN TMP to HWS (approved and the only track shortening allowed)
5. Reports visual at a guess 25DME.
6. Like most other 146 drivers, if the controller gave you a visual approach you would have more than likely descended below the CTA steps (trust me many do it) through the NNM CTAF.
How am I doing? From now on expect a VSA when you report - I am more than happy to do the paperwork.
If I am wrong give us all the facts not just the ones you want us to hear.
NFR - good to see you still around.
Let me guess and see how close I am:
1. Inbound on the DN 163 VOR Radial
2. Around 2030hrs local
3. 146 driver
4. Given track shortening on the DN TMP to HWS (approved and the only track shortening allowed)
5. Reports visual at a guess 25DME.
6. Like most other 146 drivers, if the controller gave you a visual approach you would have more than likely descended below the CTA steps (trust me many do it) through the NNM CTAF.
How am I doing? From now on expect a VSA when you report - I am more than happy to do the paperwork.
If I am wrong give us all the facts not just the ones you want us to hear.
NFR - good to see you still around.
Thread Starter
Let me guess and see how close I am:
1. Inbound on the DN 163 VOR Radial Correct
2. Around 2030hrs local Incorrect
3. 146 driver Correct
4. Given track shortening on the DN TMP to HWS (approved and the only track shortening allowed) Incorrect and if this is the only track shortening allowed you really need to take this up with the other controllers as we get all sorts of track shortening, outermarker, west of palmerston for VSA etc etc
5. Reports visual at a guess 25DME. not sure when, I normally report visual when I become visual, even if that is outside 30nm. Seems to confuse ATC ???
6. Like most other 146 drivers, if the controller gave you a visual approach you would have more than likely descended below the CTA steps (trust me many do it) through the NNM CTAF. Have not knowingly done this, I have to take your word for what happens in other aircraft! The only step that should concern a jet is the 10nm step. If they are as you suggest being cleared via the TMP and adhearing to VSA requirements then they shouldn't be below the steps and if they are maybe you should be asking them the question????
How am I doing? From now on expect a VSA when you report - I am more than happy to do the paperwork.
Not particularly well, the info you got correct was already posted above, except the 146 driver
If I am wrong give us all the facts not just the ones you want us to hear. .If you believe I have not offered all please tell As far as I am concerned it is all there pure and simple. Inbound on the 163 rad, on descent, no clearance given that would alter our tracking and then given the instruction.
or something very similar no mention of HWS or FEEGS or anything else.
I didn't phone up as it was no big deal quite normal to question clearances that don't make sense, in fact I had a similar one on my previous flight inbopund from the east. I am sure you would question pilots who made requests of comments that were non sensicle. ( please excuse the spelling)
I initially I made no mention of Darwin, for one reason, so it didn't turn into a slanging match against Darwin ATC. Been there done that, waste of time with no results.
1. Inbound on the DN 163 VOR Radial Correct
2. Around 2030hrs local Incorrect
3. 146 driver Correct
4. Given track shortening on the DN TMP to HWS (approved and the only track shortening allowed) Incorrect and if this is the only track shortening allowed you really need to take this up with the other controllers as we get all sorts of track shortening, outermarker, west of palmerston for VSA etc etc
5. Reports visual at a guess 25DME. not sure when, I normally report visual when I become visual, even if that is outside 30nm. Seems to confuse ATC ???
6. Like most other 146 drivers, if the controller gave you a visual approach you would have more than likely descended below the CTA steps (trust me many do it) through the NNM CTAF. Have not knowingly done this, I have to take your word for what happens in other aircraft! The only step that should concern a jet is the 10nm step. If they are as you suggest being cleared via the TMP and adhearing to VSA requirements then they shouldn't be below the steps and if they are maybe you should be asking them the question????
How am I doing? From now on expect a VSA when you report - I am more than happy to do the paperwork.
Not particularly well, the info you got correct was already posted above, except the 146 driver
If I am wrong give us all the facts not just the ones you want us to hear. .If you believe I have not offered all please tell As far as I am concerned it is all there pure and simple. Inbound on the 163 rad, on descent, no clearance given that would alter our tracking and then given the instruction.
make visual approach with requirement to not be below 3000' until established on final
I didn't phone up as it was no big deal quite normal to question clearances that don't make sense, in fact I had a similar one on my previous flight inbopund from the east. I am sure you would question pilots who made requests of comments that were non sensicle. ( please excuse the spelling)
I initially I made no mention of Darwin, for one reason, so it didn't turn into a slanging match against Darwin ATC. Been there done that, waste of time with no results.
Last edited by RENURPP; 22nd Feb 2005 at 00:16.
