Tower & Appr Question

[Squadgy]

Hi,

A few questions re Twr and Appr positiions.

I'm interested in the use of DFTI/ ATM (hope that's right terminology - I'm talking about the radar feed that shows the final approach area to the Tower controller).
Is this use of this equipment taught as part of the Aerodrome Control course, or is it taught during OTJT purely at units equipped with it? Also, can the equipment only show the final approach area or do some units have setups so a wider area, say the entire ATZ / CTR are presented to the Tower Controller?
To what extent can the Tower controller 'control' using this equipment - at what stage does a radar rating become a requirement?

Also, re Approach positions, I know some non-radar appr positions are located in a VCR (I thihnk Woodvale is an example), but are there any instances or radar positions being located in a VCR, rather then another room. If so what are the advantages and disadvantages of this?

Thanks in advance! :-)

[Dan Dare]

Here goes for the quick starter answers:

1) DFTI (distance from touchdown indicator) has been mostly replaced by ATM (air traffic monitor), which can be as good as the radar used by approach controllers.

2) Theory of what to do with an ATM is covered in the aerodrome course. How it works used to be covered in Radar Theory later on. This will change very soon. Each ATM is different, so functions picked up during OJT.

3) Range varies with equipment, but not unusual to be able to wind out beyond 40nm for spotting, or even operational planning. Normally it would be 15-20nm range. Most functions available to the tower controller and no radar rating required as it is usually a monitoring function only (I know 'advanced use of ATM' etc.). Radar rating is necessary for radar position only.

4) Various units provide approach procedural service from the Visual Control Room (eg Woodvale, Shoreham, Oxford, Cranfield etc), but I am unaware of any which have approach radar in the VCR (historically very difficult to see the radar screen in daylight). It is also specifically forbidden to provide both a Tower and Approach Radar service simultaneously.

[Squadgy]

Most functions available to the tower controller and no radar rating required as it is usually a monitoring function only (I know 'advanced use of ATM' etc.). Radar rating is necessary for radar position only.

Thanks, by monitoring, would I be right in saying that if an aircraft departed and turned right instead of left on departure and the ATCO picked this up on an ATM, then they could advise the aircraft of this as they are simply 'monitoring' the aircraft's position and advising of the error, rather than 'positioning', which would involve passing a heading based on the ATM which would require a radar rating??

[rodan]

Spot on, that is one of it's specific basic purposes:

Uses of the Aerodrome Traffic Monitor

(a) Determine the landing order, spacing and distance from touchdown of arriving aircraft;

(b) Assist in applying longitudinal separation for departing aircraft;

(c) Enable the controller to confirm that the initial track of a departing aircraft conforms with the clearance issued;

(d) Provide information to aircraft on the position of other aircraft in the circuit or carrying out an instrument approach.


There are further uses that can be made of the ATM, like passing traffic information and establishing separation in a missed approach, but these require a dispensation from the CAA and are subject to further controller training.

[Simtech]

I remember watching a TV series about a guy doing his PPL at Gloucester. There were various shots of the VCR and their Approach Radar controller was sitting up there alongside the Tower controller and his assistant.

Perhaps someone with local knowledge could confirm?

[Bear 555]

Hi All,

Recently installed several systems in middle east, where the display in the VCR was, technically, a full spec unit. The only difference being the use of a high intensity monochrome VDU.

The software load, maps and functionality were the same as those in the Radar room.

Bear

[tiggur]

The controller at Gloucester sitting in front of the ATM in the VCR is not necessarily a Radar controller. An Approach procedural function is usually supplied from that position, using the ATM as an aid to provide traffic info etc.

Unidentified traffic with conflictions may be advised "Traffic BELIEVED to be in your 2 oclock range 4 miles crossing right/left etc etc"

It can be legally used by a procedurally or tower rated controller
so long as a radar service is not provided.

Gloucester also has some fine radar controllers. They use the same kit for separation, sequencing and I beleive now for 2 mile SRAs. The main radar screens downstairs are used for half mile SRAs.

However, since that program you talk about (A Plane is Born?) was filmed before the recent radar upgrade, this may be out of date info, as I haven't worked there for 5 years.

Perhaps Matspart3 could divulge some up to date info.

[niknak]

I think that we are the only unit in the UK which has approval to operate the radar in the VCR (willing to stand corrected though!),
as well as from the purpose built room downstairs.
The approval was given some considerable time ago, and the system works very well.
Mon to Fri 08.30 to 1730 we join our MOD collegues up the road and do approach radar to Norwich from an assigned console at Coltishall.
Outside these hours and at weekends, approach radar and SRAs at any time are done from the radar in the VCR at Norwich, or downstairs.

To use it as an ATM we simply reduce the range to between 10 and 20 miles (with SSR), when it's in use as an approach radar, the tower atco can still use it as an ATM, but obviously it is slightly more limited.

The biggest advantage of being a tower atco sitting next door to the approach radar atco is ease of coordination between the two positions - no delays in getting clearances or other information, and gives you a better idea of what the other is planning to do,
:E :ooh:

[2 sheds]

Tiggur

If, indeed, radar based traffic information is passed to unidentified aircraft in the manner you describe, this is totally contrary to MATS 1 requirements - the pilot could easily infer that a radar service was being provided.

[Spiney Norman]

2 sheds.
What Tiggur says is not totally contrary to MATS pt1 as you say. Have a look at FIS MATS Pt1 5.1 (b), which I think you're thinking of is.....
'The controller may attempt to identify the flight for monitoring and co-ordination purposes only. Such identification does not imply that a radar service is being provided or that the controller will continuously monitor the flight. Pilots must be left in no doubt that they are not recieving a radar service'.
But it also says.......
5.2. ' In addition to the above, controllers will, subject to workload, provide pilots with information concerning collision hazards to aircraft operating in Class C,D,E,F, and G airspace when self evident information from ANY source indicates that a risk of collision may exist'......
I'd say that providing you make it clear that you're providing a FIS by establishing the 'verbal contract' and ensure radar derived information is passed with the 'believed to be' included you're actually covered. Now, as to doing that without an Approach Radar rating, don't think I want to go there!

Spiney.

[ILS 119.5]

Our ATM and not a DFTI is an exact replica of the Approach Radar, we can only use it as MTS Pt1 & Pt2 say so. However, in the real ATC world it is never used so. If you saw two a/c on collission course for each other would you only give traffic information, I would't. If they hit each other and you had only given traffic infornation then you would be heavily criticised and investigated. If you (with a valid APR rating) gave vectors to avoid and had an airmiss, again your b##ll###s are on the line. No win situation, unfortunately the UK ATC system has no protection for the controller. If you play it by the book and have an incident you will be in trouble for not using the saying in MATS Pt1 about any guidelines in this book does not mean that an ATCO can use his/her common sense. If you use your common sense and have an incident then you will be in trouble for not conforming to the MATS Pt1 or Pt2.

[Whipping Boy's SATCO]

Our DFTI equivalent (can't remember the name for the life of me) is also just another radar console so, theoretically, there would be no problem using it to provide a radar service. However, it does present a few problems. Not least, the fact that most units orientate the display with what the controller sees out of the window. Consequently, it is not unusual to find North at the bottom of the screen; need I say more.