Surveillance Radar Approach
PPRuNe Handmaiden
We do them reasonably often at RAF Northolt and it is possible to do them in Moscow however, our ops manual prohibits us from doing them with the Ruskies.
SRA
In the 70's and early 80's controllers practised SRA'S - sometimes live, sometimes on (primitive) simulation. A dedicated radar map was required, and if memory serves, ML had one for only one runway - RWY 16* (which is why Centaurus might have had trouble with 27). At one time there was a requirement on TMA endorsement and every year or so to demonstrate ability to conduct an SRA. Eventually the maps, techniques and practices were dropped, the reason possibly being that other modern aviation equipment and redundancy made SRA unnecessary.
*memory a bit dodgy here.
*memory a bit dodgy here.
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I found a video on how they work in the US. They actually shoot an ASR with an instructor talking the pilot (and the audience) through it.
If anyone has tried one recently in Australia or NZ, please let us know how similar they are. : )
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UCzvEZOR7t0
If anyone has tried one recently in Australia or NZ, please let us know how similar they are. : )
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UCzvEZOR7t0
I remember doing SRAs into the shorter RW28 at EGPF Glasgow in the late 1990s.
Landing into the setting sun (at 4pm in the winter!) might as well be IMC as you couldn't see the runway for the glare.
They used to be my favourite approaches as you let ATC do all the hard work in monitoring and calling out your approach - all you had to do was work the corrections...
Is one able to request one at YPPH these days? Would love to give the guys some practice there...
Landing into the setting sun (at 4pm in the winter!) might as well be IMC as you couldn't see the runway for the glare.
They used to be my favourite approaches as you let ATC do all the hard work in monitoring and calling out your approach - all you had to do was work the corrections...
Is one able to request one at YPPH these days? Would love to give the guys some practice there...
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,416
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just to correct an impression left by some, an SRA approach would be used with a surveillance radar providing horizontal position only.
In all the ones I ever flew or witnessed from the radar room, the pilot would be vectored to a point 6 miles from touchdown on the centre line, and advised to be at 2100 QFE, and to start a 3 degree descent at that point. The pilot had to know what that meant in fpm at the aircraft's approach speed.
From that point also the pilot would listen but not respond to the controller. Heading changes would be advised (eg right 10 degrees) as the controller struggled to keep the aircraft on the centreline in whatever wind was effective.
At each mile point the controller would advise the required height QFE and the pilot would correct the RoD as needed.
In my experience the guidance would be terminated at 2 miles, and if you were still in cloud you would break off and go away.
It is, however, a very long time since I did one!
What was a real challenge for a controller, and a test of accurate flying skill and nerve for a pilot, was the QGH approach, especially if, as a legendary ATCO at Sywell used to do, the controller was doing several at the same time.
In all the ones I ever flew or witnessed from the radar room, the pilot would be vectored to a point 6 miles from touchdown on the centre line, and advised to be at 2100 QFE, and to start a 3 degree descent at that point. The pilot had to know what that meant in fpm at the aircraft's approach speed.
From that point also the pilot would listen but not respond to the controller. Heading changes would be advised (eg right 10 degrees) as the controller struggled to keep the aircraft on the centreline in whatever wind was effective.
At each mile point the controller would advise the required height QFE and the pilot would correct the RoD as needed.
In my experience the guidance would be terminated at 2 miles, and if you were still in cloud you would break off and go away.
It is, however, a very long time since I did one!
What was a real challenge for a controller, and a test of accurate flying skill and nerve for a pilot, was the QGH approach, especially if, as a legendary ATCO at Sywell used to do, the controller was doing several at the same time.
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Baghdaddy Airport
Age: 60
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
seems people are confusing cloud break procedure with PRA. Cloud break procedure was used a lot when I worked Ohakea sector (Military/Civil). Point the aircraft to the airfield and descended them according to radar terrain map and then within 10nm descended to 1500ft was authorised according to the 'book'. Was used as a way of getting aircraft on a visual approach. PRAs were discontinued many years ago and I don't believe any controllers in NZ would be current. PRA's were a controller talk down on equivalent of an ILS in todays terms. Cloud break procedure was from any direction.
Used to do them on HMAS Melbourne - called CCA [carrier controlled approach].
Controlled over 1500 GC/CCA's many in actual bad weather issues. Controlled a C-130 coming into Butterworth one Sunday morning from Bahrain...IMC with heavy rain and low cloud. All diversion airfields required an alternate; great satisfaction getting them on the ground in nearly zero vis in heavy tropical rain after three attempts. It got my attention when they said they would take a vector to the back of Penang Is and ditch as no more fuel to mess around or go anywhere. Talk down to touch down and a few Anchors afterwards!
Controlled over 1500 GC/CCA's many in actual bad weather issues. Controlled a C-130 coming into Butterworth one Sunday morning from Bahrain...IMC with heavy rain and low cloud. All diversion airfields required an alternate; great satisfaction getting them on the ground in nearly zero vis in heavy tropical rain after three attempts. It got my attention when they said they would take a vector to the back of Penang Is and ditch as no more fuel to mess around or go anywhere. Talk down to touch down and a few Anchors afterwards!
Fast jets were the easiest...a Huey coming to the hover on a GCA caught a few of the uninitiated off guard! The carrier approaches were fun as the ship only turned into wind late in the game so vectoring to a point in space which would hopefully be near finals...
In the RAAF, the main reason for an SRA was to approach a different airfield from where the radar was situated, e.g.radar at Pearce, fly the approach to Gin Gin 15 miles north with the runway at 90 degrees to the radar. The controllers did a reasonable job, but they were dealing with students. And unlike the GCA where the radar sweeps painted the aircraft twice a second, they only saw the blip every 6 or 7 seconds, so the heading changes needed were considerably larger than on a GCA.
Chief Galah said, many years ago:
That wheels-up came from a short hop from RAAF Laverton to Melbourne, not a diversion. The weather was a bit ordinary and he wanted to stay VFR under the cloud, and he only had UHF radio, so I think he was talking to the tower via Mel Approach, as tower only had VHF at the time. At 250t plus it doesn't take long to cover the distance, and it was a straight-in approach, whereas the knuckleheads were only used to an initial/pitch/oval circuit to land. So, because there was no "downwind leg" he didn't do his "downwind checks" and screeched to a halt on his big drop tanks on the wet runway, the tanks being the only reason he survived - otherwise, the nose-high approach attitude would mean that when the tail hit the ground, the cockpit would slam onto the runway and drive the pilot's @ss into his helmet.
This was the cause of 2 things:
Changing the name to "Pre-landing checks"; and
The joke "How does a fighter pilot know he has done a wheels-up landing? He needs full afterburner to taxi."
Chief Galah said, many years ago:
Sort of training for both sides of the fence. One of these "practise diversions" undignifyingly ended up with a wheels up on Rwy 34 one day.
Reputed to be the only survivable wheels up by a MIR3.
I'm unsure if a SRA was involved with that, but the "practise diversions" seem to disappear from the repetoire after that, funnily enough.
Reputed to be the only survivable wheels up by a MIR3.
I'm unsure if a SRA was involved with that, but the "practise diversions" seem to disappear from the repetoire after that, funnily enough.
This was the cause of 2 things:
Changing the name to "Pre-landing checks"; and
The joke "How does a fighter pilot know he has done a wheels-up landing? He needs full afterburner to taxi."
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a civvy in Darwin many years ago we were often asked if we would accept a GCA.
Fortunately our CP was ex military & we had a fantastic relationship with the controllers
Bloody great for IF skills & kept the controllers current - takes a bit of getting used to being told " 300 fpm NOT 250 fpm"
Fortunately our CP was ex military & we had a fantastic relationship with the controllers
Bloody great for IF skills & kept the controllers current - takes a bit of getting used to being told " 300 fpm NOT 250 fpm"
