Africa - Banjul, Gambia, approach to rwy 32 to be precise.
Mistrust in Management
Thread Starter
Africa - Banjul, Gambia, approach to rwy 32 to be precise.
I appreciate this forum is aimed mainly those lucky people who fly in Europe but i thought you might like to hear about my little story today.
We were inbound to the above station under control from Dakar radar shortly to be transferred to Banjul approach/tower. We had been cleared to a point 10 miles on the extended centreline runway 32 at Banjul FL 110 . Position AMTAL
At this point we noticed traffic overhead Banjul on TCAS at FL90 in the opposite direction. To Dakar's credit they then told us that they could not contact said traffic which was a C182 and asked us to try and contact. We tried the Dakar frequency, Banjul tower and 121.5 - nothing. They came at us varying in altitude from FL87 to FL 93.
We took up the hold at FL110 and then saw the traffic climbing directly under us to FL95.
I have to ask what type of clown would knowingly fly directly along the approach path in the opposite direction to inbound traffic on that countries only international airport. Even assuming radio failure you have to imagine that self preservation would take over and you would avoid such areas?
They walk among us.
Regards
Exeng
P.S. for the tree huggers here that was half a ton of gas wasted.
We were inbound to the above station under control from Dakar radar shortly to be transferred to Banjul approach/tower. We had been cleared to a point 10 miles on the extended centreline runway 32 at Banjul FL 110 . Position AMTAL
At this point we noticed traffic overhead Banjul on TCAS at FL90 in the opposite direction. To Dakar's credit they then told us that they could not contact said traffic which was a C182 and asked us to try and contact. We tried the Dakar frequency, Banjul tower and 121.5 - nothing. They came at us varying in altitude from FL87 to FL 93.
We took up the hold at FL110 and then saw the traffic climbing directly under us to FL95.
I have to ask what type of clown would knowingly fly directly along the approach path in the opposite direction to inbound traffic on that countries only international airport. Even assuming radio failure you have to imagine that self preservation would take over and you would avoid such areas?
They walk among us.
Regards
Exeng
P.S. for the tree huggers here that was half a ton of gas wasted.
Last edited by exeng; 22nd Jun 2014 at 23:55. Reason: using an android mess
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having such a long runway they tend to take off and land lighter aircraft in the most convenient direction and with little forethought to other traffic.
Landing is much the same, they would offer as straight in from Dakar and give you the tail wind as 8 KTS or so the upper winds seemed to reflect this but as soon as you approached 1500 ft above the field the tailwind increased due to the sea breeze, if the tailwind hit 10kts or more at 1000 ft AGL I would break off and circle onto RWY 32 because it was likely that the tail wind at the surface would exceed the aircraft tail wind limit.
Landing is much the same, they would offer as straight in from Dakar and give you the tail wind as 8 KTS or so the upper winds seemed to reflect this but as soon as you approached 1500 ft above the field the tailwind increased due to the sea breeze, if the tailwind hit 10kts or more at 1000 ft AGL I would break off and circle onto RWY 32 because it was likely that the tail wind at the surface would exceed the aircraft tail wind limit.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Only occasionally above FL50
Age: 71
Posts: 211
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
6 Posts
I was trying, in part, to understand why an inbound aircraft would be at FL110 at 10 miles from the runway. As a lowly PPL / IMC I would expect to be way above any inbound or circling traffic if I was around 10,000 feet (especially if the norm is a straight in approach from Dakar under radar control as mentioned by A and C, and if the airspace at 10,000 feet is uncontrolled).
I do understand that aircraft have to descend at some point during the approach, but at 10,000 feet, I would have thought the runway direction was pretty irrelevant when considering the likely track of both the incoming aircraft and any transiting traffic.
I do understand that aircraft have to descend at some point during the approach, but at 10,000 feet, I would have thought the runway direction was pretty irrelevant when considering the likely track of both the incoming aircraft and any transiting traffic.
Mistrust in Management
Thread Starter
mungo
We did not, although I do accept we probably should have.
I made the presumption that since said traffic was transiting Banjul he or she would at least contact them.
We were about 20 nms from AMTAL try to get descent from Dakar when we noticed the traffic on TCAS. (we were also 2 way with Banjul tower)
We then had to set up an anticipated hold at AMTAL and try and contact this A/C. Looking after our jet and pax was the priority and we did try Dakar, Banjul and 121.5. Should have tried 126.9 I suppose but that is normally used by high level traffic for information as you know. Somehow I doubt this traffic would have been monitoringb126.9
We were very concerned about its varying altitude and then became more concerned when it started to climb directly beneath us at AMTAL. (It stopped at FL 95)
We asked Banjul to file a report and have filed both an ASR and MOR ourselves.
Don't suppose we will hear a thing as that is the way in these parts.
Kind regards
Exeng
I made the presumption that since said traffic was transiting Banjul he or she would at least contact them.
We were about 20 nms from AMTAL try to get descent from Dakar when we noticed the traffic on TCAS. (we were also 2 way with Banjul tower)
We then had to set up an anticipated hold at AMTAL and try and contact this A/C. Looking after our jet and pax was the priority and we did try Dakar, Banjul and 121.5. Should have tried 126.9 I suppose but that is normally used by high level traffic for information as you know. Somehow I doubt this traffic would have been monitoringb126.9
We were very concerned about its varying altitude and then became more concerned when it started to climb directly beneath us at AMTAL. (It stopped at FL 95)
We asked Banjul to file a report and have filed both an ASR and MOR ourselves.
Don't suppose we will hear a thing as that is the way in these parts.
Kind regards
Exeng
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Andrewgr2
I think you misunderstand me, Dakar would offer a direct track to the Banjul VOR ( on the airfield ) and radar assistance within the Dakar area. The vertical profile usually had you leaving ( something like) FL350 at the Dakar VOR aiming for the straight in approach at Banjul, at about FL 160 you would get asked if you had two way contact with Banjul........ At this point any radar "assistance" would terminate and the whole control was a procidual affair.
My take on the situation was that your TCAS and looking out of the window were the only realistic options to avoid other aircraft. The best I can say for the place is that unlike the Egyptans the guys in Banjul never tried to run me into a mountain !
My take on the situation was that your TCAS and looking out of the window were the only realistic options to avoid other aircraft. The best I can say for the place is that unlike the Egyptans the guys in Banjul never tried to run me into a mountain !
