I'm finding it difficult to work out the proposed AAR scenario. We looked at the concept of 'Conditional AAR Routes', where ad hoc AAR can take place with a tanker in transit. But the tanker advises ATC of its waypoint ETAs and it is up to ATC to join the receivers with the tanker using an RV Alfa. This would need to be below RVSM airspace as formations do not comply with RVSM.
Does your airspace include TACAN routes? If so, the tanker should maintain FL260, with the receivers joining at FL250 until visual, after which MARSA should apply. Typically the receivers should leave at FL270.
ATC are trained to keep aircraft apart, not to put them together, so let the receivers get on with it once they confirm radar contact with the tanker. Also, anything less than 120 ABH will probably lead to a protracted stern chase if you're not careful. You have to assume that the tanker will maintain a predicted track and speed and vector the receivers towards the anticipated RV position. But the RV location isn't normally something an ATCO should be expected to decide.
For example, a tanker might be flying south on TB2 from LAG41 to SAXON anchor at FL260 and a TAS of 440 kts. It advises you that it will be at LAG41 at 15:40 and can accept receivers in the 15 min slot between LAG41 and HOZ, with an ETA on SAXON of 16:00. If the receivers are late, the tanker might not be able to delay if it is expecting receivers shortly after its planned on-task time in SAXON anchor, so you have to think well ahead and ensure that the intercept geometry can be achieved within the stated 4-dimensional requirements.
You won't find anything about CARRs in the ATP - it's something we designed for an MCCE Eindhoven proposal several years ago. But I've practised the procedure in a training and testing part task trainer on numerous occasions and it works just fine.
Last edited by BEagle; 20th Nov 2018 at 07:46.