Hello all,
A few reactions
S.Voight
Who does invent those missed approaches? Are there any pilots involved?
In the case of Palma....straight ahead is only water, and if they would make a turn on an ILSDME distance it would be a lot better to start with.
But concerning your point of traffic:
If a go-around would state Straight Ahead, 5 DME of the ILS, thence turn to left/right direct to beacon to hold.
Would there be a problem to keep the straight ahead, 5 miles clear of traffic?
I have flown into DFW often. 17 and 18 would not be a problem to go straight ahead, when 1 landing, the other taking off.
With 13 (as I believe it is, recalled from memory) it might more difficult, because you are crossing the path of 17/18, but this is where my "where not possible" scenario kicks in, just as in a mountainious area.
Next left
I don't understand PT aircraft, but I am talking multi-crew, like DanRyan described clearly (thanx) where the ILS navaid is used on both sides according SOP's that all airliners use! So, yes, SSJ not identified.
In the case of Palma....Why SSJ DME and not IPAL ILS DME? And make it 5 DME minimum to give us time to configure..(rather 10, give us time to think as well) and thence give me the turn to MJV VOR to hold, I would be very pleased and out of the way for other traffic!!
As gonzo says...You'd be surprised, or maybe you wouldn't to learn just how many crews climb straight ahead despite the published Missed Approach!
This is true! If in an approach-briefing the missed approach takes more than 10 seconds to explain, there is something wrong with the procedure, because in a LVO (stress) go-around, you will lose it and have to redirect your attention to the piece of paper to read, in stead of the aircraft attitude and configuration!
I do give the ATC-ers the credit for their performance. Everyone is doing it to the best of their ability when they are sitting in their seat. Some are good, others are great! BUT they don't think the same way as pilots! It is a shame that in England, where all ATC-ers were given the chance to get their PPL license, has been taken out of the ATC-program. I think this was a very good initiative to have.
It is a shame that you seem to have the "you are a pilot, and I am a ATC-er attitude" with regard to your note at the bottom of your posting.
-"If you want standrdisation you can have 15 mile final approaches with 160kts to 3 miles always roll to the end (regardless of the taxi to the stand). But I'd guess you'd prefer a bit of flexibility - and you can do much better because you're a professional"
-"And another guess - you've not been on a visit to ATC for years. And if you have you didn't ask your question. Because if you had I can't believe that the people there didn't show you all the reasons and point out that they've got more than one aeroplane to worry about."
We are all trying to do our job and should work TOGETHER to make life easy and safer. I am not all-knowing, that's why I ask questions. To learn and to understand. That's also why I go and visit the tower every once in a while.
WF
Sorry, I am not aware of the LHR incident and have not got the Jepp with me to look at the missed approach in LHR. From your posting, remember the "lost comm faillure", the 10 DME (LON, why not ILSDME?), but this should also be a FANTASTIC NORMAL missed approach procedure!
Greetings to all and thanx for the replies so far!
MEL