Originally Posted by
Checkboard
I wonder why the tower giving a clearance to a "Follow Me" vehicle to cross a stop bar, followed by an aircraft, is safer than the tower giving a clearance to an aircraft to cross a stop bar?
An extract from this Survey.....
http://www.hkatca.org/docs/IFATCA%20...r%20Report.pdf
•
While a stopbar malfunction may be a recurring event at some airports, it remains a relatively unusual situation for a pilot to be at a stopbar that cannot be switched off. It would therefore help to have a contingency procedure with identical elements at all airports where stopbars are used, so pilots can be prepared for what will be done to assist them to pass the stopbar.
• From a pilot's perspective an R/T instruction to cross an active stopbar may still appear to be contrary to the ICAO provisions, even if an explanation is provided that there is a stopbar malfunction at the time. Just by looking at the active stopbar, it is difficult for a pilot to tell whether switching off that stopbar is not possible due to a malfunction (i.e. just at that moment) or because it simply is not designed as a switchable stopbar (i.e. permanently).
• The use of a Follow Me vehicle to help an aircraft pass an active stopbar serves as an indication and confirmation to the pilots that the situation is unusual, particularly so if this is also explained via R/T.
• A contingency procedure that uses just R/T phraseology to instruct pilots to cross a stopbar that cannot be switched off is therefore less desirable than a procedure that involves the use of a Follow Me vehicle.