Originally Posted by PBL
This kind of mild confusion doesn't often matter for regular local airspace users, but such things do get one into grave difficulties sometimes.
Originally Posted by Guppy
Not in this case. The facility is correctly named and identified. The procedure for it's use is clear and well known, and in full conformance with the prescribed terminal procedures criteria.
As I said, fine for regular local airspace users.
Check out the Cali situation, in which the ROZO ONE arrival was named after the endpoint, fully in accordance with local procedures and regulations. But it demonstrably confused the US pilots, who were apparently assuming that ROZO was the commencement of the arrival. And they didn't arrive.
AG RVS - Comments on Confusing Conversation at Cali.
Or check out the GOL-Legacy collision, where ATC (and, apparently, almost the entire Brazilian public) was expecting Legacy to change Flight Level without a communication, because it had that change of FL on its flight plan. That's apparently what you do according to local procedure and regulation.
Originally Posted by Guppy
You're attempting to argue and be difficult where there is no argument, nor grave difficulty.
Well, I accept that you don't see one. But that's the thing with these matters. No one saw a problem at Cali, either. Neither did anyone see a problem with having another NDB with the same ID and FREQ 200nm east. I mean, why would you ever tune it in from so high up? But they did.
And no one in Brazil was apparently expecting Legacy to adhere to ICAO norms rather than local ones when radio contact was lost.
And we won't mention the problems US pilots have flying runway heading in the UK when instructed to do so by ATC. Or will we?
Language is a big deal.
PBL