Probably not strictly on the subject of the tread, but the standard ICAO loss of radio procedures are in desperate need of amendment.
Any airline aircraft built within the last fifteen years that has suffered a total loss of radios is obviously suffering other, possibly dire technical difficulties, so the last thing the crew needs to do is delay their landing by maintaining cruise level until reaching the approach aid and then descending in the hold. This might have been a great idea with a DC 4, where the cruise altitude was 9,000’, but maintaining 37,000’ until overhead the approach aid and then wasting twenty minutes descending in the hold is just plain silly. At the very least, it gives the loss of radio crew an extra problem of arriving at the instrument approach minima with considerably less fuel than they would have had if they had been able to descend at their normal descent point some 120 miles before the initial approach aid.
The current procedures also cause far more problems for both ATC and every other aircraft in the area, for in unnecessarily lengthening the time the aircraft in difficulties remains airborne, they inconvenience and delay all other traffic in the area much longer than they should.
The Australians (who are, let’s face it, not usually renowned for ‘cutting edge’ aviation legislation of procedures), saw this problem as early as 1984, when they changed their national loss of radio procedures to the far more sensible ‘maintain expected flight profile and proceed to land without delay’. (I don’t have a copy of the Jepp in front of me, but I’m sure someone will set me straight if the intent of the Oz procedures is anything other than that.)
In this age where damn near every flight attendant in every crew I’ve ever flown in carries a mobile phone, why in the world doesn’t ICAO come up with a really novel loss of radio procedure, (and one which I suggested some three of four years ago to my local CAA) and publish a phone number to ring in the event of loss of radios on the chart or in the Emergency Section of the Jepp?
Gawd, if we could convince them to institute something as earth-shattering as the Australian procedure or the phone number idea, we might one day get someone to address the question of offset enroute tracking.
I’m not holding my breath on either…