Give Cooly an ILS !!

[onfinals_34L]

What's it going to take for an ILS to be installed at Coolangatta!

All the players conducting missed approaches and diverting to Brisbane this morning from VOR/DME approaches, Jetstar and Virgin flights from Sydney and Qantas from Adelaide.

[Uncommon Sense]

Whats it going to take?

$$$$$$

Jetstar and VB are the main operators.

[Blastoid]

Apart from the $$$$, it won't happen because:

- Terrain: ILS (being a precision approach) requires to be aligned with runway heading. Damn hill at Currumbin (for 14) an Banora Point (for 32) just won't move.

- Noise: The NA procedures at CG are extensive. Even if with the terrain it was possible, the million-dollar house owners on the above mentioned areas will get their way when they realise their peaceful lifestyle will be interrupted by the whine of jet engines overhead (more than now, anyway!). Take into account a 8NM final on an ILS, and suddenly other suburbs (most of the Gold Coast South of Surfers) will be affected.

I say we should suggest the old Kai Tak approach: track inbound 290 degrees (over water) at a localiser located on Currumbin Hill, have the chequerboard in sight, turn left 150 degrees to intercept final RWY 14. Fewer missed approaches, but more CFITs??? :{

Ahhh, Queensland ... beautiful one day ....

[whipping boy]

Shut the whole bloody place down and sell the land.

[Uncommon Sense]

I am not convinced about the terrain issue v.v. GP angle.

It could go a little steeper than 3 deg to qualify, but it's not going to be London City proportions.

The NAP - well that is another kettle of fish.

Having said that, wasn't the main reason for the initial 5 deg ,and now only 4 deg, GP into LCY to do with NAP?

[Cornholio]

Who cares what's the reason for ANYthing in Pommyland??? Are you showing off?????

Anyway we're talking about CG here...

Problems with weather-diversions in CG? Anyone who doesn't carry a little extra on a bad day is a FOOL.

CG rarely suffers from anything that won't blow through in a short space of time. Patchy low cloud may prevent a successful approach at one moment but will often allow an easy run on the next attempt.

Diversions to BN and cumulative effects thereof cost a hell of a lot more than the cost of hauling the odd extra ton when it's perfectly obvious the weather is a little crappy.

But they don't need an ILS.

[Icarus2001]

Do you have any idea what it costs to install and then maintain an ILS installation to even CAT 1 standard? Big dollars!

How many aircraft actually have to divert in anger after say shooting two approaches at CG? More than ten in one year?

Get real.:8

[bombshell]

Icarus 2001......yes it does cost money to have an ILS installed and maintained etc. But there are plenty of places around the world with less movements that have an ILS.

My question would be why do we need OOL when BNE is just up the road with 2 ILSs? It would seem to me that the area is over serviced.

[onfinals_34L]

Thanks everyone for all your input so far.

Icarus2001, Re the more than ten in one year missed approaches, well I've noted 6 in the last two days so looks like CG will have perfect weather for the next 5 months.

Most held for 20+ minutes and made two to three approaches each, trying for both 32 and 14.

Have noted months ago the VB 737 red-eye from Perth making a missed approach and still having enough fuel for another crack and getting in after holding for a while. (Not bad)

Re the cost, sure it costs a ****load and I'm sure the decision makers will congratulate themselves as they nash their teeth together if they ever experience the joy of multiple missed approaches and bussing down to Cooly or arriving hours later.

[F111]

Forget about ILS, it's old technology, ASA are already working on curved GPS approaches with minima equal to ILS approaches.

ASA would like to remove all ground based navids by 2009 except ILS and by 2012 they are looking at removing all ILS's and using GPS for everything.

[FlexibleResponse]

Some would say it is a disgrace for any significant RPT Airport to operate without some type of precision approach.

Considering the rapidly increasing number of daily (and nightly) RPT operations, some might say that the chances of a major accident due to lack of a precision approach, will largely be function of statistical probability.

The proximity of high ground on final approach may not necessarily prohibit the installation of an ILS. Bali, for example, has an offset ILS localizer of about 2 degrees. Subic Bay has a large offset ILS only usable by FedeX.

Also, as mentioned above, Kai Tak Rwy 13 approach was 47 degrees off the runway centreline and CX used a minima 675’ directly into the checker board which was mounted on foothills rising to 2000’ odd.

Most of us would agree that visual approaches in appropriate conditions are very safe and would recommend such to maintain pilot handling skills. But after thousands of instrument approaches in RPT, and having to teach others the same has convinced me that non-precision instrument approaches rank as one of the few remaining great hazards to commercial aviation.

I just hope sanity prevails and Cooly gets the upgrade it deserves soonest so that the Gold Coast and Tweed customers get to fly with the appropriate level of safety that they should rightly expect…before it is too late.

In the meantime, we should congratulate the highly trained and professional crews operating into Cooly with such an outstanding safety record.

[Capt Claret]

F111

Interesting comments about replacing ILS by 2012. I'd recently heard that ILS was never expected to be removed because GPS is too susceptible to local area jamming, should some one, or some group be so inclined.

[jb_flyer]

The one time I flew into Gold Coast from Melbourne I was very intereted in the way we approached the runway, flew past the airport over the water, then turned about, giving excellent view of the surrounding hills and houses (spotters paradise those places I would bet!) then touched down, seemingly at the last moment!

Very interesting from somebody vaugley interested in that kind of stuff, unsettling for the flying basket case seated next to me.

JB

[Neddy]

F111 and all,

The cost of an ILS is approx 6million (includes the cost of upgrading approach, runway lighting, flight inspection etc). The ongoing maintenance is approx 1million/year. This will not happen at Cooly (actually now called Gold Coast) for the reasons others have outlined regarding cost and probability of wx below minimums.

As to the so called "curved GPS approaches" that F111 refers to these were part of a project known as GRAS (which is a regional based augmentation system for GPS) which has very little support within the Australian aviation community. It has been an ongoing project for years sucking millions of dollars in funding but will not fly in Australia (maybe some third world country).

As for decommissioning ILSs by 2012; based on the recent ASTRA and GIT (gps implementation team) meetings this is also a non event. ILSs are an integral part of the GPS back-up network along with a number of strategic VORs and NDBs.

[Uncommon Sense]

Surely the IGS was only a precision approach if you intended to land on the chequerboard - from there it was just a circling approach with a circling minima.

Circling from a minima of 675' is actually a higher minima than most runway aligned non precision VOR/DME.

(There is a technical thread somewhere on prune that looks at how far offset you can go until precision approach is no longer practical. e.g. DPS)

[ZK-NSJ]

gps is a fine thing, untill those who control the satelites play hardball

[BankAngle50]

Could it be possible that there are times when the WX precludes landing. I think when I learnt to fly it was called an alternate or something like that.

GPS could provide RWY alignment, but the MDA will be the problem at CG; something an ILS won’t solve. Why are we not doing monitored approach when LVP in place?

arrrhh! Just use the VSD and put the trend vector on the threshold if you don’t want to divert. Perhaps a GCA approach from Brissy Approach? Hummm! We aren’t Air China or Korean yet are we? If you’re not visual at the MDA try once more then overnight at BNE. Simple.

I heard the guys had hit the TOGA's 3 times before getting in. Humm!! What would the pax be thinking? Anyway thats what an engineer told me, so I take it with a grain of salt.

[LetsGoRated]

Bank Angle

I think when I learnt to fly it was called an alternate or something like that.

Gee I wish I went to your flying school........fairly obvious, think you've missed the point

Why are we not doing monitored approach when LVP in place?

Monitored approaches, now there’s something that will solve the problem of missed approaches and alternate diversions....NOT!!

If you’re not visual at the MDA try once more then overnight at BNE. Simple.

Simple? How about we all amend our ops manuals to read "If you’re not visual at the MDA try once more then overnight at (Insert name of alternate here). Simple." Haven't been around long have you? As professional pilots we are paid to get those feral punters to their destinations, not to overnight at our alternates!! Were you operating at CG yesterday or are you the Monday morning quarterback?
A few crews elected to do a few different things....the end result? No twisted aluminum. If you think divert decisions are all ****s and giggles and "simple" you will be sadly mistaken my friend, just ask you're captain

I heard the guys had hit the TOGA's 3 times before getting in. Humm!! What would the pax be thinking?

I'll tell what they were thinking - "Thank god these pilots are getting paid serious dollars to look after us." Not the best time for them to overhear the cabin crew - "I wish these pilots were being paid more than the local train/forklift driver or garbo!!" Who gives a s$%t what they were thinking, they're not in the cockpit skinning the cat sunshine, you are!!! You have other priorities at that point. What would they be thinking as they silently plummet seawards with both engines flamed out?!!


:ok:

[F111]

Neddy,

The ASA staff at the recent RAAA convention were very keen to talk about the advantages curved GPS approaches into regional airports, in particular the cost savings to regional airlines ie reduced diversion’s etc.

[Neddy]

Yes F111 I'm sure "some" ASA staff were !

Some (less than you can count on your toes) have been floggin' that dead horse for years at every conference they can milk from your (and the rest of the industry's) money! Trouble is no one else (particularly the big players) in Oz aviation are interested in what they're selling!

Now it's about time we moved on from the "home grown solution".

[onfinals_34L]

Got to love the weather this time of year here.

Two more diversions noted this evening VB 525 and JQ 226

Thats eight diversions in 3 days (just the ones that I have noted)

Plenty of others uumming and arrhh'ing when they were told Brisbane was closed due to cells overhead, cloud then lifted at CG to allow the other 3 aircraft in that had already conducted missed approaches and were holding and crunching numbers.

[Capn Bloggs]

The cost of an ILS is approx 6million (includes the cost of upgrading approach, runway lighting, flight inspection etc). The ongoing maintenance is approx 1million/year.
Neddy, the Albany Council put one in for a couple of Fokker flights a day: I don't think they'd do that if they cost $6m and $1m maintenance a year...

Get with it guys: Non-Precision Approaches SUCK! The graveyards of the world are littered with the bodies of people who were in the back of big jets trying to do NPAs. It WILL happen, and for a place like YBCG, if the use of NPAs is as much as stated here, they should have an ILS.

And when it does go in (the ILS that is), for god's sake put a DME at the end of the runway, unlike the morons who put in the CS 33 LLZ and didn't bother putting in a DME to go with it on the threshold. The most complex NPA in Oz for big jets and they left the only DME 3 miles up the other end. What hope have we got!

[TIMMEEEE]

Stuff the ILS idea at YBCG - it just isnt viable for geographical reasons as mentioned.

Rather than quibble about an ILS at Cooly why dont we have Cat II ILS's at all the major centres!
Much more useful especially during those winter fog times along the eastern seaboard that cause massive disruptions that can take over 24 hours to rectify.

Having operated into Cooly literally hundreds of times over the years, aviation would be far better served by having more flexible ILS minimums at all current facilities.

[Uncommon Sense]

Kind of ironic isn't it.

The millions wasted on NAS, whose greatest supporters go on TV hand wringing about the safety of the travelling public, could have funded another 25+ ILS installations in Australia.

I seem to recall it took a looooong time before SY RWY 25 got one as well. Westerlies during the bush fires was 'interesting' when VD was only option.

[Captain Can't]

RNP approaches. The way of the future!
As mentioned above, ILS's and other aids will still have their place for the time being... but our industry really needs to embrace the technology - as long as the price is right though... as always $$$ :rolleyes:
btw, capt bloggs; i second that! dme's on the threshold! it may be simple maths, but on a complex NPA, a moments hestitation/confusion at the wrong time...
out.

[swh]

Its getting real expensive for G.A. operators at Gold Coast, the cost of installing and maintaining an ILS, and and initial and ongoing training of controllers would get passed on to all uses of the airport, i.e. increasing the costs for G.A., where the major benifit would be RPT jets.

Does the cost/benifit justify such a facility given the statistically small number hours a year that existing approaches will not result in a landing ?

With the terrain around the airport I would have thought a MLS facility or DGPS would be better than ILS in any case.

:hmm:

[Capt Fathom]

for god's sake put a DME at the end of the runway, unlike the morons who put in the CS 33 LLZ and didn't bother putting in a DME to go with it on the threshold
The CS 33 LLZ DME was made to read the same as the CS DME to prevent moron pilots from conducting the 33 LLZ approach using the wrong DME! The 2.6nm difference would put an aircraft 820' low if the wrong DME was used. Saving us from ourselves!

[Cornholio]

You mean saving morons from themselves. Don't put us all in the same bucket.

[BankAngle50]

LetsGoRated.

Hummm! Rather nasty response to some of my suggestions and procedures I learnt whilst with an oversea airline. I don’t think there was one ounce of constructive criticism in any of your responses. You sledge me and my qualifications without knowing what my experience. Who said i learnt to fly at an aeroclub anyway?

Yes I did operate to OOL over these days in question.

RE: my cheaky Alternates comment. The point you missed, but it seems everyone else got, was the pressure we can put on ourselves to always get in. As highlight in many crashes. Every situation needs to be assessed individually and I’m not saying you mustn’t try a few goes, but when it’s paternally obvious you wont get in below the MDA, then its time to consider the alternate and not commercial pressures.


RE: Monitored Approach. Have you ever been trained to do them. Have you done them in LVP? They are an excellent procedure and increase safety and the % chance you will get in. Do you now why we do them overseas? Do you understand the biological limitations with your eye and why these procedures were developed? Do you know why Cathay, American, S/African, SQ all do them? All I’m saying is, give us the facts why you slag off the monitored approach procedure. Monitored Approach are bloody great and worked well with my previous employer. Why not consider them?

"Thank god these pilots are getting paid serious dollars to look after us."
Ha! If you honeslty think that, what more needs to be said. Our pay is a Joke! Yes, my choice to come back and earn nothing, but dont state bullsh1t like we are well paid.
Perhaps you have already identified yourself as a Jetstar pilot.
God help us if they give you a left seat! You expel and authority gradient that is off the scale and obviously with all your vast Australia never been anywhere, LSALT never above A100, I know it all attitude; the FO’s must love flying you.

[Cornholio]

Ho hum...... You keep mentioning LVP. I hope you're not operating under LVP into Cooly, Mr. IQ50. That would be really interesting.

Did you perform an AutoLand? How did the touchdown feel??? :rolleyes:

As for monitored approaches... as you would know by now, real men don't need to do them unless the CP says to in the ops manual, as in during CAT TOO or CAT TREE.

Anyone who introduces monitored approaches around here like ******** airlines did when they were around is a sissy.

:uhoh:

:hmm:

:zzz:

[BankAngle50]

MR IQ20.

Monitored App is better suited to NPA and has no exclusivity to ILS no matter what Cat. Thanks for the Second Officer input though!

[Cornholio]

Actually most airlines don't even do them during a CAT TOO or CAT TREE so there goes your credibility around here.

This is SIMILAR but not quite the same. Kinda like the way the *******s say "same same but different..." with that idiotic look on their faces.

I don't think you know what you're talking about.

:confused:

:rolleyes:

:hmm:

:zzz:

[LetsGoRated]

Bank Angle

You are speaking utter rubbish!! Your complete lack of understanding with regards mon app & LVP and as they apply to Australian ops attests to that. Have a read of the Jepps one day!! Don’t give me that "overseas we do this" crap!! Spent a hell of a long time in one of "your" above mentioned airlines. With your total lack of understanding of these issues, I would be very surprised if you have operated a jet with any of these airlines.
Criticism? You infer questionable operational decisions by crews without being on the flight deck??
Q: How many years have you operated a jet to LVP at airports across the globe?
A: None. If you did you might have a bit more understanding of them and when they're applied and to what type of approaches!!
I've conducted hundreds of monitored approach’s and I can honestly say that it makes absolutely no f^&%ing difference on the outcome. If they are a part of your SOP's then you do them. As for being trained for them… yeah what all of 30 minutes!! The biological limitations of the eye – give me a break, you’re supposed to be flying an airliner not the f^&king space shuttle!!
You're right, got no idea of your quals, but looking at your comments critical of fellow professionals at YBCG and YSCB EGPWS stuff, I'll bet my left one that its F^&K ALL!! You have cursed yourself and one day you just might find you’re own arse hanging in the breeze.

BTW

"Thank god these pilots are getting paid serious dollars to look after us."

Read para again, I was being sarcastic.
:ok:

[Ausatco]

Uncommon Sense said I seem to recall it took a looooong time before SY RWY 25 got one as well. Westerlies during the bush fires was 'interesting' when VD was only option. The only reason SY got an ILS on 25 was to increase the use of RWY 25 for noise sharing. Ie, Political reasons, not operational.

99% of the time the weather that requires the use of RWY 25 for arrivals for operational reasons is CAVOK.

AA

[Capn Bloggs]

Fathom,

The CS 33 LLZ DME was made to read the same as the CS DME to prevent moron pilots from conducting the 33 LLZ approach using the wrong DME! The 2.6nm difference would put an aircraft 820' low if the wrong DME was used. Saving us from ourselves!

If the chart limitations and profile for the 33LLZ were based on the closest DME ie at the threshold of 33, then "morons" would be 820ft/2.6nm high, not low, if they used the wrong (in this case CS 113.0) DME, would they not?

[Capt Fathom]

You may have me there Bloggs..

..but they were more concerned about the opposite scenario.
If there is a profile based on the CS DME, and you flew that charted profile using the distance(DME) from the 33 thresold, you would be low.

To keep it simple, if there are two profiles and two DMEs, it's only a matter of time before it gets stuffed up.

Getting off the subject slightly.

[Capn Bloggs]

Arrrh but Fathom, the same situation applies. Use the closest DME for all profiles. And besides, 15 has a glideslope.
But back to the thread: we should have stuck with MLS and Multi Mode Receivers. These famous curved wiffodill Cat 1 GPS Approaches are many moons off, despite the rhetoric.
And I happen to like Monitored Approaches. Why would you, in crap conditions, let the right hand seater try to put it on the ground? I'm not saying mandate it, but it should be a round in the magazine, regardless of the visibility.

[Uncommon Sense]

Today was another beauty to resurrect this thread from last month.

Saw around 15 missed approaches. For about a two hour period only one successful one (not counting a VFR - but thats another story).

What I did not get, and perhaps someone from the local 737 operator that doesnt have a kangaroo can answer, is why after a couple of misses and diverting to BN, you then refuel and go straight back down there 50NM to miss out again!? Then rejoin the fray trying to get back in to BN? Now I assuming with the same passengers ex- SY / ML / AD - if so it just didn't seem to make much operational or financial sense to me when a phone call or even monitoring the frequency would say the best (and cheapest) place is on the ground.

Or do I have it wrong and they were repositioning to try and get back on shed?

Don't get me wrong - it makes great TV (the green one), and lots of fun from our end, but it is kind of mysterious in it's logic!

[Pushin_Tin]

If they really insist on maintaining YBCG as a jet port, Gold Coast Airport Corp. could do a lot worse than upgrading the runway lighting to a 6 stage omni directional bit of kit. In the last two decades I have worked there, the common experience I receive from the "customers" is that the runway is often the last feature sighted in the reduced vis (SE stream weather)

Failing that....extend the rail to Tweed/Coolangatta and I'll get you a tidy sum for the real estate. ETA 19R at YBBN circa 2007!

Toodles