Radar Monitoring

[ATCO2]

Dear ATCOs,

What do you do in case of radar monitoring?
I have been to some countries where some ATCOs provide radar monitoring. Some of them in that case provide radar separation during radar monitoring and some of them separate traffic procedurally.

Please comment.

Regards,

[niknak]

In the UK (civilian) ATCOs are required to state the type of service being used, either radar, procedural or just flight information.

We are outside Controlled airspace at my unit and on the rare occassions we operate procedurally most of us will look at the radar for unknown traffic, ensure levels are being adhered to or for anything out of the ordinary.
This is not written in our unit instructions, but I would say it comes under the heading "of duty of care" to tell an aircraft if he's about to be zapped by another or is not at the level you expect it to be, along with making full use of all the equipment available to ensure safety is maintained.

[PPRuNe Radar]

There might be some confusion here as to what we are talking about.

It might be the 'radar monitoring' required when traffic operating on two different ATS routes are separated by less than the minimum required by ICAO for unmonitored separation standards. This will be dependent on the RNP standard applicable to the routes.

If memory serves me correctly, it's something like a minimum of 15NM between centrelines for no monitoring requirement (in RNP5 airspace) and 12NM for routes which can be radar monitored but do not require explicit radar separation being applied (e.g. both aircraft locked on headings).

[ATCO2]

Hi all,

Thanks for your answers.

Just to clear some things.

If you have two acft flying oposite and you see that they passed one another, you apply radar separation of 4/5/6 Nm separation or you wait for 10 Nm what procedural separation is. I am talking about separation of acft when you provide 'radar monitoring' service.
One more thing, if you provide 'radar monitoring' service, do you use the phrase ' ABC xxx 'identified' ?

Thanks in advance,

Regards

[jovica]

According to ICAO Doc. 4444, in the definitions, you will find that Radar monitoring is The use of radar for the purpose of providing aircraft with information and advice relative to significant deviations from nominal flight path, including deviations from the terms of their air traffic control clearances. If you pay attention to what it says, no "provision of radar services" is mentioned. That indicates that, when monitoring, you are NOT allowed to use radar as an separation tool (vectoring, etc.).

When it comes to Spacing between parallel tracks or between parallel RNAV route centre lines based on RNP type (Annex 11, chapter 3),

3.4.1 Procedural environments
d) RNP5 (or RNP4 or better) - SUR — Procedural-pilot position reports: Spacing:
30.6 km (16.5 NM) in a unidirectional system
33.3 km (18 NM) in a bi-directional system;
3.4.2 Radar environments
b) RNP5 - SUR — Radar which meets existing standards: Spacing:
18.5-27.8 km (10-15 NM);

Hope this helps
J.

[loubylou]

Adrian Adams - In an approach environment - the callsign of the station would be either xxx radar or xxx control, and the service would either be an approach radar service or an approach control service - this would denote the service you're under

louby

[Adrian Adams]

Adrian Adams - In an approach environment - the callsign of the station would be either xxx radar or xxx control, and the service would either be an approach radar service or an approach control service - this would denote the service you're under



So are you saying at places like Lydd and Manston etc with procedural approach (no radar) when they are controlling me, they should tell me I am under "control"? I don't think this is correct and have certainly never heard it before.

When under a radar service I can see that they have to tell me and I agree what type of radar service I am receiving but I don't think its the case of "control" when being controlled procedurally.

PS. I am talking about flight within the UK airspace.

[Turn It Off]

In the case of procedural services surely the unit would notify itself as

"xxx approach"

if its a radar service

"xxx Radar" or maybe " xxx Director"

Just talking in an approach / approach radar environment

[Adrian Adams]

Turn It Off, yes this is the way I understand it.

I was always told the way to determine what type of serivce/control/information you would get a chance of getting* from an individual unit would be to know the callsign of the unit you are calling, and it is for this reason ATC will always state their own callsign when making their first call to an aircraft ie. "N757RG Manston Radar/Manston Approach/Manston Tower, London Information or whoever, pass your message".

*Obviously, these days when talking to radar, we have to readback what type of Radar service I'm getting!

[Simtech]

My local unit uses the phrase "G-XX, approach control service, non-radar".

[JBG]

Could anyone please, share with us the genuine experiences in Radar Monitoring directly from Ops room? Which are the tasks that we can perform? Please give us some hints? Thanks.

[The Fat Controller]

We have some routes in Scottish airspace, over the North Sea which are laterally separated by 12-18 miles or so.

This is not enough for a non-radar environment, so we have to monitor the track-keeping of aircraft flying theses routes.

Separation is deemed to exist provided we monitor these routes using radar.

Our radar minima are 5 or 10 miles depending on distance from the radar head.

The service provided is RADAR CONTROL as it is Class C airspace above FL195 and we are NOT obliged to inform aircraft they are identified at any time even when we change the SSR codes on transfer from Copenhagen.

In the UK we WILL advise an aircraft that it is identified and it's position if it is in Glass F or G airspace when we commence a radar service.

Outside CAS the service provided by a non-radar airfield is APPROACH CONTROL, the relevant callsign will be "XXXX Approach".

They will provide separation (standard vertical or non-radar and local deemed separations) to IFR flights that place themselves under their jurisdiction and allocate terrain-safe levels to arrivals and departures and pass airways joining clearances etc

[chevvron]

Don't forget Procedural Service will change in March next year at the same time that 'radar' ATSOCAs will no longer be called 'radar'!!.

[JBG]

Thank you guys.
I am speaking more about non radar environment with ATCos having lets say APP rating.
The definition is clear:
"According to ICAO Doc. 4444, in the definitions, you will find that Radar monitoring is The use of radar for the purpose of providing aircraft with information and advice relative to significant deviations from nominal flight path, including deviations from the terms of their air traffic control clearances." And as Jovica said "no provision of radar services is mentioned".
But what in case of significant deviations from nominal flight path which can develope into violation of safety. If "information" doesnt work the"Advice" to avoid colision could be only "turn left, right, climb etc." Isnt it already provision of radar service?

[SINGAPURCANAC]

Could someone explain to me what is the point to have radar monitoring instead of full radar service? :ugh:
@Jovica,
nice to see your post again:ok:

[JBG]

If the unit is defined as combine TWR APP and it is the best way taking into consideration the kind and amount of traffic, terrain etc. then you need to double the staff in order to separate TWR with APP to have Radar service. And no management wants to pay 20 instead of 10 ATCos.
But.But there is an operational radar and here we are-Radar monitoring.
I would appreciate any suggestions?
Thanks.