View Full Version : Marrakech (RAK) airport: accident waiting to happen!

14th Aug 2007, 09:54
In my own personal opinion, Marrakech is by far the most dangerous destination in our network.

1. Most of the time they use opposite RWY’s for landing and takeoff (10 for landing and 28 for takeoff)
2. No published app for rwy 28, not even circling minima, so just visual app available for 28
3. No published SID’s or STAR’s
4. ATC is done in (poor) English and French at the same time.
5. No radar available
6. Presence of small, slow military training a/c flying with transponder switched off
7. ATCO’s with very questionable capabilities and situational awareness
8. Apparent lack of coordination between different controllers

To illustrate this, let me tell what recently happened to me flying there:

I approached MAK vor from the North in clear CAVOK weather. The ATIS announced rwy 28 center (sic) (they only have one rwy) as active with wind at 280/4.
I was told by APP that we were nr 2 for landing with nr 1 ten miles ahead of us. As usual the APP was unwilling or unable to clearly state which rwy we would be getting. ( experience in RAK learns that information provided in their recently installed ATIS means nothing!)
When we were in the MAK hold at FL 70 turning inbound to the VOR, we were told by APP to descent to alt 3200’ and to contact TWR. In our readback we requested once more which RWY we would be getting and got a reply that we would be told by TWR.
As we saw that the nr 1 was on left base for rwy 28, to avoid further delay, we contacted the TWR with the message: "Marrakech Tower, bonjour, charter 123, turning inbound to the VOR, leaving FL70, descending 3200 ft, requesting visual approach rwy 28."
(MAK VOR is located on the centreline a few miles before rwy 10, so when turning inbound to the vor, you are on final course for rwy 10)
TWR’s reply was: “charter 123, cleared for visual approach 28, report left downwind 28”
So there I was, happily descending to 3000’ (=circuit altitude, 1500’ AGL) descending through 4500’ when joining left downwind. At that time I heard someone call TWR (in French): “TWR, callsign, at what alt is the Airbus that just flew right over me?” TWR: “he’s at 3200’. A/C (French): “ strange, because he just flew over me”
I can tell you we immediately felt very uncomfortable in our cockpit and doubled the sharp lookout we were already doing. As it was clear that the danger was behind us we continued the circuit an landed on 28 without further event.

During taxi I asked TWR for the position of the traffic that reported seeing us. It turned out it was light mil. a/c orbiting at 4000’ at the beginning of left downwind for 28. When I repeated the instruction that had been given to me by himself and by APP, he stuttered that in that case I should have been at 3200’ when starting downwind.

I told him that was wrong since no such instruction was ever issued. I complained about the presence of the a/c at that location while I was cleared for the visual, and the fact that, whatever my altitude was, at least such traffic should have been called out to me.

I never saw the other traffic, nor did I have something on the TCAS display, but with hindsight I think we came very close to a mid air collision.

Most of my colleagues share my opinion about RAK and can tell similar stories about this airport.

I can assure you that I am extremely careful when I fly to Marrakech and advise everybody to be the same when going there!

Safe landings,

14th Aug 2007, 10:46
Sabenaboy, I couldn't agree more. RAK is one place I really don't look forward to going to, and always make sure I take plenty of extra fuel. I think I've flown the straightforward approach to 10 once. Every other time I've been in there its been a nightmare, between the confusing and unclear ATC, to the lack of circling minima and as you say the departures and arrivals on opposite runways.


14th Aug 2007, 14:21
I for one will not be flying to these destinations as we enter the Holy Month of Ramaddan where sleeping and poor functioning ATC will be the norm for the 28 day period as they recover from a 3am breakfast followed by enforced daytime starvation.

14th Aug 2007, 14:39
Oh dear, more of how it could be better elsewhere, not up to our standard, etc.

New guys, again, just finding out that it ain't like it should/could be, ATC-wise, in many parts of the 'undeveloped' world.

Of course, it can't happen at home, no siree it can't...but it does.:ugh::ugh:
Just one example...
Holding at LOGAN a few years ago, inbound to LHR, the ATIS clearly states 10km visibility, no clouds, no delay.
No, of course not, until I ask the Flight Engineer to check what is happening on the LHR ground frequency...imagine our surprise when LVP are starting and ground is having problems seeing aircraft on the ramp.

Off to LGW we go, just ahead of the rush that followed, and when on apprach to LGW, the LHR ATIS is still at 10k, with the surface vis/RVR at 800 meters, and sinking fast.

New guys just have to realise that some are not quite as perfect as those at 'home'.:ugh::}

14th Aug 2007, 15:12
Sabenaboy, a reply from someone who flies very regularly from RAK,

1. RWY 10 gives with with 35° C and 9 kts headwind still a lower RTOW compared to RWY 28, the controllers are aware of this and follow the request of pilots for the opposite take-off whenever possible. Since RWY 10 is the only instrument RWY, pilots prefer this one for landing.
2. Royal Air Maroc has a NDB 28 approach supplied by Jeppesen. No, other companies do not have this and there is also no AIP NDB approach for RWY 28.
3. Correct, the departure for 28 required to climb to MAK before turning north or southwest. There are Danger Areas very close to the airport, North West GMD-16 and North East GMD-17, both just leaving a corridor to the north, another one just north of the airport GMD-5. East and South you have GMD-18 and GMD-19. A lot of coordination with military offices are in progress to get SIDs and STARs established.
4. English is not their first language but, like in Spain, Italy or France, the language they use is an ICAO language and a complaint needs to be addressed at a different level. Their English is better than in most holiday resort airports I fly or flew to recently.
5. Yes, for cicvil traffic there is no radar, like in many places in Europe with even more traffic.
6. Correct, like the much slower VFR training traffic at some of the European places I have to operate to.
7. ATCOs are all military staff, most of them trained in Europe.....
8. There are maximum 3 stations involved, Casablanca on 126.7 and they are only handing you over once RAK has received all details, from RAK there is a handover to Casablanca at a specified level and track / heading, like in other non-radar places.
Within RAK there is the approach and the tower, mostly approach and tower are operated at the same time on one frequency by the same person.

I do not want to defend RAK, I had my own surprising moments there. The airport elevation is 1536 ft, circling at 3000 will not give you the 1500 ft you claim. About 3 NM south of the airport, your downwind leg, is the border of the GMD-18, from GND-FL90, if the military trainer was in his assigned airspace holding to allow for your approach, there may have been a close approach between you both. Just to show how close this is, the go-around for RWY10 "scratches" about 1/2 mile into this GMD-18, even drawn like this in the AIP.
Yes, there is a lot of room for improvement, looking at the whole picture leads far away from the controllers at RAK, it is the system and the certified uncontrolled traffic in and out of places like RAK.

Reduce speed, fly at reasonable circling speed, try to follow all published heights, watch all the restrictions around these airports, the only way to survive, ahhh and tell your company that a quick turnaround is simply not possible as the approach into RAK may take 15-20 minutes because I will have to depart from RWY28..... :}

14th Aug 2007, 16:20
Well, Nightrider, why in this case ATCOs in Juba, Sudan are much more professional and quite fluent in English, despite their really awful life conditions? They also do all they have to do according to ICAO, but they do it quite acceptably. So, for me it doesn't matter indeed, I think you just must be a professional, otherwise you will always be one of those "stupid idiots" who creates lots of troubles for other "sky users". Isn't it? :)

Ahh, yeah I've forgotten to say: English isn't my first language, as well. But we do understand each other, don't we? ;)
P.S. This thread may last for years, as there are hundreds of airfields similar to Marrakech/Multan/East Timor etc....

14th Aug 2007, 16:39
I'm sorry guys but I flew in there today, and I'm a guy with a broad view on things, but RAK := is an accident waiting to happen...

I for one, think that we as pilot's should be more assertive when flying into RAK. I learned my lesson today after going around after the most ****ty approach control service I received in my live.

It's not my intention to disrespect the people of marrocco, but if things ain't right they just aint righ't. Things need to be adressed there urgently

Keep your eyes open guys an gals let's not bump into each other:uhoh:

14th Aug 2007, 19:52
JAR OPS requires you to audit the airport before you go. The Chief Pilot should sign off the audit, and the relevant operational procedures, flight deck briefings and your training plan before you start a route to a difficult airport.

Some airlines have whole departments that carry out surveys before they go. Some contract out the surveys to specialist companies.

If this is not done, why not ask the union representative to bring this up with the management at the next meeting? I have done surveys where the results ended up with Flight Operations telling Commercial to drop the route request.

slip and turn
14th Aug 2007, 22:46
Unbelievable talking about this as if it is some idiot at the office no-one likes. Who is trusted to make safe decisions to COMPLETELY avoid such hazards as identified here ? UR!

I see no evidence yet of a consensus anytime soon about what to do next.

ATPLs for goodness sakes not flying clubbers. This isn't warning each other about some difficult MATZ/DA/RA in the local airspace near your club.

411, surprised at your head-banging derision about new guys who expect better. I am sure you agree that old guys who've routinely accepted second best on and off for years counselling young guys to do the same, but somehow to be extra careful are not exactly CRM role models for the future, so what exactly are these pilots to do?

Who will stop going there first?

Not a union matter at all.

If as reported here, then this is a currently dangerous pilot operational matter. Like bald eagle says that means U decide! Don't just keep going there hoping it will improve.

14th Aug 2007, 23:23
If the Chief Pilot signed the audit you are ethically and duty bound to raise your issues with him [gender neutral] before your next rotation to Marrakech. Lovely city though. Love the place.

15th Aug 2007, 07:53
Had my share of white hairs there too!

We where approaching RWY 10 when we heared and saw this 737 taking off from RWY 28, did a go-around for a visual 28, and after landing when arguing with the controllers it was quite obvious that they had completely lost control awareness...

Be very very cautious there, even if you speak both english and french as they do not use standard phraseology at all and are sure that they are doing all right...

LRdriver II
15th Aug 2007, 10:20
Bandit country... all in a days work for us corporate guys. Like anywhere else be cautious, take no crap from ATC and be in charge of your aircraft.Cant really see what the problem is, you are all pros and maybe having been wrapped in cotton wool in the euro area has made you all forget basic airmanship.

My favorites in RAK are when the local airlines try to cut in front of us (me?.. take up the hold whilst an airliner 10nm behind gets priority.. and when the airport shuts down operations whilst the King arrives/departs (felt bad for surprised LR45 crew that came in and was told 5 min out to go elsewhere with NO explanation).

15th Aug 2007, 10:30
1. The main reason that everybody prefers rwy 28 for T.O., pilots and ATC included, is that there’s no parallel taxiway leading to the holding point of rwy 28. Using 28 means you have to backtrack the whole rwy which gives an unacceptable rwy occupation time with the traffic at RAK getting busier every season. Marrakech urgently needs a parallel taxiway!
2. What’s so difficult about publishing circling minima’s?? I wonder how first-timers coming to RAK at night fly a visual approach to 28? People flying there regularly know there is no terrain or obstacles within the first few miles south and south-east of the airport, but there’s no way you can be sure of that by looking at the charts with the high MSA’s and no circling minima.
3. Even more complicating factors for RAK! Anyway, if I get cleared for a visual app. I still expect to get separation from other traffic! (Unless it’s called out to me and I acknowledge visual contact of course)
4. True, RAK ATCO’s are not worse then other ATCO’s in other holiday destinations like Egypt, Tunisia, Turkey or Agadir. The problem is that they SHOULD be better, because of all the other structural problems that have a negative impact on safety.
5. Does that mean that they have secondary radar for military traffic? If so, go kick their buts and make them use it for the civilians as well with some competent controllers behind the scope!
6. Yes, correct, but in places like Sharm or Hurghada e.g. you don’t have them.
7. see 4
8. APP and TWR on one freq? Yep, most of the time, but not when I had my close call! Two people and two freq’s that day and they were not communicating!

Here’s what I think RAK needs urgently to improve safety dramatically:
A parallel taxiway, SIDs and STARs keeping arriving and departing traffic apart, RADAR with reasonably good ATCOs, and an approach (or at least circling minima) for the 28.

One more anecdote about RAK: last year a controller reported the ceiling as broken at 100 ft. While Casablanca volmet reported the same metar as BKN at one-zero-thousand. Even when I asked directly if he didn’t mean to say it was at 10000’ he kept insisting it was BKN at 100 ft, while we could see the airport clearly when below the cover at FL 100. They probably learned him that in Europe, did they? :D

Oh, by the way, ask the RAk'is to remove their ridiculous requirement to make a 180° at the end of rwy 28 only. Some controllers make you respect that rule and some let you turn on the rwy itself, reducing the rwy occupation time by valuable minutes.

Happy landings,

Hussar 54
15th Aug 2007, 10:54
Had an aircraft based there for almost two years and I actually considered moving there myself for a while to avoid the commuting....
Regular twice weekly OPS without too many serious problems, if I remember correctly, and I suppose that helped when faced with some of the problems and ( if I can spell it ) idiosyncracies which you have to put up with once you leave European airspace in anything less than a 737-size aircraft....
Let's just say standards of ATC and local airmanship in RAK should be and could be better but is still cartloads better than the majority of the neighbouring countries to the South and East....
Did any of you guys try ever try to earn a living up and down the West African Coast ? Then you'd be happy for rosters that include RAK.....

15th Aug 2007, 11:43
Comparing the bad with the worse doesn´t make the bad better.

It´s always worse somewhere else. Pointing that out does not help a lot, really.

sabenaboy made a good point here, and raised awareness concerning RAK. Why trying to play his arguments down?

15th Aug 2007, 11:49
Oh, by the way, ask the RAk'is to remove their ridiculous requirement to make a 180° at the end of rwy 28 only.

Well, as the poster has eleven years in commercial jets, perhaps a broader knowledge would be expected regarding the required use of turning bays by many airport authorities.:rolleyes:

I sometimes wonder if many rather basic subjects have been left out of the training many of these new(er) pilots receive, instead of how to learn how to push the buttons on the FMC in twelve seconds flat, thereby achieving GIGO.

Hussar 54
15th Aug 2007, 12:05
Sorry if my post has been written in a way that causes a misunderstanding....
I'm not trying to defend RAK - I did say that standards there should and could be better....
All that I was trying to say is that once out of European Airspace you have to expect that standards are worse and that you have to be prepared for the environment that you know you're going to find - whether you are a first-timer or a regular....
Unfortunately I was a regular but never once did I forget that unless you are giving 110% here, then it all becomes a lot harder....

15th Aug 2007, 13:18
Where-O-Where is ICAO when you need them?

slip and turn
15th Aug 2007, 14:06
Where-O-Where is ICAO when you need them?Maybe if we use their language and post GMMX here too then brains will engage.

Meantime those at the sharp end need to decide on the record before they fly, please.

15th Aug 2007, 21:32
Have had my share of surprises in RAK as well... and also in AGA... you know it and are ready for it... anything can happen :uhoh:
Still I like to operate to these kind of destinations (we could add many an Italian, Spanish, Greek etc airport, could we not) as it gives one the opportunity to exercise the so praised airmanship. It is interesting, it is challenging and rewarding.
Or do you guys really prefer the CDA ILS vectored standard taxi routes program :bored:

live 2 fly 2 live

16th Aug 2007, 16:00
i flying to gmmx since 2years and yes it s a very unsafe airport

i had the same bad surprise 3months ago when we came from cdg and when casa control told us that the field was closed for a royal flight ....try to imagine my face once again holding approching for rwy 10 but with more than 10kts downwind....a nice g/A....
it s one of the most dangerous filed in north africa and in morocco
and the taxing too is funny with pax embarking desambarking in front of your plane while you taxing.....
for information the ndb is CNZ


Iva harden
17th Aug 2007, 10:19
I have been flying into RAK for many years, it is slowly getting better but it is a place that needs to be treated with a lot of respect, plenty of gotchas....elevation, a high ridge to the north and the Atlas mountains to the south. If you take it easy, slow down and configure then there should be no probs. Keep your eyes peeled and if you are not happy confirm everything with RAK as many times as is necessary. I would always take plenty of fuel as you could be held due to departing traffic. It is a bit busier now with the open skies agreement, but it is not that bad......slowly slowly catch ya monkey. If there is VIP traffic then you could be waiting an even longer amount of time. It is different but we are all well trained and should be able to cope, it is not a slick place like LGW/ LHR so do not go there with those expectations. I believe radar will be available in the not to distant future. ( thats the rumour ). ASR's are worth filling in as it will give the company safety depts info to present at RAK....they do listen at RAK,it just takes time and understanding:ok:

21st Aug 2007, 06:05
There is one only sentence Really Present in the Minds of those ATCO's:
All the rest are lil'details:p
I simply dont like GMMX ATC:=
(Im talking about the ATControl, the City its Beautiful:ok:)

ATC Watcher
21st Aug 2007, 09:21
I love these posts, always the same contents after 2 pages, only the location differs.
No , the rest of the world is not the same as the UK, and procedures and ATC quality will differ with location, just like anything else in that perticular country. If one expect the same level of expertise, consideration and service,than " at home " then we should educate and pay everyone else the same as in the UK.
In the world today , you mostly get what you pay for.

If you have a real safety issue with an airport , write a report, file an airprox, write to your management and even to IFALPA. General remarks about bad procedures and bad ATC on internet will not get you anywhere, especially is the place is run by the military ( as it seems is the case in RAK ) Military brass do not surf the internet.

As for ICAO, it only issues standards and recommended practices, They have no police or army to enforce their application.The individual States are responsible for doing this.

22nd Aug 2007, 18:05
Who would go to an alternate airport with LHR being the destination when LHR visibilty drops to 800 meters ?

411 A ?

22nd Aug 2007, 22:41
411A - what a/c were you in and what year was this?

23rd Aug 2007, 01:49
About twelve years ago, Craggenmore, type L1011-500.
Really no excuse for the LHR ATIS broadcasting 10km, while LVP starting and the approach controller saying nothing about this...after holding for 50 minutes, time is appropriate to head for the alternate.

23rd Aug 2007, 02:36
after holding for 50 minutes, time is appropriate to head for the alternateGood man! I wish we had 50 mins holding fuel with a predicted 10km vis....those were the days eh..! :}

24th Aug 2007, 02:18
I agree with the concerns about RAK.
One of the things that scare me the most there, is when I am turning final on 28, what will happen if I have to go around???
The stack has 2-3 airplanes, T-37s are zooming over your head.
I would be heading staight to the VOR, climbing at an altitude already "occupied" by the a/c cleared for visual on 28. It would probably be safer to stay at 1000agl, fly straight and look out....
PS couple of weeks ago, being heavily delayed, we would arrive there 0100 local. Foolishly I thought that my usual 20min holding fuel would not ne needed so late at night and I left it in the bowser. :ooh: Never again. The place was busier than ever !

24th Aug 2007, 12:45
There are a number of airports around the world, even those that have radar, that share the same problems as RAK. One which comes to mind was last years while on approach to Chicago O’Hare (KORD) during a peak period, an MD-80 didn’t clear the runway as instructed thus causing a few go-arounds, including myself, thus disrupting other arrival sequences. It has happened to me over the years at other major airports around the world as well. You take it in stride and get on with it.

Some airports are subject to more confusion than others, and the lack of radar control and greater aircraft separation is sometimes confused with incompetence rather than making do with the equipment that you have.
At RAK and similar airports, I make regular position reports, perhaps not primarily for the traffic controller’s benefit, but for other aircraft in the area.

The good news is the weather is usually VFR in RAK and being a non radar airport, visual vigilance can be maintained with both sets of eyes out of the cockpit. Like many of you, I too, have had to hold over the RAK VOR waiting for clearance to land, even with no apparent aircraft in the air or on the ground waiting to takeoff. It can be frustrating, but there’s nothing you can do about it except take extra fuel for the hold and arrival, have an extra cup of tea or coffee, and eventually, you’ll be cleared for the approach. Besides we are all building jet.

22nd Sep 2007, 22:07
I think there is a misunderstanding here.

The problem with RAK is not the lack of radar alone. Lack of radar is not uncommon all over the world.

The problem is that they have controllers with extremely low knowledge of english (for a controller) AND there is one person operatng the positions of ground, tower and approach (procedural) at the same time.

If you add the ever increasing traffic, the T-37s AND the lack of radar, the mix is quite volatile.

23rd Sep 2007, 20:11
once i talked in rak to a female military controller,on the tarmac ; very cute with a lot of common sence,and aware of all the time the airlines loose on the turnaround because of slow militay trafic ( flight school) and poor atc handling, she felt so sorry and she said everybody is working on it . the secret is there is a prohibited area 2 nm east of 28 threshold that why they use 28 t/o and 10 for landing

24th Sep 2007, 13:15
Arara , when you say "the secret is" , do you mean it is kept secret? Because there is no such area "2nm east". There is one to the north (usually inactive) and two ENE and ESE but quite far away.

26th Sep 2007, 04:37
I've been flying to RAK for 10 years, as other posters have said it's no different to any third world non radar airport. The unique thing with RAK is that the can really take you by surprise.

Just carry an extra 40mins fuel and plan on burning 30 mins more than your trip log projects. ALWAYS expect a couple of holds due to conflicting arrivals using rwy 10 and departures using rwy 28.

If in doubt tell ATC what you will be doing - they usually go along with any suggestions.

27th Sep 2007, 18:15
Different airports same posts. bla bla bla. I agree 411. Life is more than radar vectors for ILS. DSA? full of light aircraft and so on and so on

5th Oct 2009, 11:12
I had an other interesting situation at Marrakech last week.

The Atis broadcasted: RWY 28 in use 270/4 6000 scattered at 800 ft, broken 20000ft. While approaching Marrakech below the high cloud layer, we could indeed see there was a low cloud layer (broken to overcast) covering the whole airport region.

So on initial contact with RAK app we requested the ILS 10. His answer: It will depend on the traffic! I replied by asking him the latest cloudbase and was told the same as in the Atis: S008. So we then told him with we NEEDED the ILS to 10 as a visual to rwy28 was impossible with the existing conditions. The ATCO simply didn't seem to understand what I was asking or why I was asking for the ILS.

We had to enter the MAK hold due to the usual departing traffic from rwy10. So while we were holding we couldn't see the airport at all. So we repeated once more that we needed the ILS to RWY 10.

Guess what? 3 mins later the atco said: descent alt 3200', cleared for visual app 28. Grrr! :* :( :E :=

me: negative! We need ILS10 due to clouds.
Atco (amazed voice): Oh, you want the the ILS10 (Didn't the guy ever listen to what I said???)
me: AFIRM!
Atco: Climb again FL60 in the MAK hold, two departures from rwy 28, expect 10' delay for the ILS app.

Being wise enough never to go to RAK without at least 30' extra fuel, I was glad to oblige (even if it seems more logical to me to give priority to landing A/C rather then to departing A/C in a case as this)

So, finally, 10' later, we were established on the loc 10 and transferred to TWR freq. At around 600ft AGL tower asked us if we had the rwy in sight. As we were still in the cloud layer, I honestly replied: Negative! As I regularly go to Marrakech, I already knew about their strange habit not to give landing clearance if the pilot hasn’t reported having the rwy in sight. (Is that a military ATC procedure?) He replied “continue”! I got my landing clearance a few seconds later from an other voice after I told him we were getting very close to the minimums and NEEDED the clearance NOW! Two seconds later we broke clouds AT the minima and were able to land.

So, here’s my advice for pilots going to Marrakech: Take plenty of extra fuel, be very careful going there, repeat your messages until you’re sure they’re understood by ATC, and, if you get close to minimums on the ILS just lie and tell them you’re visual with the runway if you want the ldg clearance. (Yeah, I know it’s stupid to lie but it’s easier then trying to explain the Marrakech atco’s that you don’t need to have the rwy in sight to get the landing clearance)

And here’s my advice for Marrakech’ ATCO’s (I’m hoping that one of them would happen to read this and actually understand English): Use the ILS with low cloudbase, LISTEN to what pilots say on the radio, don’t wait with issuing landing clearances on the ILS 10 until the pilot reports having the rwy in sight and, now that you have a parallel taxiway, use rwy 10 for takeoff as well when rwy 10 is used fore landing!

Let’s be careful out there,

ATC Watcher
5th Oct 2009, 14:36
I do not think MAK military controllers read PPrune Tech log. . Best way to have your message passed would be to file a report via your company , preferably in French.(should not a big issue for an ex-SN ? )

5th Oct 2009, 15:27
Dear ATC watcher,

Thanks for your reply.
I do realise that the probability of having a RAK atco reading (and understanding :} ) my post is near to zero. I also think that getting a reply to an official company report, (other then "under investigation") from Moroccan ATC is very, very unlikely. Maybe you will disagree, but I think that sending official reports to Marrakech would be just as useless as my posts on Pprune.

Here at least my "reports" will be read by pilots other then just the ones in my own company.

Sad but still true, I believe. :(


ATC Watcher
5th Oct 2009, 16:22
Thanks Sabenaboy. Military way of doing things is complex and (North) Africa is even more complex. When you mix the 2 it does not get better .:hmm:

My experience in ATC there is that to change things you need the soft approcah. Writing a report in such terms that you do not complain , but rather propose something to improve safety, has more chances to reach the correct person.
Because, like in Rome, the bringer of bad news (a complaint) is most likely to be shot, while the bringer of improvements (that he might put his name under) , has more chances to see the light of the higher echelons.
But in either case you will probably never get a written reply, you're right about that one.

5th Oct 2009, 18:50
Well, they did construct a parallel taxiway since I advised them to do so :cool: in my post of 15th august 2007 (http://www.pprune.org/tech-log/287988-marrakech-rak-airport-accident-waiting-happen.html#post3476314): Here’s what I think RAK needs urgently to improve safety dramatically:
A parallel taxiway,...

So, perhaps, they do read Pprune in Marrakech!?

Piltdown Man
5th Oct 2009, 19:31
Just out of interest, how many ASR's have you filled in about the place? The modern World only appears to work by paperwork - no paperwork, no change.


6th Oct 2009, 13:38
Just out of interest, how many ASR's have you filled in about the place?

@Piltdown Man: To be honest: not a single one!

(I know, I know... next you're going to tell that I should have and that it might have changed something in Marrakech. But frankly, I don't believe writing reports about Marrakech is worth the trouble... And in my company all pilots are already very aware of the conditions they can expect in RAK. I think it would be wasted paper and time...)

Ok, shoot! I'm ready for the bashing! :(

22nd Nov 2010, 10:19
heard rumors a german Citation was involved in a landing accident last Friday at GMMX.

Not found any piece of information elsewhere yet..

Can anyone shed light into this ?

23rd Dec 2010, 22:37
It was a Citation C-550 Bravo ( D-CALL ), Rumors saying they didn't shoot the Nitrogen-Bottle to lock the gear ( emergency gear extension)
and on 23.12.2010 GWT ( D-CCAB , C-550 went of the Rwy during T/O ( same Cpt.) ).

25th Dec 2010, 13:06
FYI; you can get your landing clearance just short before your wheels touch the tarmac. The DA/MDA is not a factor..