Only approach is NDB - is this 2008?

[fireflybob]

Inbound to a certain nameless airport in a large country in Europe which has no radar so all procedural. Notams show VOR u/s. Call to approach about 150 nm out to advise ATC that we would require ILS approach, then advised ILS out of service (nothing on Notams) and to expect locator approach.

On arrival completed locator approach - night vis 10km but raining.

One controller handling APP/TWR/GND on one frequency (Approach) so much R/T chat etc. and several calls by various a/c not responded to.

So I am sat thinking, is this 2008? That we have to fly a locator approach (ok yes I have done plenty of those over the years - long before FMC was even heard of!), we have to be proactive to find out what type of approach we can expect, the status of an essential approach aid is not on the NOTAMs! Is it right that one controller appears to be handling APP, TWR and GND?

Any comments?

[lorel]

I guess it would not hurt to mention the actual name of the airport as it might be a warning for our fellow airman. I think the airport is AHO, Alghero on Sardinia? Right?
This seems to happen every year. The annoying thing is that it takes them ages to do a flight check on the navaids as they are actually working.
Must be the bureaucracy.
The reason they say you can not fly the ILS is because there is no procedure to get you on there unless you have DME.
The fact that one contoller does everything is quite often seen in Europe. It does not make things easier especially when it's busy.

Lorel

[AMEandPPL]

Why is the airport "nameless" ? Most uncharacteristic on here !

"Say it as it is" . . . . . . "To hell with the consequences" . . . . ! !

Never mind just PPRuNe, it sounds as if air-safety in general is at risk at . . . . . well, wherever it is.

[Easy Ryder]

Sounds like Murcia (MJV) to me!

[Rainboe]

I am actually of the opinion that 50% of all that forest of print on Notams is actually incorrect, either out of date, plain incorrect, or not valid for some reason! If the field was just down to an NDB approach and the limits are OK, what is wrong with that? I actually enjoy these 'creative flying' approaches far more than just banging off another ILS. Some countries do seem to have quite restrictive budgets with regard to airport maintenance and staffing (even Gatwick appears very backwards at 4 am on a Sunday!). We just have to remember that our job is to get in (within limits), whatever the condition of the airport facilities!

[retrosgone]

Yes indeed, that would be Murcia once again. The VOR has been out of service for the larger part of this year, and the absence of navaids is Notam'd intermittently at best.

The VOR is controlled by the Spanish military, who don't seem prepared to maintain it or to give any idea when it will be back in service. The ILS is available, but there is no means of getting to it unless you have a Tacan - which is probably why the Spanish Airforce don't regard spending cash on the VOR as any kind of a priority. The end result is that lots of airliners end up doing locator approaches to an airfield with "interesting" ATC procedures - just like the 1930s!

I know that the local authorities are frustrated by the problem, but there is not much they can do without buying their own VOR (and they have considered it).

It is a pretty ludicrous situation, and of course safety is being compromised. The lack of timely Notam information to crews is pretty unforgivable too, though those of us who fly there regularly regard a "normal" service as a bonus.

You wouldn't get away with it in Northern Europe - just as well the weather in Spain is always perfect!

[fireflybob]

I actually enjoy these 'creative flying' approaches far more than just banging off another ILS.

Hey Rainboe, yes I am with you on that one too - all part of life's rich tapestry!

But I am asking the question is this state of affairs acceptable? It's different if we know that essential landings aids are off at the planning stage but when (theoretically) the first you know about this is when you are 3 minutes from the beacon is this really the world of modern ATC as it should be?

[AltFlaps]

MJV is getting more and more ridicuous ... and it WILL end in tears !!

Went there last week to be told the only available approach was a straight in visual (from the north) to R23. When we told the controller we were not visual, he really did not know what to do! He kept talking about other traffic that would prevent us flying the procedure...

The departure for R23 has (for us at least) has an emergency turn procedure. The tower controller (no radar and, cannot see the runway) gave us a straight ahead to 4000' clearence!

On top of that, there were no navaids available to fly a departure OR and emergency turn !!!!

Murcia, sort your sh1t out before someone ends up making a documentary about the crash! :*

[michaelknight]

Was there last week for the first time in 2 years and nothing has changed. NOTAMS that the NDB and VOR U\S planned on the ILS circling to land 23. Then the when we checked in, the ILS was U\S! Nothing in the NOTAMS that's the poor part.

MK

[ManaAdaSystem]

Common factors for a CFIT:

NPA at night into an airport surronded by high terrain.

I've had the same experience in another part of the world, and at that time we used GPS/FMC in lieu of a DME. We informed ATC and flew the ILS (which had an ident but no DME). I don't see the fun in flying an approach in torrential rain, using a NDB that is more likely to point at the nearest CB than give the correct indication. But then again, I'm probably a bigger chicken than most pilots out there.

We are supposed to get rid of all NDB's by a certain year?

[Rainboe]

I'd find it unacceptable in Northern Europe, but somewhere like Murcia where the problem is haze or flying into a sunset with very limited facilities is borderline. But, pilots MUST be prewarned to adequately plan and brief, and concealing the limited state of facilities in the hope everybody will go visual anyway is a bit naughty!

[Chap6168]

"Some countries do seem to have quite restrictive budgets with regard to airport maintenance and staffing (even Gatwick appears very backwards at 4 am on a Sunday!)"

Rainboe would you like to elaborate on these comments? maintenance? staffing?

[AMEandPPL]

MJV is getting more and more ridicuous ... and it WILL end in tears ! !

I'm sure that's absolutely true, and important in its own right . . . . . but has fireflybob actually confirmed that this was where he was referring to in the OP ? It now seems to have been assumed by all . . . . though at least one other contender was named.

[calypso]

Murcia is a military airfield that has in the last few years started to accept some civilian traffic and as such is not a large and well equiped airport. Surely if your airline chooses to fly there it must be on the understanding of the benefits and drawbacks that are implicit on such a destination. If you are uncomfortable with anything but radar vectors to an ILS approach just ask your airline to schedule the flights to Alicante a mere 30 miles away.

Whatever are we going to complain about next, steep approaches into City, high terrain near Innsbruck, windshear at Funchal, a short runway in Jersey... we are pilots, going to places where things are different should be part of the job. :ugh:

[Nearly Man]

Yes but, the Spanish want airlines to fly into there so they should update the airport.
I've had all sorts of nonsense there and it's a pain in the arse to be honest when you don't know what you're going to get. Don't forget we're not barnstormers and are expected to get people there in safety!

[captplaystation]

calypso
It is not because it is different it shouldn't be professional. Finding out that Notams/ ATIS don't reflect the actual situation 3 mins from an inbound fix is gash wherever it occurs. Last time it happened to me was in Austria, so it is not purely a Med thing ;)
In any case, procedures in many airlines ( including I think Bob's) is that you have to break off the approach , hold, and rebrief for the new approach, hardly the slick operation you would wish to orchestrate.
It is surely incumbent on any airport to advise, in a timely fashion, any deficiencies not advertised by Notam /ATIS (if applicable) to inbound traffic at the first opportunity. Even if one's cheapo company sends you to the back of beyond, that is merely being professional ,& cack all to do with the perceived or actual status of the Airport.

[calypso]

I do agree that changes should be in the Notams and should have made that clear.

I was mostly replying to people complaining that the spanish military does not fix the VOR or replace the TACAN with an ILS. Is like going to stay with friends and complaining about the size of the television, or that they don´t fix the washing machine. Is a small military airport and operating there has is own challenges, they are different from operating to a fully equiped large international airport.

[ComJam]

It is possible that the ILS had failed AFTER you had recieved the NOTAM's, leaving ATC with nothing but the Locator approach. A lot of the airports around Europe have no ILS engineering support at night.

I presume you didn't have to fly a "raw" NDB approach, more likely an FMS driven approach with you monitoring the ADF needle/s to ensure the aircraft is within the required track limits? (That's how we do it...i don't know about others) The only real drawback then being a higher approach minima.

Lucky the NDB was radiating really :ok:

[BOAC]

I presume you assessed this event (inadequate NOTAMS) as MOR'able, ffb? Would be interested in a summary of the response.

[Lurking123]

Devil's advocate

If you're not happy, at least file an MOR or, at the time, divert. A couple of none arrivals will soon make someone wake up.

[Fly380]

MJV is my local airport. I saw my son off there this morning to LGW. It is a great airport for SLF. Not the usual hustle and bustle of busy airports. I had no idea it was so lacking in landing aids etc. Reminds me of Lagos in the 70's/80's. (Probably still the same.). Anyway when the new runway at MJV is formally opened, there will be 24 hour civilian flights so maybe they will employ another ATC controller.:rolleyes:

[flown-it]

ComJam.
Your procedure is, IMO, the only way to go. Trouble is a lot of training departments are still in the dark ages...as are a lot of the regulatory agencies.
But those of you with a half decent FMS, load the NDB approach in the FMS, tune the NDB, display a needle and then let the machine do the work. LNAV and VNAV armed and the altitude selector set to MDA.
The magic will keep you on the approach track and cross the OM at the correct height. Leave it in VNAV to MDA or once inside the OM use V/S to get to MDA sooner. SAFE as houses, stress free and a no brainer. As to ComJam's higher minima...Why? You are still tracking the NDB, you are just tracking it using modern equipment.

[411A]

Must be nearly time for a lecture from the great god of the skies himself.....


God of the skies checking in...;)

7 hours, ASFKAP, however just a bit closer to Euroland time, at the present.
Lets see...most pilots should be able to complete the NDB approach, after all, it's part of the training to hold an ATPL.

Can't do this...?:ugh:
Find another job.

However, flown-it has quite a reasonable suggestion....use the automatics available in your new(er) aeroplanes.
Seems like a cinch to me.:rolleyes:

[Re-Heat]

It seems to me that the point is neither inability nor an unwillingness on the part of those doing the flying, but rather a complete lack of professionalism on the part of those maintaining the infrastructure and providing the necessary services.

We can all sit back and say - well, it is easy to fly with minimal navaids if you are skilled, but that misses the point entirely.

We no longer fly globally with a sextant and sliderule as it is totally unnecessary, and technological advances have moved hand in hand with safety to create today's culture.

So no, it is not acceptable for such services to be delivered in this day and age.

The best pilot and company culture is not the one that accepts the status quo, and relies on that basic flying ability, but the one that stands up to drive forward the robust, integrated technological and safety-based culture to which we have rightly become accustomed.


Rant off.

[Pizza Express]

411A

You do not know what you are talking about. This is a proc Lct App with no DME. This alone is no probs for a comercial pilot. The problem is that at MJV you don't know you are doing it until you are 20 Nm away and in crap wx with crap ATC it becomes a joke. It is also a very tight proc and if you have to do it in IMC unless you are 4000 or less overhead you have no chance in getting in. They clear you down "continue down 70" then tell you report ready base or some other crap that they make up on the spot. It's a joke. Last time I went the notam telling us that the only app was the lct "o" was not there and all nav aids were working. 20 nm from airport high because ALT would not give us lower "clear "o" app, we siad what about the VOR, reply oh yes its not working again sorry!!!! Very often this airport breaks down because the ATC is so bad, I have been flying there for 6 years now and it's not a safe environment for jets to be wizzing around. I have seen at least 5 times two aircraft cleared to the same level in the hold I have seen aircraft departing on 05 with inbounds at 7 mile to rwy 23. Half Spanish and Very bad English at the best of times. Out of all the places I have ever flown there is more chance of two jets hitting each other here than any other place in Europe. I would would rather stick a blinfold on and bimble about in the London TMA than put my faith in the controlling ability of MJV.

Having said all that just got back from MXP............................

[Fly380]

All will be well when the new Murcia airport is finished in 2010 - however with the way building is progressing on the Costa Blanca at the moment that might be 2110.:}

[retrosgone]

I am sure nobody disagrees that all of us should be able to fly an NDB (even one based on the low powered "Oscar" Locator at Murcia). As a regular attendee at the MJV funfair, it is painfully apparent that, though the field has perfectly good navaids, they are unavailable more often than not and there is no priority whatever put in to returning them to service.

On nearly every occasion, crews unfamiliar with the vagaries of this airport are finding out late in the day that the approach they reasonably expected is unavailable to them. The resulting chaos on the R/T, and the limited language skills of the controllers, combine to give rise to potential conflictions from every angle.

I was there yesterday, and enjoyed flying an entirely visual approach with no other traffic about. It was an entirely different story a few months back when the place was surrounded by CBs and heavy rain and ATC had lost the plot to such an extent that everybody's situational awareness was severely degraded.

The situation at MJV has been MOR'd on many occasions in the past, but nothing has ever been heard back. I have a feeling that national sensitivities and diplomatic niceties result in issues being raised in one country, but never reaching the appropriate authorities in another.

I would also make the point that, while flying an NDB approach is indeed good fun, non precision approaches have an appallingly bad safety record (at least 7 times more hull-loss accidents per approach than ILS).

I am quite happy flying to Murcia, it always keeps you on your toes at least! The just need to sort themselves out - particularly with regard to Notam's. When they do come, they tend to be several weeks late if the come at all.

[Rainboe]

Chap6168Some countries do seem to have quite restrictive budgets with regard to airport maintenance and staffing (even Gatwick appears very backwards at 4 am on a Sunday!
This refers to the frustrations of short staffing! In particular when on remote stands getting ground power at 5am (esp on a Sunday), parking stands open and ready, getting buses for the passengers, in particular getting buses for the crews to leave the aeroplane and go home after a long night.......

[411A]

411A

You do not know what you are talking about

Sorry. PE, but have been there, done that, with poorly organized ATC and duff navaids.
Recently it was...'proceed direct xxx beacon, cleared ILS 23 approach, localizer OTS'

Not to be deterred, the First Officer whips out the NDB plate, and does his job to perfection.
Simple fact is...you have to be adaptable, at some airfields.
Like it or not, and of course, many won't.:rolleyes:

[Max Angle]

I would also make the point that, while flying an NDB approach is indeed good fun, non precision approaches have an appallingly bad safety record (at least 7 times more hull-loss accidents per approach than ILS).

You beat me to it, this is the crux of the matter. I actually do enjoy the challenge of a difficult approach and dare I say it I seem to be quite good at NDB and other Non-p approaches BUT the record for jet transports flying these approaches is very poor and it is most certainly not the safest way to get a big aeroplane on the ground in bad weather. I have to been to MJV a few times over the years on subs. for our low cost division and quite agree that the place is an accident waiting to happen.

[Scylla]

Something will only change if the proper people with influence know exactly what the issues are. You all know that airline management only fly desks!! Start piling up those MORs about the poor ATC and your airline will have a fighting chance of confronting MJV Airport Management, UK and Spanish Regulators and getting something done. Rant on Pprune and you will not be heard!!

PS Haven't been to MJV for a while now, but at teh time it seemed actually more civilised than the other places I was being sent to :p

[IRRenewal]

he might be able to get an opportunity to fly a modern airliner.....

For a modern operation...............

[captjns]

Bring back the radio range approaches!:ok:

[BelArgUSA]

How about doing a D/F procedure, instead of Radio Range, and give you a few QDL for fun...?
Not my fault if you gents consider your FMS to be "no-go" item...
:E
Happy contrails

[Airbrake]

Quote from above.

"Leave it in VNAV to MDA or once inside the OM use V/S to get to MDA sooner".

Descending below the nominal approach path is extremely bad procedurally for a modern airline and leads to large thrust changes and unstable approaches, not to mention reduced terrain separation. Dragging it in at MDA went out with the Ark.

[ComJam]

411A

The higher minima i was refering to is the NDB approach minima as opposed to the ILS minima....

Airbrake, i agree dragging it in level at MDA is "old-hat", in my experience the FMS will generally fly a nice steady decent to reach MDA at or around the MAPt. However, there is nothing wrong with dropping to MDA early and flying in level to the MAPt if you need to for whatever reason.

As for the idea of ATC telling you which approach to expect at 20nm, if that's too tight and will lead to a rushed approach surely the sensible thing to do is to take up the hold until you're happy...

MOR-ing the ATC unit / airport operator because the ILS is not NOTAM'd "out of service" is a bit harsh if the ILS has only just failed. Might not have been the case this time, but we just don't know.

[Nearly Man]

Comjam! 'Take up the hold' ... yeh right. Do you know how much fuel is? It's more expensive than lager. I think the locals are stripping the aids for trinkets :E

[ComJam]

Hey NM, long time no see mate...

What price flight safety...?

[babemagnet]

Even in Khartoum Sudan the facilities are better then at most Italian airports!

[calypso]

An ILS is safer than NDB, a 4000m runway safer than a 2000m one a sunny day safer than a rainy day. Yes clearly but the record for jet transports flying these approaches is very poor is clearly an exageration, particularly now with GPS, triple IRS, double FMC, GPWS, capable autopilot,etc unless your definition of Very Poor is somewhat different to mine.

The fact is we do not always fly on calm sunny days to ILS radar vectored approaches to a 4000m runway, flat terrain all round, all R/T by native english speakers, etc, etc As pilots we takeoff from Gatwick and land in Ghana or Paris or Keflavik or indeed Murcia. Does it really distress you so that is not always Gatwick-A to Gatwick-B? Do you find it so challenging that you have to adapt to the prevailing conditions at the different airports? be those due to weather, terain, local culture, available funds.

An NDB approach may have a lower safety record than an ILS but is not an unsafe procedure as implied by some. Saying that it is 7 times more unsafe is a great missuse of satistics as it does not convey the fact that the safety record of both tipes of approaches (certainly in the last ten years) is extremely good.

Surely if your original plan is not workable airmanship dictates that you have a plan B, a plan C, a plan D and so on. Is all on a days work folks!

[AMEandPPL]

or indeed Murcia

STILL being assumed.

STILL not confirmed by original poster. Nil further heard from OP !

Now seems to be a general discussion about different types of approach, rather than adequacy or otherwise of facilities at one "unnamed" airport.

[411A]

Surely if your original plan is not workable airmanship dictates that you have a plan B, a plan C, a plan D and so on. Is all on a days work folks!

Very well said.
After all, we're not doing Apollo moon landings here, just standard airline stuff.
Perhaps, a tad more difficult for the younger folks....:rolleyes::}

[cirr737]

Could as well be KTW. Different airport - same ****, except no terrain...

[WindSheer]

I presume you didn't have to fly a "raw" NDB approach, more likely an FMS driven approach with you monitoring the ADF needle/s to ensure the aircraft is within the required track limits? (That's how we do it...i don't know about others) The only real drawback then being a higher approach minima.

No doubt you fly the approach with both lateral and vertical profile in front of you on a plate....not a jep plate either..;)
It was only 10 years ago there were still a lot of anologue flight decks still out there. Cant see it being a problem these days.

[modelflyer]

As a humble (and grateful) passenger who has been flying happily from Luton to Murcia and back frequently for the last 6 years, should I continue to use this route in future or change my route to Luton-Alicante, with the risks associated with a longer drive on Spanish motorways?

Also will the "new runway" help or hinder? I had heard that this would enable civil/military flights to operate at the same time.

Finally a big thank you to the Ryanair team who got us back into Luton so smoothly last Tuesday evening during the unseasonal snowfall.

Sorry if I have interuppted your professional discussion.

[Max Angle]

is clearly an exageration, particularly now with GPS, triple IRS, double FMC, GPWS, capable autopilot,etc unless your definition of Very Poor is somewhat different to mine.

Ok, I will re-phrase it. The vast majority of jet transport aircraft that suffer accidents or serious incidents during the approach phase of flight do so whilst conducting NPAs. However I would agree that the modern "managed" approach is a far cry from a raw data NDB and works very well.

Does it really distress you so that is not always Gatwick-A to Gatwick-B?

Not at all, in fact as I said I, and I suspect most other pilots, really enjoy the more challenging destinations and approaches.

Saying that it is 7 times more unsafe is a great missuse of satistics

Well 7 is not quite right, you are 5 times more likely to have a CFIT accident whilst conducting a non-precision approach as opposed to an ILS. However they are not about to go away so we need to be good at them to keep our passengers safe.

[fireflybob]

Ok guys, just got back from the blue beyond and yes it was Murcia I was referring to - going there again tomorrow.

Of course as professional pilots we should be prepared for every option and if we need to enter the hold to rebrief then so be it. But that does not mean we should not seek to improve matters where we see clear deficiencies on a regular basis.

I recall in the late 60s/early 70s BALPA naming certain airports as "Black Star" airports because they did not have certain basics such as VASIS (at least) for night approaches and/or a precision approach. This soon prompted such airports to improve their facilities.

I do NOT expect radar to the ILS wherever I go - nothing wrong with procedural approaches and/ or separation so long as the rules are applied correctly and the appropriate ATC unit is up to speed to do the job.

[Admiral346]

In TIA they just got radar installed, and it does not at all make me feel safe. There are plenty of hills and mountains around, and sticking to my procedure, overflying the station, outbound and inbound leg on the VOR approach just simply keep me from hitting any rock.
The newly trained controller with an insecure voice taking me below MSA does not improve the situation, actually keeps me on my toes with a finger on the map. Sometimes "improvement" does not come out as such.

Nic

[calypso]

You are also 5 times more likely to win the lottery if you buy 5 tickets, unfortunately however going from 1 in 14,000,000 to 5 in 14,000,000t means that you are still extremely unlikely to win. The statistics that you quote are meaningless without a reference to the absolute numbers and they only serve the purpose of unnecesarily worrying any pax that may be reading this.

[SR71]

...is clearly an exageration, particularly now with GPS, triple IRS, double FMC, GPWS, capable autopilot,etc unless your definition of Very Poor is somewhat different to mine.

The problem isn't the approach per se, its the whole environment.

You're mixing in with a controller who really doesn't know what he is doing, and can't even see where you are, aircraft who don't have multiple GPS, FMC and who are perhaps prohibited from proceeding below MSA in IMC unless on a procedure backed up with raw data versus those who are not so restricted and therefore able to "improvise" to some extent etc etc

I don't like it when I'm down to TCAS in a "terminal" environment to inform me where other traffic is especially when I got airborne recently and turned straight towards descending traffic (in accordance with my clearance) that it didn't pick up!

The risk associated with this airfield is orders of magnitude greater than most European airfields....IMHO.

[plain-plane]

It can be challenging to go to MJV at times

-ATC
-Notams often not accurate (that can also be a company thing as well)
-App not included in FMC
-App has to be flown raw data using only the basic modes of the auto pilot...
-If not familiar with airport, very very short time to brief the app (how much fuel (=time) were you carrying in the first place)
-An app type that is almost never flown any more in Europe… (NDB based on timing) (When is the last time one of you mainstream line pilots flew one in anger?)
-A few nice hills to the south west of the airport
-Throw in a FEW CBs (they apparently are the most likely WX you will run into at MJV)
-Night time ?

-Now deal with this while still fully in compliance with STRICT company SOPs…
(Final approach point vs. final approach fix)
-The 73NG will help you organize your decent inbound, a very useful tool when on times approaches and the company specifically prohibits “dive and drive” and has very efficient flight monitoring system…

All that said I just love MJV… where else do you really get to fly the A/C…
just make sure you arrive with slightly more than MINIMUM FUEL…

[mattford51]

The Murcia ATC are so brilliant that they change their minds from clearing you for a VOR approach (Oh eerr the VOR is U/S, cleared for the Oscar locator approach) as we go over the airfield. Brilliant!

[moist]

Just simply calling for clearance/startup results in "Station Calling????"
What out of 5 possible aircraft!!!!
Also, no one's mentioned Coastal Refraction!

[SR71]

And no runway end lights...

:eek:

[RoyHudd]

Journos please note. MJV is considered unsafe by pro pilots. Evident from this well-educated thread. Why not write about this now, and put pressure on the authorities, instead of publicising all this after the event. Spanish aviation boasts a rather poor safety record in recent years, (ACE, MAD spring to mind), and my experience backs this up. Often poor standard ATC.

Or is this not sort of copy sexy enough for today's consumer?

[grizzled]

IMO, SR71 summed it up well with his comments about risk being a function of the whole, not any one ingredient.

Levels of risk (for any given scenario) can only be assessed by accumulating as much relevant information as possible. I don't have to tell most ppruners what that means; for an airport, or a procedure, it includes more ingredients than most could imagine: Nav Aids, geography, weather, infrastructure, funding, operator philosophy (meaning all: aircraft operator, ANS, and airport), regulator resources and diligence, pilot training, aircraft maintenance, etc. etc. . . .

After waaay too many years investigating incidents and accidents, I offer this observation: It is the hidden ingredient that scares me. By that I mean the information we don't receive -- or isn't even known. One simple specific example that I've come across many times (post accident): Airport Crash/Fire/Rescue equipment was degraded, or even totally inoperative, and no notam was issued. In some cases, if no incident had occurred, we would not have known that the response capability was non-existent -- and had been for months.

Another example: In the past 8 years, I've been involved in the investigation of (not one, but) two accidents involving large commercial transport aircraft, where the published ATC service, and frequencies, were no longer in existence. No Notam had ever been issued. (The two accidents occurred in very different parts of the world.) A contributing factor in one of them was the runway threshold location (GPS co-ords -- as per Jepp) being several hundred metres off. Without an accident, a survey or audit wouldn't have taken place for years. And even if it had, it would likely have been a corruptly conducted audit.

Here's where the "knowledge of all the ingredients" part comes in: The airport that is more likely to have equipment/staffing/ maintenance issues is much more likely to have procedural and accountability issues (i.e. NOTAMs not issued). Because risk is the sum of all the ingredients, the airport that has "iffy" ATC, and iffy NOTAMing, and is in a part of the world where the regulator is not well-funded and/or there is a degree of corruption, then we can confidently say this: What we know about the deficiencies is likely not all there is to know. Ergo, contrary to what some have said here, the short notice loss (or unplanned loss) of a navaid, does not result in the same level of risk at "Modern North Europe International Airport" as it does at "Southeast Asian Provincial", never mind "West African Regional."

Grizz

[411A]

The Murcia ATC are so brilliant that they change their minds from clearing you for a VOR approach (Oh eerr the VOR is U/S, cleared for the Oscar locator approach) as we go over the airfield. Brilliant!

This happens all the time in 'lesser' developed parts of the world.
So, have a plan B in reserve.
Brief both approaches, that way you can do either, with minimal fuss.
If my 600 hour First Officer can do this, surely this should not be a particular problem for more expereinced air crew.

Use the 6 P's.

Prior Planning Prevents Pi** Poor Performance.

[GerritWium]

We will never know when the electronic gremlins decide to go US. Thank heavens the basic training still gets us down safely. (all tonque in cheek of course)

[luddite]

The problem with MJV is that you have to have plans B, C, D and like-as-not E, fuel for all of them and time to brief them all. My 'best' experience there was being cleared for a straight-in VOR approach 23. When I refused to fly said approach on account of there being no VOR the controller seemed completely oblivious to how that could be a problem. After we took up the hold he cleared us for a VOR approach onto 05. Doh. At that time there was no civilian locator approach to fall back on so we ended up in ALC.
Now I like a challenge but this is something else. :ugh: :ugh: :ugh:

[Sky Pilot]

Have to agree on MJV. Went there during my command upgrade and was cleared for no less than 5 different approaches in the space of a few minutes. Not so simple when you are trying to brief them all thoroughly! Leads to a serious degradation in Situational Awareness as far as I'm concerned. Go there regularly and have to agree that ATC haven't a clue and are quite happy to clear you on an approach based on a navaid that is U/S. This begs the question whether or not some people are accepting these just because it's in the FMC and they're simpler. Why would they keep offering an approach that no one will accept?

As far as professional pilots not being able to fly NDBs or raw data. I have no problem with these but when I'm carrying your Mum, Dad, kids etc I'd like to have the best Nav Aids, ATC etc. possible. I want it to be a simple and boring and unchallenging! I'm reminded of a pilot who was told "Gee, your job must be exciting..." "Not if I'm doing it properly!" he replied!

[Ex Cargo Clown]

I can't believe nobody has mentioned the fact that one of the busiest international airports in the World uses a visual NPA even with serviceable ILS and consistently has multiple RW change.....

Waiting for 411 to tell us how JFK is the best airport in the World etc now.....

[anartificialhorizon]

I can recall being SLF on a particularly exciting (Kai Tak esqe) approach into MJV on eveyone's favourite LCC.

Must have been a visual app as a steep banking left turn from downwind all the way around to line up almost short finals for 05.

Speed brakes were out all the way to wings level and final stage of flap shortly thereafter...!

Seat gripping stuff!

(I hasten to add it was a glorious, clear, bright suuny day!)

[Flyit Pointit Sortit]

Comjam,

You guys got FMS now? beats trying to program the gps on the centre console in the 30 degrees heat of Cyprus trying not to look down and get sweat on your sunglasses.

Anyway step away from PPrune - get down to MJV, do a few runs, get it all calibrated then we can all go back to drinking our coffee.:E

on the other hand, if they stop us flying to MJV, we might be able to fit in a game of golf next year:ok:

FPS

[manrow]

I take it that many of the posts on here are made tongue in cheek?

Are pilots being responsible in complaining on here about unserviceabilities of landing aids, or do they enjoy the fun of not knowing what sort of approach it will be until the last moment, or do they just enjoy the adrenaline run of doing something different?

Do any of the protesters actually take any action for things to be fixed? Did you notify your company and did they do anything about it?

Did you notify your pilots union and did they pursue the issue?

Did you notify your own aviation authority and receive confirmation of the action/correction taken?

I hope the general answers will confirm that the pilot community is as responsible as they should be, but I doubt it!

[justme69]

I'm not 100% sure about this, but I was told MJV is fully air force controlled, ATC and all. Therefore, it's gonna suck. Period. Nothing can be done about it.

If you want a little better service, where at least the guy in charge can get fired if he doesn't perform the job on par, shoot for a civil airport.

[Looker]

Latest stunt MJV pulled was to have 2 aircraft on 2 different procedural approaches to the same runway - me on VHF other aircraft on UHF.
Controller finally deigns to inform me as we turn final that there is another aircraft on the approach but not where or his cleared level.
Not having a serviceable TCAS didn't help either!
Yep you need to be on your toes at MJV they find new ways to screw up every day.

[5tarbuck]

Foreign Pireps in the US just seem to 'dissapear into the system'.
If there is a system......








...maybe just a trash can.

[TBSC]

Could as well be KTW. Different airport - same ****, except no terrain...
Well, their ILS is up and running since this afternoon (a bit more than a year after the famous Air Europa "landing").

[Wojtus]

Could as well be KTW. Different airport - same ****, except no terrain...
KTW is not the same ****, we never had VOR here :} And even it's not my fault to have to work last 11 months with LLZ approach (and NDB for the last month), I still felt ashamed of navigational aid provided. However, improvements are coming, years too late, but coming.

Well, their ILS is up and running since this afternoon (a bit more than a year after the famous Air Europa "landing").
Air Europa near-crash had nothing to do with the later ILS-outage.

[TBSC]

and NDB for the last month

Or sometimes even NDBs switched off..

Air Europa near-crash had nothing to do with the later ILS-outage.
They did blame the ILS-signal to be "oscillating" (or whatever), didn' they?

[Wojtus]

They did blame the ILS-signal to be "oscillating" (or whatever), didn' they?
Yes, they did. It was old equipment. But oscillations were found within limits (flight checked a few days after the accident). Nevertheless, Air Europa crew was trying to catch the GS from the top, almost at the double angle. Maybe they have received false GS leaf?
Full report is expected in february 2009, when it's published I'll post it in an original accident thread.

[DC-ATE]

Every time I log in here, I get a message that I haven't posted in awhile, so here goes.

I've read all the postings on this particular airport navaid "problem" with interest. The only thing I haven't seen asked is WHY do those of you complaining you keep going back there with the same problems existing? I was NEVER "Forced" to fly anywhere during my career that I choose not to because of whatever reason. If you feel it is not safe enough, divert. Simple. If enough of you divert, maybe something will be done. On the other hand, if it's not as bad as some here are indicating, then all these posts are for naught.

[Rainboe]

Be gentle with him everybody, he's quite old, and not altogether 'with it'.

[BOAC]

If you feel it is not safe enough, divert. Simple. - do we assume you do not agree, then, or is there another point to your post? I prefer to suspect and acknowledge greater experience here, personally.

"Old age and experience wil overcome youth and bullsh!t" as they say.

[411A]

Old age and experience wil overcome youth and bullsh!t"

Every time, without fail.:ok:

[DC-ATE]

All I can say at this point is: if you want to let someone else fly your airplane, go right ahead; I won't be aboard.

[Chris Scott]

Quote from BOAC:
"Old age and experience wil overcome youth and bullsh!t" as they say.


As an old fart, and a retired one at that, I have much sympathy with your sentiment. It's off the particular topic of the airfield in question, but in respect of the discussion it draws attention – as did manrow a few days ago, to an "elephant in the room".

DC-ATE says: "If enough of you divert, maybe something will be done". But, in relation to this specific discussion, he adds a caveat: "On the other hand, if it's not as bad as some here are indicating, then all these posts are for naught." By doing so, he encapsulates the dilemma that always faces you in this type of situation. Despite the unacceptable deficiencies, is it going to be safe for us to proceed [U]this time?

And, if it is, but I decide to divert or cancel on a matter of principle – to the inconvenience of our passengers and the expense of the airline – how is it going to help when 60 other captains decide to proceed that morning from divers companies, maybe including one or two from my own, and land without recorded incident?

They are hardly going to admit later to having compromised the safety of their flights by proceeding. The fact that all of them may be younger, and with fewer hours than I have, will not persuade my management that – far from being a dinosaur or having lost my nerve and/or judgement – I was behaving responsibly and proportionately, in the light of superior knowledge and experience.

On the contrary, I am likely to find myself greeted less warmly than usual next time I share a briefing console with one of my management pilots, or even one of the ambitious union representatives. The same may apply the next time I meet my co-pilot, even though he supported me warmly and solidly on the day. My flight report and MOR are likely respectively to be relegated to the bin and categorised as a low risk. Anything for a trouble-free life... In the unlikely event that there should be an incident subsequently, they will pass the buck. And even I may start to wonder: "did I over-react?" and "have I done more harm than good?"

Something about the loneliness of command springs to mind.

[DC-ATE]

Having never flown into the airport in question, I will end my participation on this topic by saying that it's up to the Captain, NOT company "pressure", "peer pressure", ATC, or anyone else, to decide to continue an approach. If you, as Captain, can't handle "that pressure", then perhaps you should move back to another seat.

[BOAC]

It's off the particular topic of the airfield in question, - indeed, and it was specifically and not generally aimed:).To return to topic, the OP raised the poor quality of information and facilities and, I believe, did not say the subsequent arrival was in any way 'dangerous' which is the territory into which we have now drifted. Further, from what I know of FFB the matter would almost certainly have been taken further.

Let's focus on MJV, as AME said in #43, rather than '"I'm an ace and can brief 7 simultaneous approaches whilst playing poker with the F/E" and '"He's older than me so must be REALLY brain dead".

Was/is it acceptable in 2008 or not? As DC-ATE says, it either is or isn't. If it isn't, do something about it.

[Rainboe]

I don't see a big problem. It's not an airport that has weather problems. We flew to airfields in North Africa that had no aids. You get close, see the field, go visual. This airport is quite identifiable on a bay. If it was up in Sweden one wouldn't be so happy, but we don't need a full suite of landing aids just because it's a fairly busy terminal. These places you do go visual, I think sometimes to insist on a full let down at a busy terminal is being a bit obstructively pedantic!

If you're going to lay your head on the line and decide to divert unnecessarily 'to make a point', then sure as eggs is eggs, someone will come along with an axe to 'give you the point'! And do most crew have a 'choice' about going there? Er....let's be real.....no!

[fatboy slim]

To get back on thread, whilst MJV hs been alot of 'fun' recently due all the reasons mentioned, it ain't a bed of roses just down the road at LEI especially with an easterly breeze and more than one for an approach. One of you circling off the ils(if it's working) and one of you doing the comedy NDB all 'procedurally' you understand. What ends up is "can you see the easy" "wheres the monarch?". I'm a regular at both these airports and they need a bit of care taking as the facilities and controlling at both are way below par.

Lovely new dispatcher at LEI mind.

[fatboy slim]

rainboe - how many aircraft in the circuit at your N african airports? No-one is saying MJV is a problem on a nice day with the airfield to yourselves...

[Rainboe]

Good point. It's awful when pilots feel they have to take on an ATC role when there is ATC you feel you just can't trust. Don't you get that prickly feeling on the back of your neck? I've done it over Africa and India as well.

[Pinkman]

OK, having had a full go and seriously alarmed many of us, what are you, as a pilot community, going to do next about MJV? Some of the ATC actions that I have read here - if true - border on the criminally incompetent.

Apart from fun, some healthy intellectual masturbation and ego bashing, and trying to solve accidents with insufficient data, one of the most important outcomes of a PPRUNE discussion has to be that at the end of the day safety is improved. Forget form filling and MORs - you are dealing with a military installation. They likely go in the bin. You can't shame them in front of a regulatory authority or put them on the BBC like the BRS runway issue last year. PPRUNE did an absolutely superb job in highlighting that issue. But it won't work here. So what are you going to do apart from whinge?

Is there an users - operators forum? How often do you have meetings with the airport management? Are EASA and DGAC present? Have BALPA got involved? Who is writing the article for El Pais and the other Spanish language papers? Now is the perfect window of opportunity, while Spanish public interest in aviation safety is aroused. Come on! Justme69 will show the way! (You will, won't you?)......

Right. I'll just go put on my kevlar flak jacket....

Pinkman

[OverRun]

The civil side of MJV is operated by Aena (Aeropuertos Españoles y Navegación Aérea, or Spanish Airports and Aerial Navigation), the Spanish airport authority. According to Aena, passenger numbers have jumped from 848,037 in 2004 to 1,645,886 in 2006 (due to the LCCs).

If any users group goes to meet with them (as Pinkman suggests), can I add some background for the discussion. With that sort of pax growth, the airport economics are illuminating. Put simply, the MJV airport business has to be awash with money. The (single) runway is provided for free by the military. The last big civil side upgrade AFAIK was the terminal upgraded at low cost in 2004-6. At that pax level, unless the airport has done some really silly deals with the airlines over charges, then there has to be plenty of money to spare for navaids, radar, and improved ATC staffing. Don’t be put off by claims of poverty . . . :ok:

[Phalconphixer]

Never mind chaps...get into a holding pattern for a couple of years; Murcias answer to Navaid problems? Build another airport...
Work started on the new Murcia airport on July1 2008, planned opening 2010 and fully capable by winter 2010.
Corovera Airport, Murcia - Airport Technology (http://www.airport-technology.com/projects/coroverainternationa/)