Sector DME arrivals

[Inboardflap]

Just had a chance to review some Australian plates and noticed this Sector Arrival approaches.
Never seen them in N America nor Europe.
Can anyone point me to a link that provides a good explanation of those procedures?

Please see: Sydney ,NSW, Australia 10-2A and Canberra,ACT, Australia 10-2A

Thanx

IF

[DirectAnywhere]

AIP ENR 1.5-50

Not a 'good' explanation but that's the legal framework you're working to.

[Mister Warning]

They were always pretty handy as a cloud break procedure for a visual approach. The trick was to find the most limiting step, and plan your normal descent profile to intercept it. Biggest drawback was that a simple mistake reading the chart could spell disaster.

[underfire]

AUS has some of the most complex MVA overlays for procedures I have ever seen....

[topdrop]

I was told DME Arrivals are an Australian procedure, not used elsewhere. (or maybe it was the sector part not used elsewhere)

[alphacentauri]

To my knowledge, they are not used anywhere else in the world......I have received feedback from other parts world indicating that we are 'nuts' to be allowing such procedures to be used.

Nevertheless the criteria for designing them is contained in MOS 173. I have used them in anger and they are a pretty neat and efficient way of getting visual if you know the weather is not down to the minima.

With the massive reduction in navaids coming in a few years, many of the DGA's will be going with them...their days are numbered.

Alpha

[Wally Mk2]

About a 100 years ago when good 'ole Keith Hants was around (great bloke loved a chat!):) he mentioned that the DME ARR was mainly set up as an off shoot from the good 'ole DME homing (or something like that, been a while since Keith handed a coffee into the old Link trainer just as you where turning inbound on an NDB App) & as has been mentioned above was a good way of getting visual for a Viz circuit due Oz having mostly fine weather especially inland.
The bloody CTA steps are a pain sometimes associated with the DME ARR only here in Oz where we do things "better" than the rest of the 5th world countries.....cough cough cough :ugh:


Wmk2

[Jack Ranga]

We're the second best in the world at everything in Australia :ok:

[Wally Mk2]

Hi there "JR", good to see some more non conformists in here with me:E

We lost the 2nd best title it's now 5th & going down faster than a Cirrus without a chute !:)

Wmk2

[Jack Ranga]

Giddy Wal, the '2nd best' title we've been bestowed with encompasses everything we do now, 2nd to everyone else in the world :ok:

[Australopithecus]

I always thought the DME arrivals to be a practical idea in theory, but after seeing some guys try to fly a jet like it was descending stairs I found the practical application a bit wanting.

As Mr. Warning mentioned, if you can finger the most limiting step and arrange your profile and energy accordingly they can be pretty handy.

The CTA steps are another matter entirely. :mad:

[Willie Nelson]

We use them going in to class D (non radar) such as Launceston and Hobart. They are printed for other locations however where there is radar, you will never be asked to use them.

Look at the Launceston sector A arrival, where the altitude limit is 5000 till 12 DME, that's quite limiting......oh wait a minute, you can't descend below 7000 feet till 14 DME anyway lest you bust the CTA step.

Good times!

[greg47]

only other places seen Png and Malaysia. The trick is basing the tod on profile used on the most limiting step. It then becomes a continuous descent

[Centaurus]

About a 100 years ago when good 'ole Keith Hants was around (great bloke loved a chat!)

A thorough good hearted gentleman. I used his D4 (Link Trainers?) a lot to teach instrument flying. The coffee was always flowing as did his war time stories. The beauty of those old Link Trainers was you could set up navaids anywhere by a complicated bit of knob twiddling which I never properly mastered. Keith was an expert at it. I used to set up Kathmandu which is a complicated VOR/DME approach with a still more complicated missed approach requiring keeping within a 4 DME radius of turn and departing to the NW and holding at 10 DME. The student then had to figure how to get back for another approach and the MSA's were high in all directions.

Probably without him being aware of it, Keith and his stories and general chit chat while you were trying hard to concentrate on an instrument approach, proved excellent value on how to cope with outside distractions while flying on instruments. And the coffee was free at any time although it was good manners to throw in a few coins to help defray costs. Thanks for mentioning his name Wally - it brought back memories of a fine old bloke in Keith Hants

[Wally Mk2]

'Centy' I often think of old Keith whenever I see an old Toyota Cressida, I used to tinker with it for him sometimes whilst it was parked outside the end of the finger-way where his Link trainer was.
I can recall Kieth often trying to 'fine tune' the so called 'computer' system on the old Link as well as changing valves & keeping the air bellows in working order, God how old are we 'Centy'?:sad:
His DC story over Hobsons Bay was the best, a character we shall most likely never see again:ok:
Off topic I know but worth a few words in his honor for giving us the ability to do all the basic App's in a at the time advanced machine that most youngin's now can only read about in history books.
The Ansett Sim center has one on display, I walk past that going to the 'Bus' & have a private giggle:ok:


Wmk2

[Capn Bloggs]

Biggest drawback was that a simple mistake reading the chart could spell disaster.
They all have a step-down profile on them now.

seeing some guys try to fly a jet like it was descending stairs I found the practical application a bit wanting.
Small children shouldn't be flying big aeroplanes.

we are 'nuts' to be allowing such procedures to be used.
Typical Not My Idea syndrome. They probably said that when we started putting stepdown profiles on all our charts...

The bloody CTA steps are a pain
Guess who's responsible for that... Hint, he's been in the press recently!

AUS has some of the most complex MVA overlays for procedures I have ever seen....
Relevance??

:ok: :ok:

[halas]

If you are going to SYD & CBR, just ignore those charts, you won't be using them.

If however you are going "outback" you may find the rnav to be your friend.

halas

[Wideglider]

Did someone mention 'DME homing's' :oh:
Good God that brings back nightmares:eek:
Oh I mean memories:}!!

[ForkTailedDrKiller]

DME homing still exists in PNG. Anyone know where to find the instructions on how to actually fly the approach?

Not hard - put yourself over the aid within tolerances then do what the chart says! :ok:

Time was, many (most?) an IR renewal concluded with an asymmetric, limited panel, DME homing and let down! :confused:

Dr :8

[zlin77]

Used to be handy on SYD-OOL in the F-28, tracking in via Casino the restriction I think was 4,800' until 10 DME OOL, saved heaps of time/fuel compared to doing the RWY 14 VOR/DME from overhead..

[alphacentauri]

It's actually not a non-ICAO compliance.....These approaches are in addition to icao requirements, not in lieu of them.


Posted from Pprune.org App for Android

[halas]

Christ, l thought l was the last one to do DME homing in '90 at YPDN as part of my IR re-validation.
What a waist of time......

halas

[AQIS Boigu]

Great in GA but useless in a jet...my company doesn't permit its use...

[alphacentauri]

Primarily because folks in other countries don't understand them and don't understand what we are trying to achieve with them. It's more fear of what you don't know.

DGA's really only work in Oz because our country is flat as a pancake. DGA's wouldn't really work in terrain challenging environments. LT, HB, CS and TL are about as difficult as it gets here.


Posted from Pprune.org App for Android

[Kharon]

Dr "Time was, many (most?) an IR renewal concluded with an asymmetric, limited panel, DME homing and let down!"

Ah, the time honoured tradition of flying a heading, a rate of descent and occasionally glancing at the clock. There more things change. etc. eh? Great fun the DME homing, very good for basic IF skills and saved a bob or two (earning ones keep, as it were). Magic with the GPS for ground speed reference, there is so little difference to tracking tolerance, once you have sorted out the drift and wind correction angle that is, amazing really when you think about it.

Great in GA but useless in a jet...my company doesn't permit its use...

Strange notion – lets see; a jet @ ground speed 150 (x 5 = 750 fpm) can't mange a 3° slope, but anything else with wings can. Bollocks.....

"Alpha" –"DGA's really only work in Oz because our country is flat as a pancake. DGA's wouldn't really work in terrain challenging environments. LT, HB, CS and TL are about as difficult as it gets here.

Him now – visual approach? – yes please, Ta very much........

[josephfeatherweight]

I've used them to great effect in a jet plenty of times. Additionally, you effectively do one on most arrivals into D class airspace when you're cleared to XXXX' "not below the DME steps..." Admittedly not normally to a minima, but if you're doing it efficiently you still need to be aware of the limiting step.

[chimbu warrior]

only other places seen PNG and Malaysia

Fiji also uses them, as do the Solomons.

[Ollie Onion]

I know that when I arrived in Australia from spending a good amount of time flying internationally based overseas, it took me a good while to get my head around DME arrivals. The main reason was that I wasn't used to an 'approach' that didn't end up with you runway aligned (or very close to it). I remember my first approach into Launceston in a jet and trying to figure out why if you flew the DME arrival as published it would take you out of OCTA, It seemed madness to me that you had to position yourself in a high position and then do a 'dirty' dive to try and get visual so you could then break off and self position for the opposite runway when the is a perfectly good procedural arrival to the ILS. The training Captain told me it saved time and therefore money to get visual for the circuit, I am still not sure this is the case when you have to slow so much to take into account the CTA steps. There is a major difference between flying in Australia and the rest of the world and it seems to be that Australian RPT jet operations still have a good amount of GA mentality attached. The rest of the world has moved on, due to airspace congestion / safety etc. every time this is mentioned in OZ you get all the incredulous comments about 'not wanting to handfly ECT' when in reality a mature and safe system doesn't want you flinging a heavy jet around at low altitude WHEN THERE IS AN ALTERNATIVE. DME arrivals are great tools for the GA piston crowd but shouldn't be a first choice approach for RPT jets.

[Di_Vosh]

I remember my first approach into Launceston in a jet and trying to figure out why if you flew the DME arrival as published it would take you out of OCTA, It seemed madness to me that you had to position yourself in a high position and then do a 'dirty' dive to try and get visual so you could then break off and self position for the opposite runway when the is a perfectly good procedural arrival to the ILS.

Not entirely sure I agree with that.

I do plenty of DGA's and ILS's into Launy (admittedly in a Dash-8) via overhead Devonport and I'd be hesitant to call the ILS approach "perfectly good". :ouch:

From my POV, a DGA that gets me visual above circuit height to break right for a left circuit into Launy is around 5 min quicker than the ILS. The final limiting step is 2300' at 5Nm, which is only 200' above circuit height so not much dirty diving involved to join downwind for 32L.

Having said all that I agree with your comments wrt GA mentality in Oz.

DIVOSH!


DIVOSH!

[Oktas8]

Many parts of the world use something similar to the Australian DGA. Minimum vectoring altitude charts, manoeuvring charts, "MRA" charts in NZ, and so on.

The difference is that Australia wants them treated as an approach, implying speed limits and FAFs and missed approach procedures.

I think they're a fantastic tool to get visual below cloud, in the circuit vicinity. Be at whatever speed and configuration you like, ready to convert to a visual approach when ready.

What I don't like is using them as a pseudo-approach, down to well below circuit height and needing to be configured and slow (but not runway aligned) before getting visual.

Not irrelevantly, there's also the cost of an extra "approach" type to be kept current...

Happy DGA-ing, anyway!
O8

[Wally Mk2]

'08' i hear where ya coming from but I can see why they are classified as an App.
Don't 4get most here are ref to the dist side of this procedure but as we all know there are lateral req's also be that Sat based Nav or Grnd based Nav to be taking into consideration hence it comes under the heading of an App especially after FF5 Nm (no maouvering).ALL App's have a Lat Nav req so this proc is no diff.
The speed side of it is often due the type of drome yr coming into (if that be the case) so 'any speed you like' wouldn't apply at some places hence a std has been developed for all DGA's.
The fact that you are allowed below normal circuit height off a DGA is to do what ALL Approaches where designed for in the first place, to effect a Ldg that's the whole idea of any App. Also you can obviously go down to the Cat circling height at any time in day VMC after a DGA to the Min where you where initially Viz. The thought of flying a Cat C machine at 400ft in the circuit would be real fun:)

Anyway I think the concept is great for a cloud break proc.


Wmk2

[Oktas8]

Wally, the lateral navigation and speed requirements are strict because the procedure is designed to get down to 500' agl or so, terrain permitting. For that, you need FAFs, MDAs, "PANS-Ops" speeds, the whole nine yards.

Lose the idea of 500', think 1500' to 2000' agl (in other words, lose the part between FAF and MAPt).

Then you'd not need all the other niceties that go with an approach; it would just be a manoeuvring chart like any other, with lateral and vertical navigation appropriate to an Arrival (which is not the same as an Approach).

Of course, many people in the regions would be inconvenienced by being unable to descend in IMC below ~1500' agl on a DGA!

But that is the key difference between an Arrival via manoeuvring chart (anywhere in the world) and an Approach via a somewhat mis-named DME/GNSS Arrival (which is actually an Approach).

The OP, Inboard Flap, might be better thinking of a DGA as a sector arrival up until 5nm or so, then it becomes a non-precision approach like any other. Not quite true, but almost so! :)

[pithblot]

DME was an Australian invention from the 1950s with application in the terminal area and as an enroute nav aid. In its heyday (long before GPS) enroute nav aids were fairly sparse - being VARs at capital city airfields and a scattering of NDBs. IFR enroute fix requirements could be met with an NDB at each end of track or an NDB at one end and a DME at the other.... if you could track on the DME. This is why the DME homing procedure was used and a logical extention of tracking in on a DME was to develop a cloud break procedure, which became the "DME descent".

So enroute Nav requirements could be met on the leg DN-MGD with dual ADFs (and two lots of ADF errors) or an ADF and a DME (which gave you track & distance and you could calculate ground speed). If you wanted to get visual, then do an ADF approach. But if your ADF or the NDB failed then you could use the published DME descent procedure (not to be confused with the DME arrival procedure).

Halas you probably were the last one, if you did homings in the 90s. We were still doing DME descents at Darwin for renewals late 80s-early 90s, but I never did one in anger.

All this is explained here DME Operational Notes (http://www.airwaysmuseum.com/DME%20Ops%20Notes.htm)

[Dog One]

Strahan was a typical use of DME homing. The NDB had a range of 30 miles, was difficult to track in weather. We could pickup the DME at about 75 miles and conduct the homing to overhead, and, if not visual conduct the DME approach.

[ANCPER]

I was going to say my understanding of DME Homing was to provide another approach alternative in case of NDB failure, however pithblot's link seems to have slightly better reasoning under Homing and Descent Procedures. Meets the requirement of two independent nav aids.

Don't get the issue towards DME ARR for jet ops, a 'long' gone domestic jet operator used that quite a bit throughout WA and if you knew what you were doing (meaning trained) it worked quite well.