PDA

View Full Version : YBBN Approaches


Cralis
22nd Mar 2017, 22:12
I'm just an enthusiast. I follow flight radar a lot when I see aircraft overhead, heading to Brisbane.

I downloaded a few approach plates, and what I see on the plates, doesn't match what I see on FR24.

Flights from the South seem to come up over Gold Coast, over Sunnybank (Archerfield?) And then straight into 01.

Or... Cleveland, around Mud Island and then into 19.

Would that be the BLAKA 9A approach, which is most common from the South?

Who selects the approach? Is it dictated by ATC before arrival? I assume it's planned, but subject to change before take off.

From the north, I can't find one that is even close to what I see. They seem to come down, over us in Bracken Ridge, over Chermside, towards the city, the left turn to the gateway bridge and then straight in.

Which approach is that?

And finally, in my little PC simulator, when I try fly a STAR, fly waypoint to way point, but the big guys do nice rounded turns between waypoints. I guess that's down to speed? Small abrupt turns to stay on course is tricky?

Going Nowhere
22nd Mar 2017, 23:27
The approach from the North would be the SMOKA5V, also called the 'river track'

https://www.airservicesaustralia.com/aip/current/dap/BBNSR15-147.pdf

IsDon
22nd Mar 2017, 23:31
I think the approaches you're asking about are the Standard Arrival Routes (STARs) used by aircraft arriving in Brisbane from Sydney, specifically the Gold Coast 1A and possibly 1P approaches. These STARs are used to link up to the ILS approach, 1A or the RNP approach 1P. You can see that the STAR effectively ends where the Approach commences. An ILS is an Instrument Landing System approach which uses ground based Nav aids, while the RNP (Required Navigation Performance) is based on GPS navigation.

The RNP is mainly flown by smaller 737s, although they were a hoot in the 767. Alas those days are gone. They're a shorter approach which uses a curved finals rather than a straight in finals from 10 miles out.

The one from the North onto 01 via the Gateway Bridge is probably the SMOKA 5M or 5V. The 5M links into another RNP approach while the 5V is a visual STAR designed to position you on a visual left base over the Gateway Bridge.

ATC determines the STAR to be flown depending on sequencing. Sometimes you'll hold over the Gold Coast until it's your turn to continue the STAR. The Gold Coast STAR is the common one from SYD where the BLAKA is usually one flown by aircraft arriving from Melbourne.

Most waypoints are "Fly By" which means the aircraft doesn't fly directly over the fix but smoothes out the corner by cutting it to position the aircraft directly on the next leg. The waypoints with a circle around them, DAYBO on the SMOKA STAR for example, are fly over waypoints meaning the aircraft must fly over the waypoint before turning.

Thanks for your interest.

Cralis
22nd Mar 2017, 23:37
The approach from the North would be the SMOKA5V, also called the 'river track'

https://www.airservicesaustralia.com/aip/current/dap/BBNSR15-147.pdf

Thanks Going Nowhere.

I'll try see how that fits on a map, but thanks, that does seem right. Over Dayboro, towards the city, and then in. I notice the last bit has to be visual. So if it's bad weather - the SMOKA5V is not an option?

Cralis
23rd Mar 2017, 00:02
Wow, thanks IsDon. That's incredible. Thanks.

When you say RNP, that's only using waypoints, so am I right in saying they lead to a visual approach, and can only be used visual conditions. (My terminology might be wrong here: Arrival = from a certain waypoint, to the beginning of an approach (STAR), and Approach = the last phase, going from the final waypoint, onto the runway - being Visual/ILS/Other). And that will have a V in the STAR name? Looking at the list of STAR charts, they seems to have either a V, P, A or M in their names. Do they indicate if it's ILS or RPN?

I've noticed on arrival into Brisbane, from Melbourne, and we seem to go downwind passed 19, then around (what I think is) Mud Island, and then onto 01. Sometimes, we seem to turn earlier. Maybe that's an illusion, but do you sometimes (with permission) deviate from the waypoints - probably due to other traffic, or weather? You mentioned you don't need to fly over the non-circled waypoints. I'm guessing, based on what you mentioned about arrivals from Melbourne, you're using BLAKA. Looking at the chart, it goes LAGOB to LEAKY to BOATS to SINNK. Because these waypoints don't have the circle, you just need to go near them - so it's up to you?

Thanks very much for the explanation...

C441
23rd Mar 2017, 00:03
I notice the last bit has to be visual. So if it's bad weather - the SMOKA5V is not an option?

Yep, if it's unlikely you'd be able to continue 'visually' from 3000ft roughly over Gordon Park/Stafford. In that case it's an 'instrument' STAR (say SMOKA5A) that heads out towards Kenmore and a series of left turns towards Archerfield and down the 01 ILS or RNAV approach.

The approach from the North would be the SMOKA5V, also called the 'river track'
Or colloquially known as a "Brekky Creek arrival"!! - look out the window, turn left at the Brekky Creek, track down the river to the Gateway, turn left and land :cool:

De_flieger
23rd Mar 2017, 00:32
When you say RNP, that's only using waypoints, so am I right in saying they lead to a visual approach, and can only be used visual conditionsNot quite, if you look at the SMOKA5A arrival it uses RNAV waypoints to get you to an initial approach fix for the Runway 01 ILS, RNAV, VOR or Localiser approaches, or for other instrument approaches onto Runway 14 and 19.

Different STARs will be used depending on the conditions, in good weather a visual STAR (signified with a V after the name, ie SMOKA5V) may be issued to allow reduced spacing between aircraft or higher speeds, and aircraft may also be given modified tracking instructions by ATC to either increase or reduce distances between aircraft, depending on how they are flowing into the instrument approaches or runways or to avoid buildups of storm clouds, so they wont always exactly follow the track on the chart if you watch them on flightradar.

If you look at something like the KEEWI5A approach into Cairns, all the approaches go via the waypoint KEEWI, but depending on where the aircraft is coming from, they will be given different transitions into the STAR, ie the initial waypoint that the STAR starts out at, being KONDA, CARBA, LAKED and a couple of others. In good (visual) conditions the aircraft might be given the KEEWI5V approach instead, so once visual approaching KEEWI they make a dogleg around and effectively join a right base leg for runway 33. This visual approach allows the aircraft coming from the north to avoid tracking 24 miles south of the field and then returning via the Localiser approach, but in bad weather the KEEWI8A STAR will be used to position the aircraft for the Localiser approach.

IsDon
23rd Mar 2017, 01:08
The STAR is the arrival that leads into the Approach.

Stars with a V are visual STARS that are not necessarily associated with an approach. ie the SMOKA 5V is purely visual.

STARS with an A lead to an ILS approach using ground based navaids.

STARS with another letter, M or P in the case of Brisbane, lead onto RNP approaches. These are instrument approaches flown in instrument conditions down to, in some cases, the same minimum altitudes as a Cat 1 ILS approach. These are independant of ground based navaids and use GPS.

Eventually, the world will do away with ILS approaches and RNP approaches will allow the same capability as ILS approaches do now in some cities. A Cat 3B ILS approach can be flown to an auto land and the first time you actually see the runway is when the nose wheel is lowered onto the ground. Eventually RNP approaches will be able to do the same thing. They will also use a ground based beacon called a Local Area Augmentation System. These beacons basically behave like another satellite that the aeroplane can interrogate. Because it's so close, and it's position is accurately known, when combined with satellite data the position of the aircraft is known very accurately.

Of course Australia doesn't even have Cat 3B ILS approaches. These are reserved for countries that are serious about flying reliably from A to B regardless of the weather. Doesn't apply to third world aviation backwaters like Australia.

aerostatic
23rd Mar 2017, 01:28
Eventually RNP approaches will be able to do the same thing. They will also use a ground based beacon called a Local Area Augmentation System. These beacons basically behave like another satellite that the aeroplane can interrogate. Because it's so close, and it's position is accurately known, when combined with satellite data the position of the aircraft is known very accurately.

They already have this, it's called a GLS approach. Sydney has them.

Cralis
23rd Mar 2017, 01:31
If you look at something like the KEEWI5A approach into Cairns, all the approaches go via the waypoint KEEWI, ...

I can only see a "STAR KEEWI EIGHT A V ARR (RNAV)". i.e. Not 5A. But I think I see what you mean. A few joins from quite a few waypoints.

itsnotthatbloodyhard
23rd Mar 2017, 01:35
Because these waypoints don't have the circle, you just need to go near them - so it's up to you?

Not quite. A 'fly by' waypoint is one where a turn must be commenced prior to the waypoint in order to effect a tangential intercept of the outbound track. (Probably not an exact quote, but near enough). So it's not just a 'do whatever you like' sort of thing, and in some ways a bit more onerous than a flyover waypoint.

IsDon
23rd Mar 2017, 01:36
They already have this, it's called a GLS approach. Sydney has them.

Yes, that's true. I was thinking more along the lines of Cat3B ILS equivalent GLS approaches.

Cralis
23rd Mar 2017, 01:39
Thanks IsDon... That's really good info, which I'll now try and digest. :) So it seems 'digital' will completely kill off any form of analogue stuff? ILS, NDBs and VORs are all analogue radio items, right? And soon it will all be GPS based waypoints, and that Local Area Augmentation System thing?

Cralis
23rd Mar 2017, 01:41
Not quite. A 'fly by' waypoint is one where a turn must be commenced prior to the waypoint in order to effect a tangential intercept of the outbound track. (Probably not an exact quote, but near enough). So it's not just a 'do whatever you like' sort of thing, and in some ways a bit more onerous than a flyover waypoint.

Thanks for that. So it's cutting the corner - not too much, as opposed to attempting an impressive right angled turn.

De_flieger
23rd Mar 2017, 01:59
I can only see a "STAR KEEWI EIGHT A V ARR (RNAV)".The STAR approach plate has both approaches on the one plate, so 150 or so miles out ATC will clear you or tell you to expect either the KEEWI 8 VICTOR, or the KEEWI 8 ALPHA, and you can start programming the FMS and planning your descent appropriately. In good weather you will follow one part of the chart, and in instrument approach conditions follow the other part of the chart. The KEEWI 5 chart is one i picked because it has both the A (using the localiser) and V (visual) on the same chart so you can see the differences between a V and A, both of which initially use RNAV waypoints to carry out an instrument or visual approach. :)

BBB3
23rd Mar 2017, 03:13
Looking at the chart, it goes LAGOB to LEAKY to BOATS to SINNK.

Great thread, especially for me (SLF) as I've only recently been looking at the STARs and SIDs with my 10yo son out of interest and trying to learn what they mean while watching FR24.

Is it common to have amusing fix names? eg. as above, "leaky boats sink" while over the bay! There's also a DENIS LILEE around here, and near SINKK is a DRAIN and a PLUGG :) Anybody got some other good ones from anywhere?

C441
23rd Mar 2017, 03:47
Is it common to have amusing fix names? eg. as above, "leaky boats sink" while over the bay! There's also a DENIS LILEE around here, and near SINKK is a DRAIN and a PLUGG Anybody got some other good ones from anywhere?
Stacks of 'em:
From memory something like "MEANN" and "DADAN" used to be the waypoints preceding "DENIS" and "LILEE"
"SHEED" near enough to overhead Essendon - named after the Mighty Bombers coach of course!
"PLUGA" and "LOYDY" fairly handy AFL players in their day & "LOKYA" in Moreton Bay.
"GAFFA" west of Alice Springs out in the Great Australian F F*&k All!!
On the way up to Japan there used to be "SEKSI", "KISME" & "NIPIL".
"GILLY" & "TUBBY" over the Tasman.
"EVONN" & "CAWLY" east of Sydney.
"NETTY", "BONEY", "BREAM", "MULET" & "FLATY" off the coast from Brissy.

….the list will no doubt roll on!

Cralis
23rd Mar 2017, 03:55
The STAR approach plate has both approaches on the one plate, so 150 or so miles out ATC will clear you or tell you to expect either the KEEWI 8 VICTOR, or the KEEWI 8 ALPHA,

Thanks De_flieger. I know it takes you guys years of studying and training, but does this seem right?

With the KEEWI 8 approach, no matter where you're coming from, you'll fly to either KONDA, CARBA .. etc ZANEY, and from there, to SUNNY (Unless ZANEY or LOCKA)... then you're off to KEEWI. And that's the transition. Any of those, to KEEWI.

Then you're off to either SUBRY or BASIL, and that would be dependent on traffic maybe? (Out to SUBRY will be further than BASIL), or your preference?

Then from BASIL... to KATAKA, if you wanted a shorter final? Or else, stay on 215 until you intercepting the ILS (Is there one), or else... just aim for the runway when it looks straight? :)

It's pretty incredible how it works, and what's even more amazing to me is the precision it's done. In FR24, you touch one plane on approach, and see it's path, and behind it, a plane following, exactly on the same line. It's pretty amazing. A computer might be doing a lot of the work - but it's still pretty impressive.

Cralis
23rd Mar 2017, 03:59
Stacks of 'em:
On the way up to Japan there used to be "SEKSI", "KISME" & "NIPIL".
.the list will no doubt roll on!

haha. :D

How on earth did they get away with that!? haha.

Oh - 'Used to be'. Blast, someone caught on. :E

underfire
23rd Mar 2017, 04:05
So it seems 'digital' will completely kill off any form of analogue stuff? ILS, NDBs and VORs are all analogue radio items, right? And soon it will all be GPS based waypoints, and that Local Area Augmentation System thing?

ahhh to dream....ASA is even 50% owner of SmartPath and it still aint there yet.

Thanks De_flieger. I know it takes you guys years of studying and training, but does this seem right?

certainly you jest!

Which part of all of this do you think takes years of study and training??!?!?!

Cralis
23rd Mar 2017, 04:07
Anybody got some other good ones from anywhere?

Just found this one (http://www.fallingrain.com/waypoint/UK/GINIS.html).

GINIS, off the coast of Ireland. :)

De_flieger
23rd Mar 2017, 04:23
With the KEEWI 8 approach, no matter where you're coming from, you'll fly to either KONDA, CARBA .. etc ZANEY, and from there, to SUNNY (Unless ZANEY or LOCKA)... then you're off to KEEWI. And that's the transition. Any of those, to KEEWI.
Perhaps, or you may be cleared direct to KEEWI, depending on how ATC is feeling.

The chart describes the procedure to follow from there, for the ALPHA approach looking at the AIP chart you then track from KEEWI to BASIL, which is also the inital approach fix for the Localiser approach, and then conduct the localiser approach via the 24 mile arc from Cairns which takes you around to intercept the localiser. There's no ILS on runway 33, just the localiser, and the ALPHA is an entirely instrument procedure until you get to the end of the localiser approach. The STAR ALPHA procedure needs to be looked at alongside the localiser 33 instrument approach procedure which it feeds you into - you definitely dont just cut in! There's high terrain either side of the localiser course, it is depicted on the Localiser 33 approach charts, cutting in would take you into that terrain.

Theres also ITORT EYSAW APUSS ECATT heading west out of Townsville.

Cralis
23rd Mar 2017, 04:53
Thanks De_flieger - that's really informative. Thanks for taking the time. I'll hop into my little virtual C172, fire up the little virtual Garmin, and see if I can try some of these.

Thanks so much!

Bleve
23rd Mar 2017, 05:34
Here's some more amusing waypoint names:

Off the coast of WA (110E): WONSA, JOLLY, SWAGY, CAMBS, BUIYA, BYLLA, BONGS, UNDER, ACOOL, EBARR, TREES

On the YBBN/YMML FIR boundary SE of Alice Springs: PUDYA, LIPPS, ALIDL, CLOZA, TOUDA, PHONE

Bleve
23rd Mar 2017, 05:39
Another from the 'Only in Japan' file.

There used to be a STAR that had the following waypoints in sequence: CHARLIE, UNCLE, NIECE & TANGO. :E

itsnotthatbloodyhard
23rd Mar 2017, 06:02
The HELLI departure out of Darwin used to have INCON, TINEN, TIABB, UTTOX. Gone now, sadly.

Cralis
23rd Mar 2017, 06:07
certainly you jest!

Which part of all of this do you think takes years of study and training??!?!?!

I guess all of it combined, and then having a full understanding. Maybe not years, but I'm sure, more than a forum thread and a print out. :)

I guess I'm slowly working out why I missed out on flying and landed up as a software developer...I'm a bitbslow. :)

I did 10 hours RA-Aus training at YCAB around 2010, and battled with the radio call, "Caboolture, Technam XXXX, lining up runway 06, Caboolture". :) More nerves than anything maybe.

F0z
24th Mar 2017, 04:43
I did 10 hours RA-Aus training at YCAB around 2010, and battled with the radio call, "Caboolture, Technam XXXX, lining up runway 06, Caboolture". :) More nerves than anything maybe.

It gets easier. Having trained at YCAB myself, CTAF calls are the easy calls for me. I'm surprised that as a software developer using common syntax all the time it wouldn't be easier for you. I feel that software development and code structure helped me during my early stages of training.

Cralis
24th Mar 2017, 11:18
Yeah, it was more a nerve issue. Just before pushing the button, freezing up and stuttering a bit. I'd say it in my head a few times before, but then over think something very simple. :)

Cralis
30th Mar 2017, 00:46
https://s30.postimg.org/j8t6c59kh/Screenshot_20170330-104252.png

Pretty bad weather in Brisbane. Any idea which departure this guys on? Nice little circle, and then off to China.

AerocatS2A
30th Mar 2017, 02:45
Looks like they've done the WACKO 1 but they deviated off it between BAABA and CARSL, most likely to avoid weather.

sheppey
30th Mar 2017, 11:30
Thanks IsDon... That's really good info, which I'll now try and digest. :) So it seems 'digital' will completely kill off any form of analogue stuff? ILS, NDBs and VORs are all analogue radio items, right? And soon it will all be GPS based waypoints, and that Local Area Augmentation System thing?

Meaning full use of flight director automation with a vengeance, and another nail in the coffin of manually flown raw data instrument flying skills.

IsDon
30th Mar 2017, 13:06
Meaning full use of flight director automation with a vengeance, and another nail in the coffin of manually flown raw data instrument flying skills.

True.

Get me off this bloody Airbus before I forget how.

maggot
30th Mar 2017, 23:05
True.

Get me off this bloody Airbus before I forget how.

He's referring to 737 RNPs, no? They just follow the line... less flying than a bus

Cralis
31st Mar 2017, 02:57
Are you guys referring to the automation and assistance aircraft provide to the pilots? I was in the extremely lucky and fortunate position to get a seat in the cabin, next to a captain on how was down to Melbourne, do do a route back to Brisbane. So he was traveling with us normal people. He was reading something on an ipad and during the take off roll, to attempt to stir up a chat, I lent over to him and told him not to worry - these things are very safe. He laughed and replied, "You clearly don't know anything about them, then", which I thought was quite funny. But never the less, we chatted all the way from YBBN to YMML, and it was one of the most enjoyable, enlightening flights I've ever had. He was so willing to answer questions and give me an insight into what was happening up front. (He was a Virgin captain).

One thing I did ask was, if he feels the art of airmanship is being lost to automation, and he said it was. But he did say something on the lines of, promoting hand flying, but I was a bit unclear on what he meant. He did say that he tried to get the FO to fly the aircraft sometimes, and he does it himself. But I ran out of time to probe further.

Would that mean, not using autopilot, and flying the aircraft manually? I spend a lot of time on my PC flight sim, and with the little C172, I can climb to .. say 5,000 and then trim the plan out to stay at 5,000 within 30 feet up and down. With the bigger aircraft (737), I find it close on impossible. So find myself setting AP to keep me straight and level.

With a commercial flight, do pilots over try practice this? Or is the flight automated pretty much all the time. And is that what sheppey, IsDon and maggot are talking about?

Thinking of this, when I said my radio calls were the hard part. I lie. Instructor, 'Climb at 800fpm at 90kts'. Wow... that was fund for the first hour. PAT, if I recall? Power, Attitude, Trim'.. And then suddenly, level out and maintain 100kts. What? Brain melting. :)

PoppaJo
31st Mar 2017, 04:27
There is always an element of automation in most modern aircraft, even if you remove the AP, AT still exists. Hand Flying is quite dependant on weather, traffic, general experience, situation awareness and more often than none fatigue.

Have a read about the Jetstar blunder above Mildura in 2014. Shows how quickly things can go wrong for inexperienced pilots at high altitudes removing the automation side of the job.

I'm yet to work with another Australian Captain that discourages hand flying. Other countries, complete opposite, the automatics are the bible.

Cralis
31st Mar 2017, 05:51
THanks PoppaJo... sounds like automation is required, based on this (http://avherald.com/h?article=47196b94)? Or at least, recommended.

IsDon
31st Mar 2017, 06:19
There is always an element of automation in most modern aircraft, even if you remove the AP, AT still exists. Hand Flying is quite dependant on weather, traffic, general experience, situation awareness and more often than none fatigue.

Have a read about the Jetstar blunder above Mildura in 2014. Shows how quickly things can go wrong for inexperienced pilots at high altitudes removing the automation side of the job.

I'm yet to work with another Australian Captain that discourages hand flying. Other countries, complete opposite, the automatics are the bible.

That was what I had in mind with my Airbus quote above.

With the Airbus there is always some form of automation watching your every move, even when you try to hand fly it's still there.

The Boeing isn't like that, (certainly the 767, it may be different with the newer Boeings).

If I was asked to explain the difference, in laymans terms, between an Airbus and a Boeing I'd explain it thus:

In a Boeing, if you wanted to roll the aeroplane upside down you could. The aeroplane would scream at you "Bank Angle, Bank Angle" leaving you in no doubt what you're doing, but if you want to do it, fill your boots. The pilot has final say.

In an Airbus you could get to 60 degrees Angle of Bank and then stop. No matter how hard you pushed the silly stick over it would just say, "No No Messieur, that's all I'm going to give you". The computer has final say. Now the computer is taking its information from all sorts of probes and other systems which may, in fact, be telling the computer complete bullsh1t. It's happened many times before, even in my airline. QF72 being a very public example. There is no way, short of direct law, of taking the computer out of the loop completely. Most of the time it behaves like an obedient copilot. Sometimes it behaves like its high on crack. Airbus arrogance even stated in the FCOM that Unusual Attitude recoveries didn't have to be trained as Airbus aircraft can't be stalled or put into unusual attitudes. Complete bollocks. We now train UA recovery in the simulator, as all responsible airlines should.

From what I've seen on the Airbus, most pilots are reluctant to hand fly because the aircraft is just not designed to be hand flown. Boeing pilots seem more inclined to hand fly because once you take control, you actually have it, completely. It's far more satisfying as a result.

PoppaJo
31st Mar 2017, 06:35
Airbus Pilots- Flying Computer Managers

maggot
31st Mar 2017, 08:09
Crikey, even an airbus- 2wings, engines and flight controls; just fly it. My current and previous airbus both needed to be 'flown'.
Backseat bus time doesn't count

itsnotthatbloodyhard
31st Mar 2017, 11:31
Crikey, even an airbus- 2wings, engines and flight controls; just fly it. My current and previous airbus both needed to be 'flown'.
Backseat bus time doesn't count

Precisely. I do the same amount of hand flying on the Bus as I did on the 76, and ultimately you operate them much the same way. Program something into the FMC, take off, hand fly till you get sick of it, drive it around on the automatics using whatever modes seem best at the time, disconnect, do some more hand flying, land, go and have a beer. If I ever have an urgent need to exceed 60 AOB, then I'll be cursing it as much as IsDon. Until then, the differences are a little exaggerated.