Approach Speeds
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Moscow
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you, HEATHROW DIRECTOR & NATCA A80.
And what about higher altitudes then? Say, from cruising FL till base leg? When do you start to slow down the traffic for intervals? What are speed ranges for different types?
It's not just for idle interest, guys. I spent 10 years in area control followed by three years at a busy tower. Recently I seized an opportunity to test myself at Radar Approach, and will start simulator next week. I wouldn't like to hear from the pilots 'Unable' most of the time.
Thanks again.
And what about higher altitudes then? Say, from cruising FL till base leg? When do you start to slow down the traffic for intervals? What are speed ranges for different types?
It's not just for idle interest, guys. I spent 10 years in area control followed by three years at a busy tower. Recently I seized an opportunity to test myself at Radar Approach, and will start simulator next week. I wouldn't like to hear from the pilots 'Unable' most of the time.
Thanks again.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Scott can help elaborate on how the Enroute Enviroment handles arrival traffic to busy terminals here in the U.S.
At Atlanta Hartsfield, the arrivals come over 4 post (two downwinds, and two base legs) from the Enroute center, in trail and vectored for the STARS. The downwind post arrivals are at 14,000 and descended to 11,000, when they are put onto the downwind they descend to 7,000. Normally their speeds aren't reduced until they descend out of 10,000, and by the time they enter the downwind leg they are descending to 7,000 and slowing to 210 or 180 depending on what the final controller needs.
Base leg traffic is dumped to 6,000 or 5,000 (depending if they are entering from the South or North) from 11,000 and slowed to usually 180. Finals then turn everyone onto the approaches and slow them down to tweak the finals, I haven't seen anything slower than 150, with 170 being the norm.
I've watched some really good controllers work a large amount of traffic trying to learn from them, these individuals make working traffic at Atlanta look easy, even though due to the volume it isn't. I'm itching to get out of the classroom and simulator and start training.
Mike
NATCA A80
At Atlanta Hartsfield, the arrivals come over 4 post (two downwinds, and two base legs) from the Enroute center, in trail and vectored for the STARS. The downwind post arrivals are at 14,000 and descended to 11,000, when they are put onto the downwind they descend to 7,000. Normally their speeds aren't reduced until they descend out of 10,000, and by the time they enter the downwind leg they are descending to 7,000 and slowing to 210 or 180 depending on what the final controller needs.
Base leg traffic is dumped to 6,000 or 5,000 (depending if they are entering from the South or North) from 11,000 and slowed to usually 180. Finals then turn everyone onto the approaches and slow them down to tweak the finals, I haven't seen anything slower than 150, with 170 being the norm.
I've watched some really good controllers work a large amount of traffic trying to learn from them, these individuals make working traffic at Atlanta look easy, even though due to the volume it isn't. I'm itching to get out of the classroom and simulator and start training.
Mike
NATCA A80
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Wales
Posts: 302
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Speed
Hi,
It might be useful to look at some approach plates also. They will show any SLP ( Speed Limit Points ) which can have an effect on where and when a pilot starts bringing his / her speed back.
Certainly as far as Approach radar goes, 210 Downwind, 180 Base and 160 to 4 is about right, but that varies with aircraft and company op procedures.
Another couple of bits to bear in mind, in the UK ( Not sure if it applies outside the UK or not ?? ) 250kts below 10000' ( can be deristricted by ATC ) unless you are an E145 then its 230kts - apparently something to do with windscreens and birdstrikes.
Hope thats some help.
TIO
It might be useful to look at some approach plates also. They will show any SLP ( Speed Limit Points ) which can have an effect on where and when a pilot starts bringing his / her speed back.
Certainly as far as Approach radar goes, 210 Downwind, 180 Base and 160 to 4 is about right, but that varies with aircraft and company op procedures.
Another couple of bits to bear in mind, in the UK ( Not sure if it applies outside the UK or not ?? ) 250kts below 10000' ( can be deristricted by ATC ) unless you are an E145 then its 230kts - apparently something to do with windscreens and birdstrikes.
Hope thats some help.
TIO
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
cancel_mayday
HEATHROW DIRECTOR has given some pretty good pointers on suitable speeds for modern jets to fly. One thing that Heathrow/Gatwick etc are very good at is assigning 210kts or 220kts as the downwind speed depending upon aircraft type. I used to know which speed to assign to which aircraft, but I can't remember which speed is for which aircraft any more (old age creeping up). If you can get someone to give you some guide on that matter you will get some very happy aircrew and reduce the number of requests over the RT for different speeds.
There are a number of ATC units in certain parts of the world who are inflexible on downwind speed assignment, adding to noise and fuel burn.
As an aside, do you know if Sheremetevo and Domodedovo (sp?) Approach Radar units have mode C? It seems we are never cleared to a lower level until we have reached and reported reaching a previously assigned one.
G W-H
HEATHROW DIRECTOR has given some pretty good pointers on suitable speeds for modern jets to fly. One thing that Heathrow/Gatwick etc are very good at is assigning 210kts or 220kts as the downwind speed depending upon aircraft type. I used to know which speed to assign to which aircraft, but I can't remember which speed is for which aircraft any more (old age creeping up). If you can get someone to give you some guide on that matter you will get some very happy aircrew and reduce the number of requests over the RT for different speeds.
There are a number of ATC units in certain parts of the world who are inflexible on downwind speed assignment, adding to noise and fuel burn.
As an aside, do you know if Sheremetevo and Domodedovo (sp?) Approach Radar units have mode C? It seems we are never cleared to a lower level until we have reached and reported reaching a previously assigned one.
G W-H
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Fort Worth ARTCC ZFW
Posts: 1,155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The enroute portion in the US is just about any sort of speed depending mainly on the sequence and if there are any delays. If we are running delays, then everyone gets 250 KIAS. If not, then the front person gets barber pole <G>, and we go back from there. Normally at the BUSY places, there is a restriction of sorts going into approach control from the enroute environment. In our case it is normally 250 KIAS. It can also depend on the flow of traffic. If you are feeding to what is known here as the short side (going to be going directly to a base leg from the enroute environment.) they will want you lower and slower. If you are going to the long side (going to fly a downwind.) then you can be higher and a little faster for a short time longer.
regards
Scott
regards
Scott
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Moscow
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Giles Wembley-Hogg,
exactly. Different types - different speeds (ecpeccially the case to old Russian-built a/c. They are less flexible). Our foreign colleagues have much more radar vectoring experience, so I thought they could give the figures for any type at once.
All Moscow's airports (as well as a very large portion of en-route space) have been served by ATC from a single centre (by swedish Tercas) for more than 20 years, and from the very beginning mode C has been used.
exactly. Different types - different speeds (ecpeccially the case to old Russian-built a/c. They are less flexible). Our foreign colleagues have much more radar vectoring experience, so I thought they could give the figures for any type at once.
All Moscow's airports (as well as a very large portion of en-route space) have been served by ATC from a single centre (by swedish Tercas) for more than 20 years, and from the very beginning mode C has been used.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
<<I thought they could give the figures for any type at once>>
Not that easy as identical aircraft, operated by the same airline on the same sectors will often want different speeds. If I recall correctly, when BA brought in A320s we were told that the preferred intermediate approach speed was 220kts... but we lost count of the number of crews who said "we'd prefer 210".
Not that easy as identical aircraft, operated by the same airline on the same sectors will often want different speeds. If I recall correctly, when BA brought in A320s we were told that the preferred intermediate approach speed was 220kts... but we lost count of the number of crews who said "we'd prefer 210".
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
cancel_mayday
Since it seems I could be one of your customers one day, if I am visiting in a 757 then the following speeds suit me nicely:
Cruise - 10000'/ ca 2950m M0.8/290kts
Below 10000'/ ca 2950m 290kts-250kts
Downwind 210kts
Base leg 180kts
Final 160kts to 4NM
If I am visiting in a 767, then the only speed I would change is downwind to 220kts.
Frankfurt use 170kts to the outer marker, but that doesn't work very well for us and I would urge you not to go down that route.
HEATHROW DIRECTOR and his former workmates were very good at giving us our range from touchdown. This isn't done much around the rest of the world, but it is very helpful. Is it something your unit has considered or do you already provide ranges to the locals and if so is it in km or NM? Just interested to know.
G W-H
Since it seems I could be one of your customers one day, if I am visiting in a 757 then the following speeds suit me nicely:
Cruise - 10000'/ ca 2950m M0.8/290kts
Below 10000'/ ca 2950m 290kts-250kts
Downwind 210kts
Base leg 180kts
Final 160kts to 4NM
If I am visiting in a 767, then the only speed I would change is downwind to 220kts.
Frankfurt use 170kts to the outer marker, but that doesn't work very well for us and I would urge you not to go down that route.
HEATHROW DIRECTOR and his former workmates were very good at giving us our range from touchdown. This isn't done much around the rest of the world, but it is very helpful. Is it something your unit has considered or do you already provide ranges to the locals and if so is it in km or NM? Just interested to know.
G W-H
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Giles. Although I'm now in the land of carpet slippers and Horlicks I'd just like to thank you and your colleagues for letting ATC know when you're fairly light and going to pull the speed right back on final. The 757 really can slow up dramatically inside 4nm and if the controller gets enough warning he can pop the next one a half mile or so further out. Saves the Tower man getting the shakes!
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Funny you should mention that HD. I was just thinking today as we left BNN that it has been a long time since I have had to warn LL INT that we will be slower than 120kts inside 4dme. Our loads must be on the up!
G W-H
G W-H
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Moscow
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you, Giles. No problems with your flights to Moscow - you'll be given all you need. The others, don't be angree, please
No, here Radar usually gives distances in KMS after pilot request. With kind of equipment you have, do you really need such info? Some Towers, where precision radar still exists (in Moscow these are UUWW and UUEE), will give you meter-deviations from the gliidepath. But this is on final only where, as you said, speeds are regulated too. Is that correct?
No, here Radar usually gives distances in KMS after pilot request. With kind of equipment you have, do you really need such info? Some Towers, where precision radar still exists (in Moscow these are UUWW and UUEE), will give you meter-deviations from the gliidepath. But this is on final only where, as you said, speeds are regulated too. Is that correct?
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
cancel_mayday
I thought that kms might be the answer. Just in case you are interested I will give you some background to our operation into Domodedovo (please ignore if it is too boring!)
You guys operate on QFE below transition height. In Boeing aircraft the EGPWS (terrain avoidance equipment) has to be switched off when QFE is used. To get around this problem and to allow the EGPWS to be left switched on, when we are cleared by a controller to a HEIGHT in METRES we translate this into an ALTITUDE in FEET on the flight deck. This is why BA aircrews may read back their clearances rather haltingly - our brains are doing a lot of work!!
When it comes to flying the approach (depicted on the chart as heights in meters - more maths going on!) we normally navigate the aircraft using inertial reference (IRS) which is corrected by regular updates from DMEs and VORs on the ground. Now, on the way to Moscow we cross a large distance where there are no VOR/DMEs. This means that our navigational accuracy gets worse as we approach the destination. All is not lost however, because the MR VOR/DME is available near UUDD. This updates the position quite accurately for a bit, but as we turn south towards UUDD it seems to introduce an error to our position (we refer to this as a "map shift"). At this point we are normally trying to navigate using the NDBs on the arrival route. It seems that these NDBs are not always radiating as strongly as they might (if at all) and like all NDBs the indications on the flight deck can be affected by weather conditions.
At this point in the approach (about 5nms north of the field) Krug start to give us vectors. On a prvious thread we dicussed Continuous Descent Approaches (CDAs). In order to minimise fuel burn and noise to our hosts we try to fly these whenever possible. Taking into account all that has been discussed so far ie. 1. our navigational display is less than accurate 2. we are flying radar headings - so don't know where we are going next 3. we are trying to fly a CDA, some people would normally ask ATC how many miles we have from touchdown ("how many track miles to run?" is a phrase used by some. This is a long winded way of explaining why I wondered in what units you passed range from the threshold!!!
Incedentally, it seems that we are unable to fly the 2 NDB approaches to Domodedovo because there is no DME on the field and thus there is no way to work out when to start descent. Some people brief that if we have to fly this approach then we can get ranges from ATC. I normally point out that the ranges will be given in kms and that normally puts them off the idea!
Do you offer SRAs or PARs into UUDD?
I hope that I haven't bored you too much and thank you for your information.
G W-H
I thought that kms might be the answer. Just in case you are interested I will give you some background to our operation into Domodedovo (please ignore if it is too boring!)
You guys operate on QFE below transition height. In Boeing aircraft the EGPWS (terrain avoidance equipment) has to be switched off when QFE is used. To get around this problem and to allow the EGPWS to be left switched on, when we are cleared by a controller to a HEIGHT in METRES we translate this into an ALTITUDE in FEET on the flight deck. This is why BA aircrews may read back their clearances rather haltingly - our brains are doing a lot of work!!
When it comes to flying the approach (depicted on the chart as heights in meters - more maths going on!) we normally navigate the aircraft using inertial reference (IRS) which is corrected by regular updates from DMEs and VORs on the ground. Now, on the way to Moscow we cross a large distance where there are no VOR/DMEs. This means that our navigational accuracy gets worse as we approach the destination. All is not lost however, because the MR VOR/DME is available near UUDD. This updates the position quite accurately for a bit, but as we turn south towards UUDD it seems to introduce an error to our position (we refer to this as a "map shift"). At this point we are normally trying to navigate using the NDBs on the arrival route. It seems that these NDBs are not always radiating as strongly as they might (if at all) and like all NDBs the indications on the flight deck can be affected by weather conditions.
At this point in the approach (about 5nms north of the field) Krug start to give us vectors. On a prvious thread we dicussed Continuous Descent Approaches (CDAs). In order to minimise fuel burn and noise to our hosts we try to fly these whenever possible. Taking into account all that has been discussed so far ie. 1. our navigational display is less than accurate 2. we are flying radar headings - so don't know where we are going next 3. we are trying to fly a CDA, some people would normally ask ATC how many miles we have from touchdown ("how many track miles to run?" is a phrase used by some. This is a long winded way of explaining why I wondered in what units you passed range from the threshold!!!
Incedentally, it seems that we are unable to fly the 2 NDB approaches to Domodedovo because there is no DME on the field and thus there is no way to work out when to start descent. Some people brief that if we have to fly this approach then we can get ranges from ATC. I normally point out that the ranges will be given in kms and that normally puts them off the idea!
Do you offer SRAs or PARs into UUDD?
I hope that I haven't bored you too much and thank you for your information.
G W-H
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Scott
Time and speed are only any good if you know where you are going. This is something you don't know very accurately if you have suffered map shift in an area where the NDBs aren't always giving reliable readings (or worse still, are being vectored by a US Approach radar facility!!!!!)
G W-H
Time and speed are only any good if you know where you are going. This is something you don't know very accurately if you have suffered map shift in an area where the NDBs aren't always giving reliable readings (or worse still, are being vectored by a US Approach radar facility!!!!!)
G W-H
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Moscow
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Giles Wembley-Hogg,
It was very interesting to know your view of the problem of QFE and meters. Who else flies on QFE? Who else in the world uses meters except Russia, Mongolia and China?
No, your post wasn't neither boring nor too long. I didn't know before that Boeing's EGPWS needs feets only. Is it the same with Airbus? I didn't know either that your approach plates are depicted in meters on QFE. You really have to do a lot of arithmetic here?
Lack of VORs is a historical Russian problem as we had used a different navsystem for tens of years. I know nothing about the range of those NDBs on the doorstep of UUDD. They should be strong enough at 50-km range, though.
Do you know what 'Krug' means? 'Circle' is the answer (= Radar, Director etc. abroad). Vectors are usual practice in time of traffic peaks at Moscow's airports. If it's most effective, I don't know. UUDD continues to 'steal' airlines from other Moscow's airports which results in severe jams in the morning and in the evening. And believe me, nobody on the ground cares of the fuel burnt in the air and noise problems. Safety is the primary task in the ratherlimited air space with lots of military and other restrictions and under very strict rules of air space use.
There's been no more PAR at Domodedovo since they upgraded Tower, so there's no such kind of approach. SRA is rather unusual practice for Russia. But ILS is 'on' most of the time.
We'll certainly be able to speak over the radio one day as the last part of your route to Domodedovo, Moscow (UUDD) passes through my future area of responsibility (points BP-WT).
Thank you for your attention to the problem and very clear explanation. Don't you know Steven John, by the way?
It was very interesting to know your view of the problem of QFE and meters. Who else flies on QFE? Who else in the world uses meters except Russia, Mongolia and China?
No, your post wasn't neither boring nor too long. I didn't know before that Boeing's EGPWS needs feets only. Is it the same with Airbus? I didn't know either that your approach plates are depicted in meters on QFE. You really have to do a lot of arithmetic here?
Lack of VORs is a historical Russian problem as we had used a different navsystem for tens of years. I know nothing about the range of those NDBs on the doorstep of UUDD. They should be strong enough at 50-km range, though.
Do you know what 'Krug' means? 'Circle' is the answer (= Radar, Director etc. abroad). Vectors are usual practice in time of traffic peaks at Moscow's airports. If it's most effective, I don't know. UUDD continues to 'steal' airlines from other Moscow's airports which results in severe jams in the morning and in the evening. And believe me, nobody on the ground cares of the fuel burnt in the air and noise problems. Safety is the primary task in the ratherlimited air space with lots of military and other restrictions and under very strict rules of air space use.
There's been no more PAR at Domodedovo since they upgraded Tower, so there's no such kind of approach. SRA is rather unusual practice for Russia. But ILS is 'on' most of the time.
We'll certainly be able to speak over the radio one day as the last part of your route to Domodedovo, Moscow (UUDD) passes through my future area of responsibility (points BP-WT).
Thank you for your attention to the problem and very clear explanation. Don't you know Steven John, by the way?