RIS: a couple of niggles

[tubthumper]

Probably going over old ground again, but there are a couple of questions that I can't find a definitive answer to, relating to radar services outside controlled airspace:

1. Radar information service: It has been permissable for some years now to "....provide radar vectors for the purpose of tactical planning....". What is meant by that phrase "tactical planning"?

2. This one's the one that gives me the heartache: Where does it say we can allocate levels to traffic under a RIS? We can vector, fine, but climb and descend? It's not a lot of use being able to do one without the other, but surely the line of distinction between RIS and RAS becomes increasingly blurred if one can send 'em left, right, up, and down under both levels of service.

I could, and probably will, go on about this for some time, but for now, your thoughts please.

[flower]

What springs to mind with me on both points is that the traffic under RIS will be entering CAS at some point.
The traffic on a tactical planning issue may at some point be vectored for an ILS so you are giving a heading towards the point you wish him to enter the Zone ?
Or;
To place the traffic in a better position when transiting the zone against arrivals and departures ?

Regarding levels, again we do this to traffic receiving a RIS joining the airways system, they are allocated a level at which they are to enter CAS at, they choose when to climb or descend but they must be at that level by the airspace boundary.

Sometimes the traffic doesn't want a RAS but a RIS, Military traffic springs to mind immediately on that point, or your workload is too high to offer a RAS but you nevertheless need to ensure some control over the traffic prior to entering CAS ?

[Chilli Monster]

Tubbie mon brave - ca va?

1) Vectoring for tactical planning:- otherwise known as "sequencing" to the rest of the world (that should make it clearer).

2) Allocation of levels - If you think about it logically you're not allocating a level under RIS, but your allocating it as part of an Approach Control Service. So, taking it one step further, you'd allocate levels to your inbounds and outbounds (Approach Control) but your outside CAS transits get to fly at whatever level they want (taking into account flight rules and correct quadrantal etc) and it's their problem - not yours. Subject to those levels you then have to work your inbound / outbound traffic around it.

Flower - why would traffic under a RIS be entering CAS at some point? (TG, BE, MC, CN, MH etc etc)

[tubthumper]

Regarding levels, again we do this to traffic receiving a RIS joining the airways system, they are allocated a level at which they are to enter CAS at, they choose when to climb or descend but they must be at that level by the airspace boundary.

But would you instruct the pilot to climb/descend? If the pilot is issued with such an airways joining clearance, he has to climb to that level anyway, even if he's not under a radar service at all.

MATS 1 says,"Controllers can expect the pilot (in receipt of a RAS) to accept vectors or level allocations which may require flight in IMC." Under RIS, it only states, "the controller may provide radar vectors for the purpose of tactical planning or at the request of the pilot." No-where does it say anything about allocating levels. However, whenever this subject is raised, and the question is asked, the answer always comes back as an emphatic "Yes, you can issue climb/descent instructions to aircraft under a RIS". Where does it say this? Or am I just stuck in the past, when things were so much more simple, i.e. RIS meant you watched 'em on radar, passed the traffic, and let them get on with it. No headings, no levels, nothing. If you wanted to be told go left, go right, go up, go down, it was a radar advisory service.

[Chilli Monster]

Originally Posted by tubthumper

But would you instruct the pilot to climb/descend? If the pilot is issued with such an airways joining clearance, he has to climb to that level anyway, even if he's not under a radar service at all.

But if they weren't under a Radar Service you'd still give them climb / descent against known IFR traffic until they reached CAS - hence the reason I used the Approach Control v RIS split of responsibility.

Or am I just stuck in the past, when things were so much more simple, i.e. RIS meant you watched 'em on radar, passed the traffic, and let them get on with it. No headings, no levels, nothing. If you wanted to be told go left, go right, go up, go down, it was a radar advisory service.

No - you're correct - for aircraft not utilising an Approach Control Service (Inbounds / Outbounds), but just using you for a RIS when transitting outside CAS in the area in which you work.

[flower]

Originally Posted by Chilli Monster

Flower - why would traffic under a RIS be entering CAS at some point? (TG, BE, MC, CN, MH etc etc)

Reread the subtleties of my posting dear Chilli The example I can think of is as a transit of Class D. We also have trainers joining the airways system which only receive a RIS outside, flying the correct quadrantal, which need to be at a different level upon entering CAS.

Tubthumper the rules regarding vectors under a RIS came in when we were at College all those decades ago

[Turn It Off]

1 . Vectors may be applied for tactical use - mainly this would be sequencing but, as Folower rightly said, Could be to position someone for an easier zone crossing. However, these vectors may NOT be used for seperation. Lets remember an a/c on a RIS could be VFR and may tell you that they cannot maintain the heading anymore.

2. Level instructions cannot be issued to traffic on a RIS. RIS a/c are responsible for their own terrain seperation, and, once again may be VFR and not abble to accept the climb / descent due to cloud.

With an a/c joining CAS and they are changing from their quandrantal the pilot will change when they are ready. However, in anything other than Class A airspace, the pilot could still be VFR and unable to accept the level issued and may require a new / ammended clearance - Remain outside is a good one!!

TIO