cockpit checks completed
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Wilmslow and North Yorks
Age: 53
Posts: 402
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you aren't checks complete at the point the controller says "cockpit checks, report complete" a reply of "limited checks complete" will suffice. In which case you can expect a final check for your gear as you're cleared to land. Seems to work well at every Military field i've visited.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: southampton,hampshire,england
Posts: 869
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Did a couple as a trainee controller about quarter of a century ago at an R&D unit. The aircraft would not be handed to the PAR controller until cockpit checks complete. Civvy pilots should not forget the complexity of a single seat fast jet compared to a multi-crew fully equipped modern luxurywagon. During the PAR talkdown there would be a transmission break to confirm gear and flaps, and intention. Consider also that earlier military jets needed real pilots....for example, the icing letdown in a Canberra.....or perhaps homing to the overhead [engine-out] to commence a spiral letdown and report passing cardinal points.
Remember what on-board navaids you had 25 years ago, the military pilot probably had less than half of that, and probably not much fuel either. For the controller, the kit is like something from the dark ages, and requires a high degree of technical knowledge to both set up and use....top respect to any PAR people out there!
Remember what on-board navaids you had 25 years ago, the military pilot probably had less than half of that, and probably not much fuel either. For the controller, the kit is like something from the dark ages, and requires a high degree of technical knowledge to both set up and use....top respect to any PAR people out there!
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: mids
Age: 59
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a matter of interest how often do mil controllers have to be signed off on PAR's. We quite often get asked to do one for controller currency. Which is not a problem although cheating a bit when we can see the runway.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Wilmslow and North Yorks
Age: 53
Posts: 402
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mike, Replacement PAR (RPAR) has now replaced the old CR62 system at all of the UK's military bases. The problem of it locking on to other aircraft passing through its "beam" has been resolved. It now "locks" the a/c on approach and provides the controller with a similar, although digital, display to the old system. I believe it's less user friendly though due to the lack of the old style primary return trails...
It's certainly not as easy to calibrate!
It's certainly not as easy to calibrate!
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: London UK
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a matter of interest how often do mil controllers have to be signed off on PAR's. We quite often get asked to do one for controller currency. Which is not a problem although cheating a bit when we can see the runway.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Karup, Denmark
Age: 70
Posts: 175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Been here since the 70'es. Have been to other places occasionally - and abroad. The controllers don't insist on moving. Why would we?
Thanks! The damaged single pilot jet has been mentioned. Hope I can talk you down to ground level/your minima - and if you really trust me, there will be a runway below your wheels!
Now here is a new approach to avoid "controller training in progress" (In the Royal Danish Air Force). They don't train any!
(And no APP or TWR controllers either!)
So enjoy a good PAR for the next few years here - and then it's lost - forever?
As a note having done quite a few now in anger down to mins and also in CAVOK for controller currency the voice and the tone of the talkdown makes a huge difference to the cockpit load.
Now here is a new approach to avoid "controller training in progress" (In the Royal Danish Air Force). They don't train any!
(And no APP or TWR controllers either!)
So enjoy a good PAR for the next few years here - and then it's lost - forever?
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Madrid FIR
Posts: 293
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Getting back to the thread title............
Just checked the JSP552, and it's only on PAR and SRA that the controller asks for checks. Why? I take the point of high workload single seat jets, military aircraft coming back shot up etc etc, but supposing our hero decides to do an ILS, or recover visually. He still has to carry out his approach and pre-landing checks, but now apparently nobody has to remind him. Where's the logic?
And how precisely does the request for landing checks act as a form of speed control? It has already been established that different types of aircraft require different types of checks at varying points on the approach (just look at a selection of pilots notes). So just because a Tornado might drop the gear and flaps and lose a few knots, doesn't automatically follow that the same applies to a C130.
I rather suspect that it's the old military system - we teach it because it's in the book, and it has to be in the book because we teach it.
Just checked the JSP552, and it's only on PAR and SRA that the controller asks for checks. Why? I take the point of high workload single seat jets, military aircraft coming back shot up etc etc, but supposing our hero decides to do an ILS, or recover visually. He still has to carry out his approach and pre-landing checks, but now apparently nobody has to remind him. Where's the logic?
And how precisely does the request for landing checks act as a form of speed control? It has already been established that different types of aircraft require different types of checks at varying points on the approach (just look at a selection of pilots notes). So just because a Tornado might drop the gear and flaps and lose a few knots, doesn't automatically follow that the same applies to a C130.
I rather suspect that it's the old military system - we teach it because it's in the book, and it has to be in the book because we teach it.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Karup, Denmark
Age: 70
Posts: 175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You are right! On no other approach would we ask the pilot his minima, write it down, and remind him at the end of the approach. They could be anything from 100 feet AGL and upwards. For many years we have used the GCA/PAR's technical minima: 100 feet/ 1/3 NM (2.75 degrees). "Radar's minima. I will continue advisory." And by the way some operators specifically ask us to "stop talking" on the very last part, as they are busy with either landing or going around!
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Karup, Denmark
Age: 70
Posts: 175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Come to think of it, why would a shot up warplane pilot be especially interested in his "minima for this approach". Here is the day he probably would say, very fairly, "make this a good one, I'm not going around!"