Runway crossing on tower frequency
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Belgium
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Runway crossing on tower frequency
Can anyone provide some input into how implementation of ICAO guidelines for all runway crossings to be undertaken on the tower frequencies, has been introduced, and how has it been received? I understand that it has been introduced in UK? Correct Y/N? Anywhere else? I see it is being introduced in Australia as well.
So many variables involved eg altitude and speed of the crosser, intensity of IFR arrivals and departures, classification of airspace, weather conditions etc that you're unlikely to find two airfields who do it exactly the same in the UK. Some airfields with class A or D airspace for instance, designate VFR crossing routes where the RTF procedures are laid down, whilst many just treat crossers on an ad hoc basis.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: UAE
Age: 57
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Runway crossing
Ok so this may sound real stupid, but how does the crossing of a runway have anything to do with the speed of the crosser or the type of airspace. I am assuming that the original poster is referring to aircraft on the ground wanting to cross an active runway unless I am totally mistaken, in which case ignore this post.......
Cheers
Wadi
Cheers
Wadi
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: France
Age: 55
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can't imagine an ACFT (on the ground) crossing an active RWY on an other freq than the one used for the active RWY. Unless active previous co-ordination between GND/TWR.
Usually, airborne ACFT are on the same frequency when vectored for spacing. Unless active previous co-ordination between TWR/APP, APP/ACC, ACC/ACC.
There are good reasons for that.
Usually, airborne ACFT are on the same frequency when vectored for spacing. Unless active previous co-ordination between TWR/APP, APP/ACC, ACC/ACC.
There are good reasons for that.
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Toronto
Age: 48
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pretty old-school stuff, Tower ops 101, I would have thought, for active aircraft at least. If you're on the runway, you should be on the Tower frequency. Changing to Ground at 40kts on the rollout to be ready with the call isn't a good idea yet I've seen it happen a lot.
The mix gets bigger with Ground vehicles, and tow's - but nonetheless the principle is the same - that the vehicle should be under the control of the Twr controller and not the Ground Controller. Presents a logistical issue as often the RT with ground vehicles is on UHF and the radio will be on the Ground Side.
Some interesting docs ... the first Human Factors and Runway Incursions,
the second is the Australian intro the first poster refers to.
http://www.paris.icao.int/documents_open_meetings/download.php?maincategory=40&subcategory=49&file=runway_mosc ow_20051212_pres4.pdf
http://www.airservicesaustralia.com/PUBLICATIONS/current/sup/a10-h05.pdf
The mix gets bigger with Ground vehicles, and tow's - but nonetheless the principle is the same - that the vehicle should be under the control of the Twr controller and not the Ground Controller. Presents a logistical issue as often the RT with ground vehicles is on UHF and the radio will be on the Ground Side.
Some interesting docs ... the first Human Factors and Runway Incursions,
the second is the Australian intro the first poster refers to.
http://www.paris.icao.int/documents_open_meetings/download.php?maincategory=40&subcategory=49&file=runway_mosc ow_20051212_pres4.pdf
http://www.airservicesaustralia.com/PUBLICATIONS/current/sup/a10-h05.pdf
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Ontario Canada Gulf Coast USA
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agree with wao
Ground gives taxi clearance from point A to the active R/W holding bay when departing the airport.
If Grd issued a taxi clearance included crossing a R/W on your way to the active R/W holding bay, then look carefully and cross it. If Grd didn't clear crossing R/W on way to the active....Don't cross it. If you don't know what ground said about crossing R/W STOP and ASK.
As wao said, stay with tower during rollout UNTIL ATC says exit X taxiway, and then when clear of the Active and on the taxiway, LISTEN before switching to Grd, 'cause Tower may be workin' both ATC and Grd at that particular moment and ask you to stay with him for taxi clearance. Otherwise he wil advise you to contact Ground @freq xxx.x
I see very little confusion with it in the Toronto area but that's MHO.
If Grd issued a taxi clearance included crossing a R/W on your way to the active R/W holding bay, then look carefully and cross it. If Grd didn't clear crossing R/W on way to the active....Don't cross it. If you don't know what ground said about crossing R/W STOP and ASK.
As wao said, stay with tower during rollout UNTIL ATC says exit X taxiway, and then when clear of the Active and on the taxiway, LISTEN before switching to Grd, 'cause Tower may be workin' both ATC and Grd at that particular moment and ask you to stay with him for taxi clearance. Otherwise he wil advise you to contact Ground @freq xxx.x
I see very little confusion with it in the Toronto area but that's MHO.
Guest
Posts: n/a
In principle it sounds like a good idea to have any vehicles that are crossing the runway on the same frequency as aircraft that are using the runway. I don't know exactly what ICAO currently says on the subject but I can give a bit of info about what happens in the UK....
Many years ago I think that the UK introduced a requirement for vehicles crossing the runway to use the TWR frequency. I recall there was a lot of resistance to this on grounds of cost (for fitting equipment to vehicles, particularly those which only occasionally needed to go on a runway) and, in practice, it was actually done at very few airports. There were also some 'technical' objections that aeronautical band frequencies are for communication between aeronautical ground stations and aircraft stations and, thus, their use for communicating with vehicles contravened ITU regulations.
Where vehicles do/did use TWR frequencies I have heard stories of poor RTF discipline and operating practise which caused disruption to TWR operations. I suspect many of these stories are apocryphal but I had personal experience of this on one occasion where - with good intentions - a vehicle driver made a number of inappropriate transmissions on a TWR frequency.
Whatever the reasons and history, in the UK there are currently several recommendations on the RT arrangements for runway crossing - in my view, these recommendations are a good compromise. The recommendations are in a document called CAP 670 ATS Safety Requirements and the relevant text is below:
Many years ago I think that the UK introduced a requirement for vehicles crossing the runway to use the TWR frequency. I recall there was a lot of resistance to this on grounds of cost (for fitting equipment to vehicles, particularly those which only occasionally needed to go on a runway) and, in practice, it was actually done at very few airports. There were also some 'technical' objections that aeronautical band frequencies are for communication between aeronautical ground stations and aircraft stations and, thus, their use for communicating with vehicles contravened ITU regulations.
Where vehicles do/did use TWR frequencies I have heard stories of poor RTF discipline and operating practise which caused disruption to TWR operations. I suspect many of these stories are apocryphal but I had personal experience of this on one occasion where - with good intentions - a vehicle driver made a number of inappropriate transmissions on a TWR frequency.
Whatever the reasons and history, in the UK there are currently several recommendations on the RT arrangements for runway crossing - in my view, these recommendations are a good compromise. The recommendations are in a document called CAP 670 ATS Safety Requirements and the relevant text is below:
6.2.2 Two-way radiotelephony communication facilities shall be provided for aerodrome (surface movement) control service for the purpose of controlling vehicles on the manoeuvring area, except where communication by a system of visual signals is deemed to be adequate.
NOTE: This communication facility is normally provided by UHF radio equipment and systems but the use of VHF Aeronautical Mobile Service frequencies may be permitted for ground to ground communications in specific circumstances.
Recommendation: Where conditions warrant, separate communication channels should be provided for the control of vehicles on the manoeuvring area.
Recommendation: VHF air-ground communications should be cross-coupled to UHF two-way radiotelephony communications for vehicles operating on the active runway.
NOTE: Cross-coupling between the VHF air-ground communications used for the control of aircraft and the UHF two-way radiotelephony communications used for the control of vehicles provides situational awareness for the aircrew, controller and operator of the vehicle. The vehicle operator is aware of any aircraft transmissions by monitoring the cross-coupled VHF Air-Ground Communications and has direct two-way radiotelephony communications with the controller. In some cases the transmissions from vehicles are re-transmitted to aircraft. As separate transmit and receive frequencies are used at UHF between the base station and vehicles, talkthrough facilities may be used to enable vehicles to hear one another.
NOTE: This communication facility is normally provided by UHF radio equipment and systems but the use of VHF Aeronautical Mobile Service frequencies may be permitted for ground to ground communications in specific circumstances.
Recommendation: Where conditions warrant, separate communication channels should be provided for the control of vehicles on the manoeuvring area.
Recommendation: VHF air-ground communications should be cross-coupled to UHF two-way radiotelephony communications for vehicles operating on the active runway.
NOTE: Cross-coupling between the VHF air-ground communications used for the control of aircraft and the UHF two-way radiotelephony communications used for the control of vehicles provides situational awareness for the aircrew, controller and operator of the vehicle. The vehicle operator is aware of any aircraft transmissions by monitoring the cross-coupled VHF Air-Ground Communications and has direct two-way radiotelephony communications with the controller. In some cases the transmissions from vehicles are re-transmitted to aircraft. As separate transmit and receive frequencies are used at UHF between the base station and vehicles, talkthrough facilities may be used to enable vehicles to hear one another.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Near Stalyvegas
Age: 78
Posts: 2,022
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Many [many] years ago, I was a "Runway Controller" at MAN. I had my own "discrete freq" for R/w crossers [usually vehicles] a/c stayed on the TWR freq. Now, a/c are cleared to taxi on GND, then transferred to TWR to cross.
Hope this helps
Hope this helps
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Belgium
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wadi/HD, completely correct. I am referring to taxiing, towing and all other traffic movements associated with an active runway.
I see in Australia they differentiate between an Active Runway and a Runway In Use, where a runway may be released to the Ground Controller and is therefore excluded from the procedure - that is, Not In Use. Unfortunately the link provided to the Australian site does not connect, but I have seen it elsewhere.
Eurocontrol also did some (heaps) of work on this as well I think? They came up with the same reccomendation as ICAO in having all traffic on the same frequency when opertaing on the runway, to improve situation awareness.
So researching the use of the procedure, I am looking for understanding of where, how and effectiveness of this guidance elsewhere.
To me is seems a no-brainer. Looking at the human factor presentation given by the Dutch professor (thanks Wao for the link), situation awareness comes out strongly; Same frequency, same language would seem to be the theme that can influence this issue most?
BH
I see in Australia they differentiate between an Active Runway and a Runway In Use, where a runway may be released to the Ground Controller and is therefore excluded from the procedure - that is, Not In Use. Unfortunately the link provided to the Australian site does not connect, but I have seen it elsewhere.
Eurocontrol also did some (heaps) of work on this as well I think? They came up with the same reccomendation as ICAO in having all traffic on the same frequency when opertaing on the runway, to improve situation awareness.
So researching the use of the procedure, I am looking for understanding of where, how and effectiveness of this guidance elsewhere.
To me is seems a no-brainer. Looking at the human factor presentation given by the Dutch professor (thanks Wao for the link), situation awareness comes out strongly; Same frequency, same language would seem to be the theme that can influence this issue most?
BH
Guest
Posts: n/a
This will get you to the Australian doc.
Theoretically your conclusion is a no-brainer - but the practicalities can throw up some problems. Just as a quick example, the distinction between an active runway and a runway in use can very easily become blurred and it is vital that everyone knows the status of each runway at all times. On a nice calm day, with multiple runways available, a request from a pilot for a convenient runway which can easily be accommodated by ATC brings its own HF challenges.....I've read a report where this sort of thing feature (but I can't recall much detail more offhand, I'm afraid).
Probably the most important thing in all of this is to use standard procedures/RTF and adherence to those procedures. Many runway incursions occur simply because the procedures in place were not followed (or maybe they weren't very good) and misunderstandings arose.
Theoretically your conclusion is a no-brainer - but the practicalities can throw up some problems. Just as a quick example, the distinction between an active runway and a runway in use can very easily become blurred and it is vital that everyone knows the status of each runway at all times. On a nice calm day, with multiple runways available, a request from a pilot for a convenient runway which can easily be accommodated by ATC brings its own HF challenges.....I've read a report where this sort of thing feature (but I can't recall much detail more offhand, I'm afraid).
Probably the most important thing in all of this is to use standard procedures/RTF and adherence to those procedures. Many runway incursions occur simply because the procedures in place were not followed (or maybe they weren't very good) and misunderstandings arose.
