IRAQ - VFR Clearences Issued in IMC?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: USA
Age: 74
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IRAQ - VFR Clearences Issued in IMC?
Maybe one of you knowledgeable gents can riddle me this... Recently we have obviously had a major change in Controllers in Iraq. Specifically, Ali Radar is now staffed by some international accents that provide some interesting results.
Specifically for me and my bretheren, lately after Takeoff, we have been given 'procede VFR to your operating area, Good bye'... What's this?
In Iraq at O'dark thirty 100-miles out no one has their lights on and we are being turned loose with a 'good bye'? (We should AT LEAST get a 'you be careful out there...')
Tonight (actually this morning at 0200) I was picked up by "Bagdad Approach" (again, what's this? It should be Ali Radar according to the IAP) at 65nm NW at 9,000 feet and told to procede VFR to Tallil. Oh, and there is a UAV at 5,000 feet over the field. Contact the tower at 10 miles...
I don't know about everyone else, but I am NOT liking this VFR stuff with UAV's in the area and no positive control. (When it is darker than the inside of a well diggers... THAT's IMC)
So... Chilli Monster or other local knowledgeable folks, am I wrong or just paranoid?
Gabilane
Specifically for me and my bretheren, lately after Takeoff, we have been given 'procede VFR to your operating area, Good bye'... What's this?
In Iraq at O'dark thirty 100-miles out no one has their lights on and we are being turned loose with a 'good bye'? (We should AT LEAST get a 'you be careful out there...')
Tonight (actually this morning at 0200) I was picked up by "Bagdad Approach" (again, what's this? It should be Ali Radar according to the IAP) at 65nm NW at 9,000 feet and told to procede VFR to Tallil. Oh, and there is a UAV at 5,000 feet over the field. Contact the tower at 10 miles...
I don't know about everyone else, but I am NOT liking this VFR stuff with UAV's in the area and no positive control. (When it is darker than the inside of a well diggers... THAT's IMC)
So... Chilli Monster or other local knowledgeable folks, am I wrong or just paranoid?
Gabilane
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Out There
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SevenUp
I would think lack of separation is an ADDITIONAL worry in an area like that. What's the point of ATC if they aren't going to help?
Last edited by SevenUp; 5th Aug 2011 at 08:35. Reason: Missing word
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: France
Age: 55
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What's the point of ATC if they aren't going to help?
I guess "Good bye" at the end of the message means : "Radar service terminated, Control Service terminated, Information Service Terminated".
Should we also understand "Alert Service terminated", as the VFR flight plan was not filed (because not expected) ?
I believe IFR cancelation is (or should be) only on pilot's request...
If there was any ATS on the route, one would expect "You may contact the Information Service", or anyone who's in charge of the area.
Maybe, "procede VFR" is a local version of the "join" instruction. The one we give to cross own-nav a non controlled area. But Information and Alert Services are still provided, we don't say "Good bye"...
Seems weird to me.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Anywhere
Posts: 2,212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gabilane
Even if it's dark, you can be VFR. However, duty of care is that you just don't do that to somebody, especially in our environment (It's dark, it's scary as you say. Didn't know about ther lights situation with yourselves though - I know the UAV's are unlit).
The problem is that the US Military, since the inception of Iraqi Freedom, have not operated the airspace in accordance with the respective ICAO classifications, and that has caused a big problem with regards the transition from USF-I to ICAA control. You now have a group of ex-pat controllers, who are faced with an airspace that says one thing, but historically things have been done as if it's all Class 'B'. This is changing, but the change is not going to be without some 'growing pains'. Some Controllers think it should be done the ICAO way straight away, others (myself included) know that the change is going to have to be gradual - especially with everything else that goes on from a tactical perspective.
It's not been helped by the airspace users wanting the best of both worlds - IFR separation, but the ability to operate VFR with the freedom that entails. That may have worked over the past 8 years but in the words of Bob Dylan; "The times, they are a changing".
If it happens again - pull the trump card - declare yourself IFR and request an IFR recovery (even with the comms being as bad as they are).
Even if it's dark, you can be VFR. However, duty of care is that you just don't do that to somebody, especially in our environment (It's dark, it's scary as you say. Didn't know about ther lights situation with yourselves though - I know the UAV's are unlit).
The problem is that the US Military, since the inception of Iraqi Freedom, have not operated the airspace in accordance with the respective ICAO classifications, and that has caused a big problem with regards the transition from USF-I to ICAA control. You now have a group of ex-pat controllers, who are faced with an airspace that says one thing, but historically things have been done as if it's all Class 'B'. This is changing, but the change is not going to be without some 'growing pains'. Some Controllers think it should be done the ICAO way straight away, others (myself included) know that the change is going to have to be gradual - especially with everything else that goes on from a tactical perspective.
It's not been helped by the airspace users wanting the best of both worlds - IFR separation, but the ability to operate VFR with the freedom that entails. That may have worked over the past 8 years but in the words of Bob Dylan; "The times, they are a changing".
If it happens again - pull the trump card - declare yourself IFR and request an IFR recovery (even with the comms being as bad as they are).
Join Date: May 2005
Location: sandpit
Age: 54
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Talk to your ops manager
Refer ICAO ( not FAA ) re Class G, E and D airspace and then say where you didn't get serviced properly. Request for Sep from the "dark things" and you'll get it.....simple !!!....if your properly informed by your ops manager and read up that is !!!!...we having same problem with non-ICAO schooled pilots where I am....but they are slowly getting the point.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: USA
Age: 74
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Chilli,
Where I operate normally, dark IS IMC (not over the city where you have a horizon), but 60 to 150 miles out with no horizon is most definitely IMC.
I can appreciate the confusion with the ATC controllers... I can't even get the pilot's to acknowledge that there rules (rules? what rules? we don't need no stinkin' rules...) and it doesn't help that the IAP says:
1.2.1.5 Coalition military aircraft and US TRANSCOM contracted aircraft flying on active legs in the Air Tasking Order (ATO) are exempt from ICAA requirements.
And the GP and AP's are no longer printed and distributed on paper, only by classified internet.
I did get another interesting response by PM from one of your contemporaries that suggests much of what you also write.
The bottom line for those of us out there in the airspace should be that we would like to be able to go home at the end of this rotation. I have offered my right seat to controllers to see the situation from our point of view, but no takers.
And why would the UAV operators even care? The worst thing that could happen to them is that they might fall out of their chair in the shelter where they are "flying" the UAV.
Again, I appreciate you addressing this issue. Regardless of what the macho pilots say, I know that they are all just as concerned with the poor coverage as I am.
Best Regards,
Gabilane
Where I operate normally, dark IS IMC (not over the city where you have a horizon), but 60 to 150 miles out with no horizon is most definitely IMC.
I can appreciate the confusion with the ATC controllers... I can't even get the pilot's to acknowledge that there rules (rules? what rules? we don't need no stinkin' rules...) and it doesn't help that the IAP says:
1.2.1.5 Coalition military aircraft and US TRANSCOM contracted aircraft flying on active legs in the Air Tasking Order (ATO) are exempt from ICAA requirements.
And the GP and AP's are no longer printed and distributed on paper, only by classified internet.
I did get another interesting response by PM from one of your contemporaries that suggests much of what you also write.
The bottom line for those of us out there in the airspace should be that we would like to be able to go home at the end of this rotation. I have offered my right seat to controllers to see the situation from our point of view, but no takers.
And why would the UAV operators even care? The worst thing that could happen to them is that they might fall out of their chair in the shelter where they are "flying" the UAV.
Again, I appreciate you addressing this issue. Regardless of what the macho pilots say, I know that they are all just as concerned with the poor coverage as I am.
Best Regards,
Gabilane
