Release on Contact
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Isle of Man
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Release on Contact
Hi guys
Having a discussion at work (regional airport APP/RAD unit) with my radar u/t, other ATCO &ATC Sup/Training Officer about the use by Centre of 'Released on Contact' for a non-standard inbound. I said that this wasn't allowed (remember it being banned way back in my ATCO career), nobody else had heard this and I couldn't find anything in the books to back it up. My justification was the aircraft that was coordinated by center and ROC, then calls you on box two for alternate runway or something similar, you have it identified and descend/vector it while it's still being controlled by the centre.
Discuss !
Having a discussion at work (regional airport APP/RAD unit) with my radar u/t, other ATCO &ATC Sup/Training Officer about the use by Centre of 'Released on Contact' for a non-standard inbound. I said that this wasn't allowed (remember it being banned way back in my ATCO career), nobody else had heard this and I couldn't find anything in the books to back it up. My justification was the aircraft that was coordinated by center and ROC, then calls you on box two for alternate runway or something similar, you have it identified and descend/vector it while it's still being controlled by the centre.
Discuss !
Last edited by FragRad; 17th Nov 2011 at 09:52. Reason: spelling!
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: southampton,hampshire,england
Posts: 866
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FragRad
Hi, you've already mentioned the "danger" in your post. I thought ROC was no longer approved. I would amend or insert into your MATS part 2 that you will not accept a ROC release....as a safety measure. Ask the centre for a more specific release. As a courtesy write to the centre ATC Ops informing them of your decision and I'm sure they will advise the relevant sector[s]. Rgds.
P.S. If you wish, you could run it by your ATC Inspectorate if you want to discuss it further.....they are good people....send them a copy at least.
P.S. If you wish, you could run it by your ATC Inspectorate if you want to discuss it further.....they are good people....send them a copy at least.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: solent-on-sea
Posts: 443
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't recall it specifically being banned but definitely not good practice, though obviously that doesn't mean it's not used frequently, due to risk as you say of being called on box 2 or taking someone else's call etc..
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good point about aircraft calling you on box 2 but not yet released by the other sector but before you can exercise ROC, is the aircraft under your control/your jurisdiction? Has the previous controller hand-off the label to you?
Last edited by Careless; 17th Nov 2011 at 12:11. Reason: spelling
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 348
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was taught several years ago, and still agree, that ROC was bad practice, for the main reason listed above re the pilot calling you on box 2.
I don't recall ever seeing anything in writing to say it is not specifically allowed. It's much safer to specify a time or place for the release.
I don't recall ever seeing anything in writing to say it is not specifically allowed. It's much safer to specify a time or place for the release.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: EGLL
Posts: 493
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a transferring controller, if I was giving a ROC I wouldn't transfer the a/c until clean of any confliction. Even if I was transferring an a/c without any release restriction I wouldn't transfer it until clean. If there was conflicting traffic then a release subject radar could be appropriate. As an accepting controller and the pilot called me on box 2 I would know it was not released. I should also be able to see any conflicts or ring the transferring controller if in doubt. As a pilot I would always say that I was calling on box 2 as we could be calling from well outside the sector coverage. Also on box 2 you don't transmit all the initial spiel that you would if you were on box 1 on initial contact.
I don't think ROC is banned, I think it is a fallback from the early days. Check out MATS Pt1 CAP 493, it might say in there.
I don't think ROC is banned, I think it is a fallback from the early days. Check out MATS Pt1 CAP 493, it might say in there.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In my day you would fail your Validation or LCE if you used the phrase " released on contact"
This guards against the possibility of a pilot calling the Approach Unit on his second box for whatever reason ( eg wx info , Runway etc ) and then being given control instructions prematurely.
We had all this out with SRG years ago.
Releases are at a time , place or level and nothing else as far as I was concerned but I guess we can now add following an electronic handover.
This guards against the possibility of a pilot calling the Approach Unit on his second box for whatever reason ( eg wx info , Runway etc ) and then being given control instructions prematurely.
We had all this out with SRG years ago.
Releases are at a time , place or level and nothing else as far as I was concerned but I guess we can now add following an electronic handover.
More than just an ATCO
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Up someone's nose
Age: 75
Posts: 1,768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I remember being given a thump by Jock Ellis at Redbrae back in about 1970 for using it. Too many ways for it to go wrong, apart from those mentioned above suppose the transferring controller made a mistake and it was not yet clear of all his traffic. c/s confusion and wrong a/c goes. loss of R/T and a/c goes by himself.
The Inbound release, as far as I remember, was worded as "....released at (Time, Position or Level) ...." so "released on contact" would not be a valid release.
The Inbound release, as far as I remember, was worded as "....released at (Time, Position or Level) ...." so "released on contact" would not be a valid release.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: solent-on-sea
Posts: 443
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ILS, "As an accepting controller and the pilot called me on box 2 I would know it was not released. I should also be able to see any conflicts or ring the transferring controller if in doubt."
How would you know it was not released if the pilot didn't say he was on box 2?
What if he took someone else's call to QSY?
What if you've no radar to see with ?
How would you know it was not released if the pilot didn't say he was on box 2?
What if he took someone else's call to QSY?
What if you've no radar to see with ?
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: EGLL
Posts: 493
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NLN
I am not condoning the use of ROC and have never used it myself, I am merely just stating my view through experience and what I would do. I admit there is room for error by using ROC and not sure whether the use of it has ever been included or banned in any official ATC documents. As I said I think it is a fall back from many years ago.
In answer to your questions:-
On initial contact to an approach unit what does an a/c have to say? When calling on box 2 what does the a/c say? Is it the same?
If the a/c took the wrong call to QSY then I would ring the unit it was being transferred to immedietly to advise.
If I didn't have any radar to see the a/c then I wouldn't expect a ROC, nor would I expect it to be published instructions.
Out of experience I would always announce that I was calling on box 2 to avoid confusion and also tell the controller that we are still with the controlling sector.
I am not condoning the use of ROC and have never used it myself, I am merely just stating my view through experience and what I would do. I admit there is room for error by using ROC and not sure whether the use of it has ever been included or banned in any official ATC documents. As I said I think it is a fall back from many years ago.
In answer to your questions:-
On initial contact to an approach unit what does an a/c have to say? When calling on box 2 what does the a/c say? Is it the same?
If the a/c took the wrong call to QSY then I would ring the unit it was being transferred to immedietly to advise.
If I didn't have any radar to see the a/c then I wouldn't expect a ROC, nor would I expect it to be published instructions.
Out of experience I would always announce that I was calling on box 2 to avoid confusion and also tell the controller that we are still with the controlling sector.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hants
Posts: 2,295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The aircraft calling on box to is not only a problem for ROC, it can also be a problem for standard releases if the offering sector has decided to hang onto the aircraft for a little longer (i.e. passed the coordinated release point) for any reason...
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Isle of Man
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for all the feedback guys, I'll contunue to instruct trainees not to accept it from the centre and ask for something more precise.
Careless - afraid we're not quite as sophisticated as to have electronic handoffs on the labels, we don't even have electronic transfer of estimates/departure times - come on NATS, give us a link into HCS (or whatever they called now!)
Careless - afraid we're not quite as sophisticated as to have electronic handoffs on the labels, we don't even have electronic transfer of estimates/departure times - come on NATS, give us a link into HCS (or whatever they called now!)
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: The foot of Mt. Belzoni.
Posts: 2,001
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Released leaving controlled airspace.
This one created an interesting discussion a few years ago, but I believe it's still fairly common. Any thoughts folks?
This one created an interesting discussion a few years ago, but I believe it's still fairly common. Any thoughts folks?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: The foot of Mt. Belzoni.
Posts: 2,001
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is a bit silly when 3 very busy airports in a very complex TMA environment are not even connected to NAS, the 'National Aerospace System'. Management types often spout about "singing from the same hymn-sheet". Let's start by all looking at the same radar picture. - Sorry, "situation display". 
Because until we do, the "Single European Sky" is nothing but a pipe-dream.
Because until we do, the "Single European Sky" is nothing but a pipe-dream.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Obviously a new use of the word National that I'm not familiar with....
On the subject of released on contact I'm with what seems to be the majority view - it doesn't comply with the rules and so you're on dodgy ground if it goes wrong. And there are too many ways it can go wrong. That doesn't mean I've never done it or accepted such a release but I would never recommend it as good or normal practice. When it comes to trainees, I think it has to covered by the training so that the u/t understands the risks and implications. Advising a u/t not to accept ROC is a good idea but ultimately every controller has to make their own decisions and that should be based on a good understanding of the factors involved rather than simply being told it's not a good idea.
Released leaving CAS I have few problems with. Having worked approach for many years at an airport not directly connected to the airway system it is essentially a point, it's just that you may not know where it's going to be. When I worked in that environment NATS went through a bit of the transition from providing aircraft joining/leaving airways with a service to 'if it's outside CAS then we don't provide a service' so a lot of the releases were leaving CAS leaving APR to resolve any conflicts for joiners/leavers. Not a problem - just a bit more work sometimes for APR.
On the subject of released on contact I'm with what seems to be the majority view - it doesn't comply with the rules and so you're on dodgy ground if it goes wrong. And there are too many ways it can go wrong. That doesn't mean I've never done it or accepted such a release but I would never recommend it as good or normal practice. When it comes to trainees, I think it has to covered by the training so that the u/t understands the risks and implications. Advising a u/t not to accept ROC is a good idea but ultimately every controller has to make their own decisions and that should be based on a good understanding of the factors involved rather than simply being told it's not a good idea.
Released leaving CAS I have few problems with. Having worked approach for many years at an airport not directly connected to the airway system it is essentially a point, it's just that you may not know where it's going to be. When I worked in that environment NATS went through a bit of the transition from providing aircraft joining/leaving airways with a service to 'if it's outside CAS then we don't provide a service' so a lot of the releases were leaving CAS leaving APR to resolve any conflicts for joiners/leavers. Not a problem - just a bit more work sometimes for APR.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Here, where I am
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Way back in the distant past (1980) when our Cadet Course was doing the Approach Procedural Course at CATC, we were told that there was no such thing as Release on Contact and that we should refuse such a release if an ACC tried to pass it. You could, however, have a Release AND Contact provided a place/level/time was included. e.g. Release and contact at 1015. Highest mark I ever got at CATC was for Approach Procedural - 87%. It's all been downhill from there really!
