Occurrence Reporting by ATC
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Occurrence Reporting by ATC
Hi all
Looking for an experienced take on things... Can anyone shed any light on the timescales and processes behind when ATC file an MOR or ASR equivalent?
Also what sort of things tend to get reported from your perspective and if there are any aircraft involved in the issue, do you always get in touch with the crew over the phone or inform them you will be filing a report?
Looking forward to hearing your thoughts. Thanks.
M2m
Looking for an experienced take on things... Can anyone shed any light on the timescales and processes behind when ATC file an MOR or ASR equivalent?
Also what sort of things tend to get reported from your perspective and if there are any aircraft involved in the issue, do you always get in touch with the crew over the phone or inform them you will be filing a report?
Looking forward to hearing your thoughts. Thanks.
M2m
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Down South
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We have a list of things that are mandatory to report including airport, pilots deviating from a clearance, icing conditions, heavy turbulence, anything where a Pan or Mayday is declared.
It's unlikely the actual controller will get involved in speaking to the aircrew as all our reports get passed to the Investigations department and they take it from there. We can get feedback on the results when they get them.
As for timescales, it depends entirely on the incident and what the Investigations lot need to find out or who they need to contact. UK airlines are pretty good although trying to track down of the bizjet pilots can be more difficult so any reporting will take longer. Obviously it's all got to be run past the CAA at some point
This is from a UK perspective and in particular NATS en-route
It's unlikely the actual controller will get involved in speaking to the aircrew as all our reports get passed to the Investigations department and they take it from there. We can get feedback on the results when they get them.
As for timescales, it depends entirely on the incident and what the Investigations lot need to find out or who they need to contact. UK airlines are pretty good although trying to track down of the bizjet pilots can be more difficult so any reporting will take longer. Obviously it's all got to be run past the CAA at some point
This is from a UK perspective and in particular NATS en-route
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ah wonderful, thanks very much for the response. And is it the same situation for ATC peeps working in the Tower?
This discussion amongst myself and some colleagues has been going on far too long and it would be really nice to get an ATC perspective
1) Are you aware of the weather minimums that inbound and outbound traffic operate to (Do you ask or just leave the crew to decide for themselves)?
2) In the specific case where an aircraft would make an approach in conditions below these minimums would you refuse or still give a landing clearance?
3) And following normal visual ref's by the crew at DA and a normal, non-eventful touchdown, would you classify this as an occurrence to be reported?
If you were to report it would you get in touch with the crew on landing to advise them of that or not?
m2m
This discussion amongst myself and some colleagues has been going on far too long and it would be really nice to get an ATC perspective
1) Are you aware of the weather minimums that inbound and outbound traffic operate to (Do you ask or just leave the crew to decide for themselves)?
2) In the specific case where an aircraft would make an approach in conditions below these minimums would you refuse or still give a landing clearance?
3) And following normal visual ref's by the crew at DA and a normal, non-eventful touchdown, would you classify this as an occurrence to be reported?
If you were to report it would you get in touch with the crew on landing to advise them of that or not?
m2m
Guest
Posts: n/a
General point to start.....ATC may be required to report many things as a local procedure, this is supposed to help an ATC unit/company to tweak its safety management systems and to make sure everything is covered. Some of these reports must be submitted as part of the MOR scheme in the UK (different names in other countries). There is a European Directive on occurrence reporting which says that each State must capture certain specific events and analyse or investigate these events. The MORE scheme is the UK's way of meeting the directive. Our friends at EASA are in the process of helping the European Commission to draft a regulation (rather than a directive) which looks like it will be far more specific about how occurrence reports will be submitted and handled.
On to the questions you ask, here are my thoughts (from a UK viewpoint although most other European States work to similar principles) ...
1 - ATC do not know what minima crews operate to but, certainly controllers at an airport have a good feel for whether an aircraft will be starting an approach or not. Ultimately of course, it's up to the aircraft commander in accordance with his/her Ops Manual.
2 - In the UK there is an ATC procedure, commonly known as the 'absolute minima' procedure where ATC will ask the crew to check their minima in certain conditions. To do this each ATC unit has a table of minima for each approach that is the lowest that an aircraft can legitimately make an approach. If a pilot says he/she wants to make an approach below these conditions the controller will ask the crew to check their minima. If the pilot still wants to make an approach ATC has some special phraseology that does not clear the aircraft for the approach but says there is no traffic in the way. This gets reported to the CAA.
3 - A normal landing does not get reported....although the passengers seem to clap for some reason on many flights.
ATC would not normally contact the crew after landing - if I recall correctly the procedure specifically stops this in order not to compromise any subsequent legal action taken by the CAA.
That's what happens in the real world and it would surprise me if it was not fully covered in professional pilot training.
On to the questions you ask, here are my thoughts (from a UK viewpoint although most other European States work to similar principles) ...
1 - ATC do not know what minima crews operate to but, certainly controllers at an airport have a good feel for whether an aircraft will be starting an approach or not. Ultimately of course, it's up to the aircraft commander in accordance with his/her Ops Manual.
2 - In the UK there is an ATC procedure, commonly known as the 'absolute minima' procedure where ATC will ask the crew to check their minima in certain conditions. To do this each ATC unit has a table of minima for each approach that is the lowest that an aircraft can legitimately make an approach. If a pilot says he/she wants to make an approach below these conditions the controller will ask the crew to check their minima. If the pilot still wants to make an approach ATC has some special phraseology that does not clear the aircraft for the approach but says there is no traffic in the way. This gets reported to the CAA.
3 - A normal landing does not get reported....although the passengers seem to clap for some reason on many flights.
ATC would not normally contact the crew after landing - if I recall correctly the procedure specifically stops this in order not to compromise any subsequent legal action taken by the CAA.
That's what happens in the real world and it would surprise me if it was not fully covered in professional pilot training.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: South Coast and Suffolk
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
M2m- for ATCOs (as well as other's) in the UK we follow the guidance in CAP382.
'Absolute Minima' has been changed a bit and the table of figures at each unit has now gone, the MATS Part 1 refers to it as 'Absolute Operating Minima' and the special phraseology which Spitoon refers to is no longer relevant to Absolute Operating Minima.
Spitoon- basically forget what you what know about Absolute Minima and remember; Controllers shall append 'check your minima' to the first provision of RVR values at or below 1000 m to pilots of inbound aircraft making an instrument approach, except:
a) for precision approaches to runways that are capable of Cat II/III operations.
b) when aircraft are already established on final approach.
Originally Posted by Spitoon
2 - In the UK there is an ATC procedure, commonly known as the 'absolute minima' procedure where ATC will ask the crew to check their minima in certain conditions. To do this each ATC unit has a table of minima for each approach that is the lowest that an aircraft can legitimately make an approach. If a pilot says he/she wants to make an approach below these conditions the controller will ask the crew to check their minima. If the pilot still wants to make an approach ATC has some special phraseology that does not clear the aircraft for the approach but says there is no traffic in the way. This gets reported to the CAA.
Spitoon- basically forget what you what know about Absolute Minima and remember; Controllers shall append 'check your minima' to the first provision of RVR values at or below 1000 m to pilots of inbound aircraft making an instrument approach, except:
a) for precision approaches to runways that are capable of Cat II/III operations.
b) when aircraft are already established on final approach.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Thanks for the update Andy - I should have added the health warning that it's a good few years since I was operational in the UK. But the phraseology has echoes of SRAs that I did even longer ago!
And glad to see that the absurd absolute minima stuff has largely fallen by the wayside.
And glad to see that the absurd absolute minima stuff has largely fallen by the wayside.
It's also 'blurred' a bit by allowing 'below Cat 1 minima' operations if the aircraft carries certain equipment (eg HUD) AND it's been approved by the CAA. (I think it's called 'Lower than Cat 1 Minima' approval).
I understand this could allow a multi engined crew to commence a Cat 1 approach when the RVR is only 300m instead of the 'normal' 550m.
I would assume the 'Absolute Minima' procedure/special phraseology has been dropped as ATC would be unaware or rather have no 'need to know' that a particular aircraft is approved for this procedure.
I understand this could allow a multi engined crew to commence a Cat 1 approach when the RVR is only 300m instead of the 'normal' 550m.
I would assume the 'Absolute Minima' procedure/special phraseology has been dropped as ATC would be unaware or rather have no 'need to know' that a particular aircraft is approved for this procedure.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wow. That's all great info... Thanks so much to you all. So in the UK and some of Europe they have this scheme which sounds like a pretty good idea. Do they have anything like this in other developing parts of the world such as the Middle East? One assumes that the more developed areas such as UAE and Qatar might but what about less developed areas where aviation appears to be gradually becoming more vibrant such as Iran, Iraq, etc...?
Thanks.
Thanks.
