Question about SRAs
Why do it if it's not fun?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Bournemouth
Posts: 4,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Question about SRAs
I'm looking at this approach - a SRA terminating at 2nm, with a misses approach point at 1nm.
I notice that the plate has timing from the termination of the approach to the missed approach point. But would the controller provide the pilot with guidance as to when he reaches the missed approach point? Or would the controller stop giving guidance at the termination point, and expect the pilot to time to the missed approach point?
Thanks!
FFF
----------
I notice that the plate has timing from the termination of the approach to the missed approach point. But would the controller provide the pilot with guidance as to when he reaches the missed approach point? Or would the controller stop giving guidance at the termination point, and expect the pilot to time to the missed approach point?
Thanks!
FFF
----------
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: The foot of Mt. Belzoni.
Posts: 2,001
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FlyingForFun,
many years since I did one, but at 2 miles it was always "continue approach or go-around at your discretion".
Why not give EGHH ATC a call? I'm sure they will be delighted to help, (if of course you don't get an answer here).
SRA's were very satisfying to do.
many years since I did one, but at 2 miles it was always "continue approach or go-around at your discretion".
Why not give EGHH ATC a call? I'm sure they will be delighted to help, (if of course you don't get an answer here).
SRA's were very satisfying to do.
Doing a PAR to touchdown was satisfying too. My effort is occasionally seen on Discovery in a film about the Challenger 604 bizjet. I think it's been edited though, as when I say 'radar touchdown NOW', you see a puff of smoke from the tyres!!
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: On the wireless...
Posts: 1,901
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by FlyingForFun
I notice that the plate has timing from the termination of the approach to the missed approach point. But would the controller provide the pilot with guidance as to when he reaches the missed approach point? Or would the controller stop giving guidance at the termination point, and expect the pilot to time to the missed approach point?
Why is it necessary for the published MAPt not to be coincident with the RTR?
Why do it if it's not fun?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Bournemouth
Posts: 4,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Zooker - I'm hoping to get something I can point other people towards. But if I can't get an answer here then yes, I'll do that - at least I'll get an answer myself, even if I can't show anyone else. I'd guess that this isn't the only approach like this though, so there must be a standard answer?
Chevvron - I've only ever flown a PAR once, never heard of doing one to touchdown but that sounds scary/cool! And I like the edit!
Talkdownman - very true, but that's the way it is, so I'm just trying to understand what's there, not why it's there! For the last couple of years, it would have been mandatory to fly the approach as a CDFA, and go around at a DA that's at or just above the published MDA if you reached that before the missed approach point, so that would probably allay most of your fears. But it still doesn't explain why it was designed this way.
Chevvron - I've only ever flown a PAR once, never heard of doing one to touchdown but that sounds scary/cool! And I like the edit!
Talkdownman - very true, but that's the way it is, so I'm just trying to understand what's there, not why it's there! For the last couple of years, it would have been mandatory to fly the approach as a CDFA, and go around at a DA that's at or just above the published MDA if you reached that before the missed approach point, so that would probably allay most of your fears. But it still doesn't explain why it was designed this way.
Beady Eye
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am pretty certain I'm not the only Military/ExMil controller who, having done many 100's of PARs, when the weather was 'dodgy' called 'Passing Decision Height' to have the pilot come back, in that tense voice 'keep talking!'
MOD(PE) (later called DPA) air traffic units were authorised to carry out talkdowns using PAR to touchdown provided specific circumstances were met. At other MOD airfields, they could be done in emergency or simulated emergency.
On the occasion shown on the Discovery programme, I was unaware it was being filmed (otherwise I would have terminated at DH) and I've never received any royalties!!
On the occasion shown on the Discovery programme, I was unaware it was being filmed (otherwise I would have terminated at DH) and I've never received any royalties!!
Some large UK civil airports no longer offer SRAs. I think the logic being that with multiple ground aids (ILS, VOR/DME etc) and modern aircraft kit the likelyhood of an SRA is too small, and the controllers would also find it very difficult to stay proficient. However, I do recall one such airport accepting an urgent medivac RAF SAR helicopter for an SRA because it was not equipped for any other type of instrument approach, and the weather was very poor. The ATCO concerned had not done SRAs for many years, but I'm pleased to report that the helicopter landed safely from its first approach.
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: EU
Posts: 497
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is a controller permitted to do an SRA if they haven't done one for many years?
Genuine question as I have more than once been asked if we could accept an SRA for controller training and I always assumed they would need to do them now and again to remain signed off for them.
Genuine question as I have more than once been asked if we could accept an SRA for controller training and I always assumed they would need to do them now and again to remain signed off for them.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: The foot of Mt. Belzoni.
Posts: 2,001
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
spekesoftly,
When EGCC approach went from flouride tubes to processed radar, (NODE-M), the SRA facility was removed. Other airfields continue to do them using processed displays. EGPF still has a requirement for u/t ATCOs to carry out SRAs and, I believe remain proficient post-validation.
For many years, we kept a log-book at 'CC with a list of SRA 'runs' undertaken by individual ATCOs. For validation, we had to do 25 on each of the 2 approach radar systems we had, a Marconi S264H and a Plessey/Cossor 4011. Great times indeed.
Many Cessnas from EGCB came and did practice runs with us.
When EGCC approach went from flouride tubes to processed radar, (NODE-M), the SRA facility was removed. Other airfields continue to do them using processed displays. EGPF still has a requirement for u/t ATCOs to carry out SRAs and, I believe remain proficient post-validation.
For many years, we kept a log-book at 'CC with a list of SRA 'runs' undertaken by individual ATCOs. For validation, we had to do 25 on each of the 2 approach radar systems we had, a Marconi S264H and a Plessey/Cossor 4011. Great times indeed.
Many Cessnas from EGCB came and did practice runs with us.
Is a controller permitted to do an SRA if they haven't done one for many years?
Obviously the situation I described earlier was exceptional, safety of life etc, and I expect the pilot was made aware of the circumstances when he requested the SRA as his only option.
PS - Zooker, thanks for the info. Your man did well!
Last edited by spekesoftly; 5th Dec 2014 at 23:52.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 422 Likes
on
222 Posts
One of most bizarre radio exchanges I heard was at Kai Tak. The eye of a typhoon had just passed directly through the harbour and so there was a sudden wind reversal, meaning that the runway was changed from 13 to 31. There was a stack of aircraft waiting to have another attempt at an approach, many had already diverted because at one stage all were going around due to the horrendous crosswind.
After the runway change, the first aircraft was vectored round to begin the ILS, only for ATC to inform the crew that there would be a delay because the localiser wouldn't come on line. ATC then offered the crew a PAR instead. This seemed to confuse the crew, who eventually said they weren't equipped to carry out a PAR and went around and back into the stack! I've often wondered what equipment they thought they needed, other than the radio they were already talking on.
After the runway change, the first aircraft was vectored round to begin the ILS, only for ATC to inform the crew that there would be a delay because the localiser wouldn't come on line. ATC then offered the crew a PAR instead. This seemed to confuse the crew, who eventually said they weren't equipped to carry out a PAR and went around and back into the stack! I've often wondered what equipment they thought they needed, other than the radio they were already talking on.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: On the wireless...
Posts: 1,901
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On a similar 'Bizarre-Level' recently had an aircraft filed in, but wx not too good so informed company before departure that 'radar out of service'. Reply was 'Oh, we'll come and have a look anyway…'. Confirmed on initial contact that Radar out of service. After several approach attempts crew asked 'any chance of an SRA?'. Reminded crew yet again that 'radar out of service'. The penny then dropped 'Ah, right…' (thinks...'so that's what the 'R' means'…)
I think the currency requirement at my unit was 3xSRA/month, but it's 6 years ago so I may be wrong. Certainly when we had PAR it was 6/month. My old unit is one which asks pilots doing practice iaps if they can accept an SRA for 'controller training'.
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: EU
Posts: 497
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Someone I used to work with who trained at one of the sausage machine integrated schools was once positioning an aircraft and had some interesting failures along the way which killed both nav boxes. The weather wasn't good and he asked for help and was offered an SRA, which he declined thinking he didn't have the kit required and ending up doing a no compass no gyro instead.
Couldn't help being amused one day [many moons ago]. One of the local airline DOs, who was in the habit of listening in to the half mile SRAs, asked why we always informed the pilot that it would be 'standard mist approach procedure'?
H49
H49
