Sydney ATIS: DO NOT PASS THRU ASSIGNED RWY CL
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sydney ATIS: DO NOT PASS THRU ASSIGNED RWY CL
An interesting question came up recently,
Sydney ATIS usually states: DO NOT PASS THRU ASSIGNED RWY CL
The question is this: once assigned a radar vector towards the runway centreline (ie for “base”), but not yet cleared to intercept the localiser, should one make a pilot intercept of the localiser anyway, in the event a further heading and instruction to intercept is not provided? Such as in the event of frequency congestion, or distraction (eg another aircraft declaring an emergency), or simple ATC forgetfulness?
One argument is “Lost Comms” procedures, which provide an answer, but maintaining the last vector for 2 mins could take you through the centreline.
Another argument is that for parallel runway ops, the statement on the ATIS is there to tell you not to EVER fly through the centreline regardless of the reason.
And a further argument is that this statement on the ATIS is simply provided to remind pilots not to overshoot during a normally cleared localiser intercept. Not for any other reason.
And occasionally, I have had Director intentionally take me through the centreline, for sequencing.
So I have heard three different pilot interpretations.
For what it’s worth, as a pilot, I know what I would do, but I am interested in the ATC expectation.
Anyone in Sydney Director or ATC care to comment?
Sydney ATIS usually states: DO NOT PASS THRU ASSIGNED RWY CL
The question is this: once assigned a radar vector towards the runway centreline (ie for “base”), but not yet cleared to intercept the localiser, should one make a pilot intercept of the localiser anyway, in the event a further heading and instruction to intercept is not provided? Such as in the event of frequency congestion, or distraction (eg another aircraft declaring an emergency), or simple ATC forgetfulness?
One argument is “Lost Comms” procedures, which provide an answer, but maintaining the last vector for 2 mins could take you through the centreline.
Another argument is that for parallel runway ops, the statement on the ATIS is there to tell you not to EVER fly through the centreline regardless of the reason.
And a further argument is that this statement on the ATIS is simply provided to remind pilots not to overshoot during a normally cleared localiser intercept. Not for any other reason.
And occasionally, I have had Director intentionally take me through the centreline, for sequencing.
So I have heard three different pilot interpretations.
For what it’s worth, as a pilot, I know what I would do, but I am interested in the ATC expectation.
Anyone in Sydney Director or ATC care to comment?
Last edited by Derfred; 22nd May 2018 at 14:50.
Nunc est bibendum
If ever I’ve been taken through the centreline they’ve told me before the event they were going to do it.
Good question though. It’d be interesting to hear from ATCOs as to what they think we are going to do.
Good question though. It’d be interesting to hear from ATCOs as to what they think we are going to do.
The phrase “Do not pass through assigned runway centreline” in the ATIS gives authority to the crew to make a pilot intercept in the event of blocked comms, radio failure etc (Chart 10-9D for Sydney under ‘Radio Failure Procedures - IVA’)
Yep you’re supposed to begin a turn to intercept in absence of an instruction in time to not pass through. Any time you’ll be taken through for sequencing you’ll be advised. Passing through centreline with only 1000m between them is a very bad idea.
SYD TWR/DIR
SYD TWR/DIR
I cannot think of a time that I have been vectored through the localiser toward the adjacent approach where traffic was a factor. I did have to abandon a 34R approach on an RA. The offending traffic blew his turn onto 34L and went through both centrelines.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Kyeemagh
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you get a join final vector, join final.
If you get a 'taking you though final' vector, follow the vector.
If you are approaching final without a turn, turn and join final before it's too late!
If you get a 'taking you though final' vector, follow the vector.
If you are approaching final without a turn, turn and join final before it's too late!
DCA required the T-VASIS to be operational for aircraft flying up to 250 knots in case of faster overseas aircraft types like fighters. To meet this requirement the RAAF were asked to provide a Sabre fighter to make runs down the T-VASIS at night to check the flyability at varying speeds from 150 knots to 250 knots. . On one such run, the Sabre while turning steeply left to avoid crossing active Runway 16 at 200 knots plus, came close to crossing Runway 16 due its radius of turn at high speed. ATC stopped the trial because of danger to aircraft using 16. The Sabre pilot came up with a solution. At 200 feet instead of breaking left he would break vertically. And that is what he did; pulling lots of "G" at 200 feet going vertical with a roll of the top of the loop and then to re-position for another high speed run down the T-VASIS. That worked nicely even at night and the trials were then successfully concluded.
Last edited by Judd; 24th May 2018 at 03:17.
Great question Derfred, This is something I often comment about to workmates and trainee directors. If your approaching centre line and nothing heard from director you are suppose to start a turn to final. As A pilot you would be well aware of how ugly things can get on base at parallel runway airports. This rule is in place should you or ATC suffer a comms failure at this crucial point of your flight. In 15 years of director I haven’t seen many cases where something has happen to prevent turning an aircraft to final at that point, but in all cases the pilots went through final.
It would be very poor technique from director to take you right up to final for late turn or even take you through without telling you. You would be within your rights and expected to turn to final, especially if you saw another aircraft on the adjacent base. If your really concerned you may end up going through final perhaps a “approaching centreline” followed by a turn if no response from director. A breakdown of sep with the aircraft your following to the same runway is much preferable than one with the aircraft coming at you on opposite base!
It would be very poor technique from director to take you right up to final for late turn or even take you through without telling you. You would be within your rights and expected to turn to final, especially if you saw another aircraft on the adjacent base. If your really concerned you may end up going through final perhaps a “approaching centreline” followed by a turn if no response from director. A breakdown of sep with the aircraft your following to the same runway is much preferable than one with the aircraft coming at you on opposite base!
I have seen it maybe twice over the last 12 years where either ATC was busy/ distracted/ mis calculated/ whatever and I began a turn for final without having had the instruction. I think I had a strong tailwind and groundspeed high ( I should have configured earlier) both times. I have read a report where pilots relied 100% on automation to begin the turn and it hasn’t done a good job ( probably tailwind again).
My thoughts are that you stay aware of your groundspeed on base ( during the brief it’ll be obvious if there is a likely tailwind based on the ATIS) and configure to ensure you are not smoking along at 250kts groundspeed ( 220 is ok) and turn on unless told not to.
I was a slow learner on this and do see new pilots making the same mistakes I did quite regularly. Good topic because when you first start flying jets to Sydney it can take a while to pick up these things if it isn’t specifically covered during training.
This from the ATSB website;
My thoughts are that you stay aware of your groundspeed on base ( during the brief it’ll be obvious if there is a likely tailwind based on the ATIS) and configure to ensure you are not smoking along at 250kts groundspeed ( 220 is ok) and turn on unless told not to.
I was a slow learner on this and do see new pilots making the same mistakes I did quite regularly. Good topic because when you first start flying jets to Sydney it can take a while to pick up these things if it isn’t specifically covered during training.
This from the ATSB website;
A review of the ATSB database indicated that about 30 per cent of all reported TCAS RA occurrences in Australia, or involving Australian aircraft overseas, occurred at Sydney Airport. Data provided by Airservices indicated that about 62 per cent of all RAs in the Sydney terminal area occurred during IVA procedures. The other 38 per cent included other approaches, departures and overflying aircraft.
In certain situations, two aircraft can be flown on IVAs at Sydney in a manner consistent with the required procedures, yet both aircraft’s TCAS can generate an RA. For example, of the
277 reported RA occurrences during IVAs at Sydney during 2008–2013, 30 involved one of the aircraft passing through the extended centre-line. For many of the other occurrences there was insufficient information to determine whether a deviation occurred.
In certain situations, two aircraft can be flown on IVAs at Sydney in a manner consistent with the required procedures, yet both aircraft’s TCAS can generate an RA. For example, of the
277 reported RA occurrences during IVAs at Sydney during 2008–2013, 30 involved one of the aircraft passing through the extended centre-line. For many of the other occurrences there was insufficient information to determine whether a deviation occurred.
Based on the data above , every 60 days an aircraft passes through the assigned runway centerline and an RA occurs during IVA’s in Sydney. Who knows how many aircraft fly through the centerline and no RA results?
I was quite often told by captains flying into Sydney that you did not turn until told to by ATC. Even when I pointed out the wording on the ATIS, “yeah but you’re turning without a clearance then”.
The more sensible approach in the Airbus would be to leave it in NAV Blue when you extend the centreline, that way the aircraft will turn you to avoid going through the centreline based on your ground speed etc.
But I was often berated for trying to do it.
morno
The more sensible approach in the Airbus would be to leave it in NAV Blue when you extend the centreline, that way the aircraft will turn you to avoid going through the centreline based on your ground speed etc.
But I was often berated for trying to do it.
morno
Yep morno there's definitely some conflicting opinions out there. As you say, it's on the atis; it's an atc instruction.
I have had director (rarely I’ll admit) give headings that won’t actually make an intercept or an intercept very close to the runway due to strong headwinds on base (you know, the 30kt x-wind days)
Ive queried the heading which has the given me an “extra” 10 degrees intercept, but still not pretty. Like said above, configuring earlier and reducing the g/s has been the only way to make it work.
As stated earlier, the Jepps state not to go through the Centre line even in the absence of an instruction. Not sure how you can really argue against that.
Ive queried the heading which has the given me an “extra” 10 degrees intercept, but still not pretty. Like said above, configuring earlier and reducing the g/s has been the only way to make it work.
As stated earlier, the Jepps state not to go through the Centre line even in the absence of an instruction. Not sure how you can really argue against that.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
277 reported RA occurrences during IVAs at Sydney during 2008–2013
Yes, the Jepp instructions are quite clear. Thanks for all the responses, folks.
Yip. That’s why it’s important to watch your groundspeed and make sure it’s reasonable. There can be RA’s triggered when both parties are complying with procedures/ instructions.