Air refuelling procedures
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Guildford, UK
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Air refuelling procedures
Hello all, I work for an ATC training academy in Europe . We have a simulator exercise coming up shortly that involves two F16s joining up with a KC135 at FL300 for refuelling.
We have the F16s approaching from the south at 400kt with the KC heading SW at 210kt.
The Distance starts at 100 miles.
They each receive vectors to meet up in a block of airspace.
The KC declares to ATC that he will lead the formation and conduct all comms, at about 30 miles separation.
ATC affirms.
KC declares ready for MARSA at 15 miles sep.
ATC clears them to formate.
F16s switch off transponders.
They formate and refuel.
After 10 mins, KC declares ready to break formation.
ATC affirms.
Formation breaks, then transponders back on.
ATC declares assuming responsibility for separation
All a/c route away
Is this more or less correct? If not, would someone mind spelling it out correctly?
What pattern does the formation fly whilst refuelling?
Is that pattern requested by the KC, or prearranged, or defined by ATC at the time?
Any more detail would be greatly appreciated
many thanks
Simon
We have the F16s approaching from the south at 400kt with the KC heading SW at 210kt.
The Distance starts at 100 miles.
They each receive vectors to meet up in a block of airspace.
The KC declares to ATC that he will lead the formation and conduct all comms, at about 30 miles separation.
ATC affirms.
KC declares ready for MARSA at 15 miles sep.
ATC clears them to formate.
F16s switch off transponders.
They formate and refuel.
After 10 mins, KC declares ready to break formation.
ATC affirms.
Formation breaks, then transponders back on.
ATC declares assuming responsibility for separation
All a/c route away
Is this more or less correct? If not, would someone mind spelling it out correctly?
What pattern does the formation fly whilst refuelling?
Is that pattern requested by the KC, or prearranged, or defined by ATC at the time?
Any more detail would be greatly appreciated
many thanks
Simon
Last edited by simonhk; 19th Nov 2018 at 15:11.
1. Are you planning to use a TRA? E.g. ED-R-302 for GINI Anchor, a typical German AARA.
2. KC-135 speed would be around 280 KIAS, 210 is way too slow!
3. 30 miles is too early for the tanker to control all comms unless in a dedicated TRA.
4. MARSA would only be acceptable once the receivers were visual with the tanker, at which point they should be pushed to the boom freq. with SSR at Sby.
5. Typically, in an AARA the formation will fly a racetrack pattern. E.g. in GINI Anchor, 34 x 14 nm with left turns. Minimum block for a formation refuelling at FL290 would be FL270B300 as in GINI.
6. 10 min is probably all the time that the F-16s would need once with the tanker.
2. KC-135 speed would be around 280 KIAS, 210 is way too slow!
3. 30 miles is too early for the tanker to control all comms unless in a dedicated TRA.
4. MARSA would only be acceptable once the receivers were visual with the tanker, at which point they should be pushed to the boom freq. with SSR at Sby.
5. Typically, in an AARA the formation will fly a racetrack pattern. E.g. in GINI Anchor, 34 x 14 nm with left turns. Minimum block for a formation refuelling at FL290 would be FL270B300 as in GINI.
6. 10 min is probably all the time that the F-16s would need once with the tanker.
Yes, learn the ATP. 
I am bemused by this Simon, if you are working in an "ATC training academy", presumably the proceedures that are being taught conform to some standards that you are aware of?
Very generally, if you refer to the ATP, you will find that there are profiles for many different Rendevous Proceedures (RV's). You should be able to deduce how they fit into your profile, or not. Cheers
OAP
I am bemused by this Simon, if you are working in an "ATC training academy", presumably the proceedures that are being taught conform to some standards that you are aware of? Very generally, if you refer to the ATP, you will find that there are profiles for many different Rendevous Proceedures (RV's). You should be able to deduce how they fit into your profile, or not. Cheers
OAP
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Guildford, UK
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you all. I'm a Simulator pilot at the academy and have been there for only 2 months. This part of a larger exercise seemed somewhat simplified and I was wondering what the IRL procedures should be.
BEagle - your points are noted. Not a TRA in use it seems, rather a block of flight levels, with the ATCO deciding where the RV should happen according to traffic. This raised some questions for me, hence my enquiry here.
ORAC - thank you. Plenty to get my teeth into there.
OAP - thank you. Cheers indeed.
BEagle - your points are noted. Not a TRA in use it seems, rather a block of flight levels, with the ATCO deciding where the RV should happen according to traffic. This raised some questions for me, hence my enquiry here.
ORAC - thank you. Plenty to get my teeth into there.
OAP - thank you. Cheers indeed.
I'm finding it difficult to work out the proposed AAR scenario. We looked at the concept of 'Conditional AAR Routes', where ad hoc AAR can take place with a tanker in transit. But the tanker advises ATC of its waypoint ETAs and it is up to ATC to join the receivers with the tanker using an RV Alfa. This would need to be below RVSM airspace as formations do not comply with RVSM.
Does your airspace include TACAN routes? If so, the tanker should maintain FL260, with the receivers joining at FL250 until visual, after which MARSA should apply. Typically the receivers should leave at FL270.
ATC are trained to keep aircraft apart, not to put them together, so let the receivers get on with it once they confirm radar contact with the tanker. Also, anything less than 120 ABH will probably lead to a protracted stern chase if you're not careful. You have to assume that the tanker will maintain a predicted track and speed and vector the receivers towards the anticipated RV position. But the RV location isn't normally something an ATCO should be expected to decide.
For example, a tanker might be flying south on TB2 from LAG41 to SAXON anchor at FL260 and a TAS of 440 kts. It advises you that it will be at LAG41 at 15:40 and can accept receivers in the 15 min slot between LAG41 and HOZ, with an ETA on SAXON of 16:00. If the receivers are late, the tanker might not be able to delay if it is expecting receivers shortly after its planned on-task time in SAXON anchor, so you have to think well ahead and ensure that the intercept geometry can be achieved within the stated 4-dimensional requirements.
You won't find anything about CARRs in the ATP - it's something we designed for an MCCE Eindhoven proposal several years ago. But I've practised the procedure in a training and testing part task trainer on numerous occasions and it works just fine.
Does your airspace include TACAN routes? If so, the tanker should maintain FL260, with the receivers joining at FL250 until visual, after which MARSA should apply. Typically the receivers should leave at FL270.
ATC are trained to keep aircraft apart, not to put them together, so let the receivers get on with it once they confirm radar contact with the tanker. Also, anything less than 120 ABH will probably lead to a protracted stern chase if you're not careful. You have to assume that the tanker will maintain a predicted track and speed and vector the receivers towards the anticipated RV position. But the RV location isn't normally something an ATCO should be expected to decide.
For example, a tanker might be flying south on TB2 from LAG41 to SAXON anchor at FL260 and a TAS of 440 kts. It advises you that it will be at LAG41 at 15:40 and can accept receivers in the 15 min slot between LAG41 and HOZ, with an ETA on SAXON of 16:00. If the receivers are late, the tanker might not be able to delay if it is expecting receivers shortly after its planned on-task time in SAXON anchor, so you have to think well ahead and ensure that the intercept geometry can be achieved within the stated 4-dimensional requirements.
You won't find anything about CARRs in the ATP - it's something we designed for an MCCE Eindhoven proposal several years ago. But I've practised the procedure in a training and testing part task trainer on numerous occasions and it works just fine.
Last edited by BEagle; 20th Nov 2018 at 07:46.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Guildford, UK
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you BEagle. It would seem that this most closely resembles a Conditional ARR. No TACAN routes.
We ran this sim exercise in anger today and nobody had conniptions.
I was flying the tanker and the two F16s, along with 8 high level airliners in the sector.
KC at FL300 at 300kt on an out and return route to a fix.
Two F16s also FL300 at 450kts.
ATC was happy for me as the KC to declare intentions and expectations.
ATC directed the F16s to the KC en route.
KC declared lead and comms and MARSA at about 10miles sep.
F16s formed up for 10 mins (SSR STBY) then broke off and away on predefined route.
KC turned round and headed back.
Seemed to work fine and provided the required extra workload for the ATCO along with all the usual traffic for the sector.
Thanks again for your input.
We ran this sim exercise in anger today and nobody had conniptions.
I was flying the tanker and the two F16s, along with 8 high level airliners in the sector.
KC at FL300 at 300kt on an out and return route to a fix.
Two F16s also FL300 at 450kts.
ATC was happy for me as the KC to declare intentions and expectations.
ATC directed the F16s to the KC en route.
KC declared lead and comms and MARSA at about 10miles sep.
F16s formed up for 10 mins (SSR STBY) then broke off and away on predefined route.
KC turned round and headed back.
Seemed to work fine and provided the required extra workload for the ATCO along with all the usual traffic for the sector.
Thanks again for your input.
KC at FL300 at 300kt on an out and return route to a fix.
Two F16s also FL300 at 450kts.
Two F16s also FL300 at 450kts.
Also the tanker and receivers should NEVER be at the same level until the receivers call visual. Declaring MARSA when co-alt and BVR is a recipe for disaster.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Guildford, UK
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you BEagle. Those speeds - yes indeed, I just couldn’t remember what the speeds actually were in the sim that day 
The same level issue - I’ve suggested a few changes to the scenario based on my newly aquired knowledge, we’ll see if the instructors modify the excercise. Apparently the bureaucracy is significant.....
Thanks v much
The same level issue - I’ve suggested a few changes to the scenario based on my newly aquired knowledge, we’ll see if the instructors modify the excercise. Apparently the bureaucracy is significant.....
Thanks v much
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: An airfield cunningly close the Thames
Age: 46
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
F-16s refuel at around 315 IAS, and would more likely refuel mid-20K. Very unlikely to be able to operate above FL280 due to non-RVSM capability of formations. Normal for a block of airspace with 2000ft below tanker for joining and 1000ft above for departing. Marsa can be declared any time the tanker is happy to be responsible for separation, generally when altitude separation is assured: declaration of altitudes or positive TCAS contact are some examples. Receivers would remain squawking until within around 3nm where they would chop to boom freq and the tanker would take control. ATP-56B is now ATP3.3.4.2. See JAPCC website for latest guidance.
Ah, the mystical art of basket dancing. Especially the BDA, which was akin to pushing wet spaghetti up a cat's arse, or taking a running f@ck at a rolling doughnut......
The BDA was an utter sod! I was launched on Q with 3 tanks and 8 missiles to prod the thing, having never had any previous dual or even a brief. Teach yourself BDA prodding wasn't a deal of fun, but eventually I worked out what to do and topped up - then we heard that the Bears had turned for home....
Debrief after RTB- "What's the big deal? A tanker is a tanker"...
Strangely enough, the same ar$e wrote a signal some months later saying that a dual trip with an AARI was essential for KC-135 BDA prodding. In Charlie fit without missiles, no doubt.
A 3000 ft airspace block was always the norm on routine AARAs, but for CARR or en-route trail RVs 2000 ft is surely adequate?
Debrief after RTB- "What's the big deal? A tanker is a tanker"...
Strangely enough, the same ar$e wrote a signal some months later saying that a dual trip with an AARI was essential for KC-135 BDA prodding. In Charlie fit without missiles, no doubt.A 3000 ft airspace block was always the norm on routine AARAs, but for CARR or en-route trail RVs 2000 ft is surely adequate?
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Far far away
Age: 53
Posts: 715
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can't help myself - so have to offer the following:
ATP 3.3.4.2 (ATP-56(C)) is the current standard - hosted by JAPCC.
"We have a simulator exercise coming up shortly that involves two F16s joining up with a KC135 at FL300 for refuelling."
Not an issue as long as you have the airspace cleared and non-RVSM compliant separation standards. F-16s are fine at FL300, unless heavily loaded.
"We have the F16s approaching from the south at 400kt with the KC heading SW at 210kt.
The Distance starts at 100 miles.
They each receive vectors to meet up in a block of airspace."
You're running an RV Alpha scenario, the Tanker should be at AAR Speed (300 - 310Kts for F-16s); Receivers should be at no more than AAR speed +20Kts by the time they are < 1NM behind the tanker.
"The KC declares to ATC that he will lead the formation and conduct all comms, at about 30 miles separation."
Should have been arranged before take-off and included in the ATC Flight-Notification, otherwise better to communicate these intentions about 15 minutes before the formation joins up together - 30NM is a bit late.
"ATC affirms."
In accordance with national ATC policy.
"KC declares ready for MARSA at 15 miles sep."
In most FIRs the Tanker simply declares MARSA. This should be done as soon as positive ID of the receivers has been made by the tanker - no need to wait until visual. As long as the tanker commander is satisfied that they have sufficient situational awareness and knows where the receivers are they can declare MARSA.
"ATC clears them to formate."
Generally, yes.
"F16s switch off transponders."
Generally, yes - Tanker switches TCAS to TA only, Receivers to Standby.
"They formate and refuel."
Yes
"After 10 mins, KC declares ready to break formation."
As soon as the formation has good comms on a discrete frequency they can discuss their post-refuelling requirements. The tanker should communicate clearance and routing requirements well before AAR is finished.
"ATC affirms."
ATC issues enroute clearance to the tanker, for both the tanker and the receivers; the tanker completes the read back for all then relays the receiver clearance via discrete comms.
"Formation breaks, then transponders back on."
Formation receives separation clearance from ATC, moves to cleared separation - either laterally or, more often, vertically. Transponders back to normal settings; receivers check-in with ATC.
"ATC declares assuming responsibility for separation"
Not really - ATC don't have the ability to ensure separation so this isn't specifically stated. Formation separates first, then checks-in, then standard separation criteria are applied by ATC.
"All a/c route away"
in accordance with ATC clearance.
"What pattern does the formation fly whilst refuelling?"
Depends what they're doing. They could either continue along a pre-planned route or maintain an anchor pattern - a left-hand racetrack that fits within pre-arranged airspace boundaries.
"Is that pattern requested by the KC, or prearranged, or defined by ATC at the time?"
Any of the above. Usually pre-arranged and within special use airspace, or coordinated between the KC and ATC, and included in pre-notification (either flight-notification or ALTRV).
Enjoy your AAR training scenario!
ATP 3.3.4.2 (ATP-56(C)) is the current standard - hosted by JAPCC.
"We have a simulator exercise coming up shortly that involves two F16s joining up with a KC135 at FL300 for refuelling."
Not an issue as long as you have the airspace cleared and non-RVSM compliant separation standards. F-16s are fine at FL300, unless heavily loaded.
"We have the F16s approaching from the south at 400kt with the KC heading SW at 210kt.
The Distance starts at 100 miles.
They each receive vectors to meet up in a block of airspace."
You're running an RV Alpha scenario, the Tanker should be at AAR Speed (300 - 310Kts for F-16s); Receivers should be at no more than AAR speed +20Kts by the time they are < 1NM behind the tanker.
"The KC declares to ATC that he will lead the formation and conduct all comms, at about 30 miles separation."
Should have been arranged before take-off and included in the ATC Flight-Notification, otherwise better to communicate these intentions about 15 minutes before the formation joins up together - 30NM is a bit late.
"ATC affirms."
In accordance with national ATC policy.
"KC declares ready for MARSA at 15 miles sep."
In most FIRs the Tanker simply declares MARSA. This should be done as soon as positive ID of the receivers has been made by the tanker - no need to wait until visual. As long as the tanker commander is satisfied that they have sufficient situational awareness and knows where the receivers are they can declare MARSA.
"ATC clears them to formate."
Generally, yes.
"F16s switch off transponders."
Generally, yes - Tanker switches TCAS to TA only, Receivers to Standby.
"They formate and refuel."
Yes
"After 10 mins, KC declares ready to break formation."
As soon as the formation has good comms on a discrete frequency they can discuss their post-refuelling requirements. The tanker should communicate clearance and routing requirements well before AAR is finished.
"ATC affirms."
ATC issues enroute clearance to the tanker, for both the tanker and the receivers; the tanker completes the read back for all then relays the receiver clearance via discrete comms.
"Formation breaks, then transponders back on."
Formation receives separation clearance from ATC, moves to cleared separation - either laterally or, more often, vertically. Transponders back to normal settings; receivers check-in with ATC.
"ATC declares assuming responsibility for separation"
Not really - ATC don't have the ability to ensure separation so this isn't specifically stated. Formation separates first, then checks-in, then standard separation criteria are applied by ATC.
"All a/c route away"
in accordance with ATC clearance.
"What pattern does the formation fly whilst refuelling?"
Depends what they're doing. They could either continue along a pre-planned route or maintain an anchor pattern - a left-hand racetrack that fits within pre-arranged airspace boundaries.
"Is that pattern requested by the KC, or prearranged, or defined by ATC at the time?"
Any of the above. Usually pre-arranged and within special use airspace, or coordinated between the KC and ATC, and included in pre-notification (either flight-notification or ALTRV).
Enjoy your AAR training scenario!
Last edited by D-IFF_ident; 25th Nov 2018 at 07:34. Reason: Autocorrect
