The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions The place for students, instructors and charter guys in Oz, NZ and the rest of Oceania.

Give Cooly an ILS !!

Old 7th Nov 2004, 00:05
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 15
Give Cooly an ILS !!

What's it going to take for an ILS to be installed at Coolangatta!

All the players conducting missed approaches and diverting to Brisbane this morning from VOR/DME approaches, Jetstar and Virgin flights from Sydney and Qantas from Adelaide.
onfinals_34L is offline  
Old 7th Nov 2004, 01:59
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Brisbane, Queensland
Posts: 618
Whats it going to take?

$$$$$$

Jetstar and VB are the main operators.
Uncommon Sense is offline  
Old 7th Nov 2004, 02:54
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 107
Apart from the $$$$, it won't happen because:

- Terrain: ILS (being a precision approach) requires to be aligned with runway heading. Damn hill at Currumbin (for 14) an Banora Point (for 32) just won't move.

- Noise: The NA procedures at CG are extensive. Even if with the terrain it was possible, the million-dollar house owners on the above mentioned areas will get their way when they realise their peaceful lifestyle will be interrupted by the whine of jet engines overhead (more than now, anyway!). Take into account a 8NM final on an ILS, and suddenly other suburbs (most of the Gold Coast South of Surfers) will be affected.

I say we should suggest the old Kai Tak approach: track inbound 290 degrees (over water) at a localiser located on Currumbin Hill, have the chequerboard in sight, turn left 150 degrees to intercept final RWY 14. Fewer missed approaches, but more CFITs???

Ahhh, Queensland ... beautiful one day ....
Blastoid is offline  
Old 7th Nov 2004, 03:32
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: brisbane
Posts: 26
Shut the whole bloody place down and sell the land.
whipping boy is offline  
Old 7th Nov 2004, 03:44
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Brisbane, Queensland
Posts: 618
I am not convinced about the terrain issue v.v. GP angle.

It could go a little steeper than 3 deg to qualify, but it's not going to be London City proportions.

The NAP - well that is another kettle of fish.

Having said that, wasn't the main reason for the initial 5 deg ,and now only 4 deg, GP into LCY to do with NAP?
Uncommon Sense is offline  
Old 7th Nov 2004, 05:03
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: TeePee
Age: 75
Posts: 56
Who cares what's the reason for ANYthing in Pommyland??? Are you showing off?????

Anyway we're talking about CG here...

Problems with weather-diversions in CG? Anyone who doesn't carry a little extra on a bad day is a FOOL.

CG rarely suffers from anything that won't blow through in a short space of time. Patchy low cloud may prevent a successful approach at one moment but will often allow an easy run on the next attempt.

Diversions to BN and cumulative effects thereof cost a hell of a lot more than the cost of hauling the odd extra ton when it's perfectly obvious the weather is a little crappy.

But they don't need an ILS.
Cornholio is offline  
Old 7th Nov 2004, 06:25
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Brisvegas
Posts: 2,932
Do you have any idea what it costs to install and then maintain an ILS installation to even CAT 1 standard? Big dollars!

How many aircraft actually have to divert in anger after say shooting two approaches at CG? More than ten in one year?

Get real.
Icarus2001 is offline  
Old 7th Nov 2004, 07:52
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 43
Icarus 2001......yes it does cost money to have an ILS installed and maintained etc. But there are plenty of places around the world with less movements that have an ILS.

My question would be why do we need OOL when BNE is just up the road with 2 ILSs? It would seem to me that the area is over serviced.

Last edited by bombshell; 7th Nov 2004 at 08:12.
bombshell is offline  
Old 7th Nov 2004, 08:35
  #9 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 15
Thanks everyone for all your input so far.

Icarus2001, Re the more than ten in one year missed approaches, well I've noted 6 in the last two days so looks like CG will have perfect weather for the next 5 months.

Most held for 20+ minutes and made two to three approaches each, trying for both 32 and 14.

Have noted months ago the VB 737 red-eye from Perth making a missed approach and still having enough fuel for another crack and getting in after holding for a while. (Not bad)

Re the cost, sure it costs a shitload and I'm sure the decision makers will congratulate themselves as they nash their teeth together if they ever experience the joy of multiple missed approaches and bussing down to Cooly or arriving hours later.
onfinals_34L is offline  
Old 7th Nov 2004, 09:45
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: QLD, Australia
Posts: 252
Forget about ILS, it's old technology, ASA are already working on curved GPS approaches with minima equal to ILS approaches.

ASA would like to remove all ground based navids by 2009 except ILS and by 2012 they are looking at removing all ILS's and using GPS for everything.
F111 is offline  
Old 7th Nov 2004, 11:08
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: GC Paradise
Posts: 1,048
Some would say it is a disgrace for any significant RPT Airport to operate without some type of precision approach.

Considering the rapidly increasing number of daily (and nightly) RPT operations, some might say that the chances of a major accident due to lack of a precision approach, will largely be function of statistical probability.

The proximity of high ground on final approach may not necessarily prohibit the installation of an ILS. Bali, for example, has an offset ILS localizer of about 2 degrees. Subic Bay has a large offset ILS only usable by FedeX.

Also, as mentioned above, Kai Tak Rwy 13 approach was 47 degrees off the runway centreline and CX used a minima 675’ directly into the checker board which was mounted on foothills rising to 2000’ odd.

Most of us would agree that visual approaches in appropriate conditions are very safe and would recommend such to maintain pilot handling skills. But after thousands of instrument approaches in RPT, and having to teach others the same has convinced me that non-precision instrument approaches rank as one of the few remaining great hazards to commercial aviation.

I just hope sanity prevails and Cooly gets the upgrade it deserves soonest so that the Gold Coast and Tweed customers get to fly with the appropriate level of safety that they should rightly expect…before it is too late.

In the meantime, we should congratulate the highly trained and professional crews operating into Cooly with such an outstanding safety record.
FlexibleResponse is offline  
Old 7th Nov 2004, 12:19
  #12 (permalink)  

Bottums Up
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: dunnunda
Age: 63
Posts: 3,441
F111

Interesting comments about replacing ILS by 2012. I'd recently heard that ILS was never expected to be removed because GPS is too susceptible to local area jamming, should some one, or some group be so inclined.
Capt Claret is offline  
Old 7th Nov 2004, 12:29
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Perth, AUS
Posts: 93
The one time I flew into Gold Coast from Melbourne I was very intereted in the way we approached the runway, flew past the airport over the water, then turned about, giving excellent view of the surrounding hills and houses (spotters paradise those places I would bet!) then touched down, seemingly at the last moment!

Very interesting from somebody vaugley interested in that kind of stuff, unsettling for the flying basket case seated next to me.

JB
jb_flyer is offline  
Old 7th Nov 2004, 22:15
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 70
F111 and all,

The cost of an ILS is approx 6million (includes the cost of upgrading approach, runway lighting, flight inspection etc). The ongoing maintenance is approx 1million/year. This will not happen at Cooly (actually now called Gold Coast) for the reasons others have outlined regarding cost and probability of wx below minimums.

As to the so called "curved GPS approaches" that F111 refers to these were part of a project known as GRAS (which is a regional based augmentation system for GPS) which has very little support within the Australian aviation community. It has been an ongoing project for years sucking millions of dollars in funding but will not fly in Australia (maybe some third world country).

As for decommissioning ILSs by 2012; based on the recent ASTRA and GIT (gps implementation team) meetings this is also a non event. ILSs are an integral part of the GPS back-up network along with a number of strategic VORs and NDBs.
Neddy is offline  
Old 7th Nov 2004, 22:33
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Brisbane, Queensland
Posts: 618
Surely the IGS was only a precision approach if you intended to land on the chequerboard - from there it was just a circling approach with a circling minima.

Circling from a minima of 675' is actually a higher minima than most runway aligned non precision VOR/DME.

(There is a technical thread somewhere on prune that looks at how far offset you can go until precision approach is no longer practical. e.g. DPS)

Last edited by Uncommon Sense; 8th Nov 2004 at 01:32.
Uncommon Sense is offline  
Old 8th Nov 2004, 03:43
  #16 (permalink)  
Kiwi PPRuNer
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: rockingham, western australia
Age: 38
Posts: 406
gps is a fine thing, untill those who control the satelites play hardball
ZK-NSJ is offline  
Old 8th Nov 2004, 04:09
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Oz -Sometimes
Posts: 182
Could it be possible that there are times when the WX precludes landing. I think when I learnt to fly it was called an alternate or something like that.

GPS could provide RWY alignment, but the MDA will be the problem at CG; something an ILS won’t solve. Why are we not doing monitored approach when LVP in place?

arrrhh! Just use the VSD and put the trend vector on the threshold if you don’t want to divert. Perhaps a GCA approach from Brissy Approach? Hummm! We aren’t Air China or Korean yet are we? If you’re not visual at the MDA try once more then overnight at BNE. Simple.

I heard the guys had hit the TOGA's 3 times before getting in. Humm!! What would the pax be thinking? Anyway thats what an engineer told me, so I take it with a grain of salt.
BankAngle50 is offline  
Old 8th Nov 2004, 06:03
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 73
Bank Angle

I think when I learnt to fly it was called an alternate or something like that.
Gee I wish I went to your flying school........fairly obvious, think you've missed the point

Why are we not doing monitored approach when LVP in place?
Monitored approaches, now there’s something that will solve the problem of missed approaches and alternate diversions....NOT!!

If you’re not visual at the MDA try once more then overnight at BNE. Simple.
Simple? How about we all amend our ops manuals to read "If you’re not visual at the MDA try once more then overnight at (Insert name of alternate here). Simple." Haven't been around long have you? As professional pilots we are paid to get those feral punters to their destinations, not to overnight at our alternates!! Were you operating at CG yesterday or are you the Monday morning quarterback?
A few crews elected to do a few different things....the end result? No twisted aluminum. If you think divert decisions are all shits and giggles and "simple" you will be sadly mistaken my friend, just ask you're captain

I heard the guys had hit the TOGA's 3 times before getting in. Humm!! What would the pax be thinking?
I'll tell what they were thinking - "Thank god these pilots are getting paid serious dollars to look after us." Not the best time for them to overhear the cabin crew - "I wish these pilots were being paid more than the local train/forklift driver or garbo!!" Who gives a s$%t what they were thinking, they're not in the cockpit skinning the cat sunshine, you are!!! You have other priorities at that point. What would they be thinking as they silently plummet seawards with both engines flamed out?!!


LetsGoRated is offline  
Old 8th Nov 2004, 09:54
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: QLD, Australia
Posts: 252
Neddy,

The ASA staff at the recent RAAA convention were very keen to talk about the advantages curved GPS approaches into regional airports, in particular the cost savings to regional airlines ie reduced diversion’s etc.
F111 is offline  
Old 8th Nov 2004, 10:59
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 70
Yes F111 I'm sure "some" ASA staff were !

Some (less than you can count on your toes) have been floggin' that dead horse for years at every conference they can milk from your (and the rest of the industry's) money! Trouble is no one else (particularly the big players) in Oz aviation are interested in what they're selling!

Now it's about time we moved on from the "home grown solution".
Neddy is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.