Position reports - a question for those on CENTRE consoles
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Awstraya
Posts: 197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Position reports - a question for those on CENTRE consoles
I've encountered what seem to be differing practices by those manning the CENTRE consoles with regard to the necessity of position reports when radar identified under the IFR.
I was under the impression that under the IFR and in accordance with AIP ENR 1.1 and the ERC's that position reports were REQUIRED as indicated on the ERC (and/or as per flight plan).
A number of times I've had CENTRE inform me that a position report wasn't required "as you're radar identified", yet have subsequent sectors (which also have me radar identified) "have a go" at me for not making a report (in accordance with the practices of previous sector)!! This can vary on the same sector at different times in the same day......
Other pilots I've talked to have experienced the same.
What's the story?
I was under the impression that under the IFR and in accordance with AIP ENR 1.1 and the ERC's that position reports were REQUIRED as indicated on the ERC (and/or as per flight plan).
A number of times I've had CENTRE inform me that a position report wasn't required "as you're radar identified", yet have subsequent sectors (which also have me radar identified) "have a go" at me for not making a report (in accordance with the practices of previous sector)!! This can vary on the same sector at different times in the same day......
Other pilots I've talked to have experienced the same.
What's the story?
Once radar identified & inside CTA then position reports not required.
Don't think the 'radar identified=no position reports' applies to OCTA. That particular paragraph is in the CTA section of the AIP.
Don't think the 'radar identified=no position reports' applies to OCTA. That particular paragraph is in the CTA section of the AIP.
Last edited by Tinstaafl; 17th Jun 2003 at 19:56.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think the ATC's care about the position report once you are radar identified but I believe a broadcast should still be made when OCTA so other traffic with just a listening watch know where you are.
When you have left CTA but are still radar identified, as Hazard_Alert suggests you can still broadcast or make a report. This will also save them asking you for your next estimate when you do leave radar coverage.
Inbound to CTA, when radar identified centre seems happy for you to stop reporting, and will usually say "identified at ..." as you call up centre for a position report.
That seems to be the case around Darwin anyway. A similar thread was on the ATCO's forum recently, where it was stated position report outside CTA but within radar do benefit other aircraft.
Inbound to CTA, when radar identified centre seems happy for you to stop reporting, and will usually say "identified at ..." as you call up centre for a position report.
That seems to be the case around Darwin anyway. A similar thread was on the ATCO's forum recently, where it was stated position report outside CTA but within radar do benefit other aircraft.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Disagree, Jep ATC 10.3 "Generally, position reports are required except when radar identified. However, radar identified aircraft may be required to submit position reports when advised by ATC or Notam".
Dosn't specify CTA or OCTA.
Dosn't specify CTA or OCTA.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Awstraya
Posts: 197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So where does that leave the "compulsory position report"? If you have a look at ERC LOW 2, Parkes has one of those solid triangle symbol thingies - which the Chart Legend labels as "COMPULSORY POSITION REPORT ALL AIRCRAFT". Are compulsory reports now no longer required when radar identified when OCTA - depending on the console person of the day? Are ASA staff allowed to override the AIP when you're OCTA?
It seems to me that the position report points nominated on the charts are leftovers from the pre-radar days and of no real use to ATC when you are radar identified. Seeing as IFR aircraft are supposed to receive DTI based on radar info, then making these reports is of no great utility for other IFR aircraft, either. The only aircraft that might be interested in knowing your position (and vice versa) would be a VFR aircraft on climb/descent through your level ........ and if a VFR aircraft is going to cross, it's see and avoid in VMC right?
So why make the reports when radar identified and why not write the change in practice into the AIP?
It seems to me that the position report points nominated on the charts are leftovers from the pre-radar days and of no real use to ATC when you are radar identified. Seeing as IFR aircraft are supposed to receive DTI based on radar info, then making these reports is of no great utility for other IFR aircraft, either. The only aircraft that might be interested in knowing your position (and vice versa) would be a VFR aircraft on climb/descent through your level ........ and if a VFR aircraft is going to cross, it's see and avoid in VMC right?
So why make the reports when radar identified and why not write the change in practice into the AIP?
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 279
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
See and avoid is a bit simplistic...part of good situational awarenes is maintained by use of radio transmissions. OCTA, IFR aircraft are passed info on other IFR and known VFR (usually unverified radar paints) but vfr a/c have to look AND listen. Position reports let all pilots know who is where. In CTA and on radar, aircraft are seperated and there positions known at all times so that info is not as necessary, hence no position reports are usually expected. ATC requires an estimate for SAR purposes for aircraft out of radar coverage and should ask for one if you do not provide a position report prior to leaving radar. On an aside for vfr pilots, most seem too afraid to use the radio. Most good controllers keep a scratchpad and scribble down bits of "extra" info (this is everything from calculating requirements to vfr radio reports). I admit this varies greatly from controller to controller. Some get frustrated at the bugsmashers chewing up radiospace, but commonsense by the pilot should prevail- keep it short and precise. My understanding on p.r.'s is that all aircraft should make them unless in CTA where the aircraft is identified and not going to leave radar coverage.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Awstraya
Posts: 197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Roger, Roger.
In my previous post : It's see and avoid in VMC right?
Note the " ".
-------------------
Unfortunately, in the brave new NAS world, VFR ACFT won't have any geographical guidance as to what area freqency to be on - so they will have an increased chance of not hearing your calls anyway (and DTI will be removed for IFR in G).
Even now, when off the VTC's and VNC's, it's not an easy thing to sort out which area frequency VFR ACFT sould be on under the current system - unless an ERC is used beforehand to sort out frequency changes with respect to course - and do you think everyone does that? Even then, when you look at differing Area Frequency boundaries, do you think all, or even most, relevant traffic will hear you?
For example, Mudgee is near the border of 3 FREQ boundaries, and depending on the direction you're flying, aircraft in at least 2 out of 3 converging area frequency areas either won't hear your position report or your top of descent call......Inverell is similar.
I suppose a little information shared is perhaps better than none....
It's also interesting that CENTRE ask you for an estimate for next position before leaving radar coverage - most of the time they seem to have an accurate ETA pegged for you within minutes of the last change of course in radar coverage.
I have no quibbles for reports OCTA and out of Radar Coverage - necessary for SAR and a rough idea of when you'll turn up on the screen.
However my main questions at the start were directed to those manning CENTRE and wondering if the practice of suppressing those making position reports OCTA when radar identified is a uniform or documented practice within AsA. If the latter is correct, then I was also wondering why the practice hasn't been converted to documentation in the AIP.
In my previous post : It's see and avoid in VMC right?
Note the "
".-------------------
Unfortunately, in the brave new NAS world, VFR ACFT won't have any geographical guidance as to what area freqency to be on - so they will have an increased chance of not hearing your calls anyway (and DTI will be removed for IFR in G).
Even now, when off the VTC's and VNC's, it's not an easy thing to sort out which area frequency VFR ACFT sould be on under the current system - unless an ERC is used beforehand to sort out frequency changes with respect to course - and do you think everyone does that? Even then, when you look at differing Area Frequency boundaries, do you think all, or even most, relevant traffic will hear you?
For example, Mudgee is near the border of 3 FREQ boundaries, and depending on the direction you're flying, aircraft in at least 2 out of 3 converging area frequency areas either won't hear your position report or your top of descent call......Inverell is similar.
I suppose a little information shared is perhaps better than none....
It's also interesting that CENTRE ask you for an estimate for next position before leaving radar coverage - most of the time they seem to have an accurate ETA pegged for you within minutes of the last change of course in radar coverage.
I have no quibbles for reports OCTA and out of Radar Coverage - necessary for SAR and a rough idea of when you'll turn up on the screen.
However my main questions at the start were directed to those manning CENTRE and wondering if the practice of suppressing those making position reports OCTA when radar identified is a uniform or documented practice within AsA. If the latter is correct, then I was also wondering why the practice hasn't been converted to documentation in the AIP.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On the subject of making position reports for vfr aircraft to listen to, i doubt whether most vfr guys would even know where the location of those points actually are, overhead airports is a different story, but i believe these are the minority of position reporting points.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 279
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NoTimtams, you are right that we have a fairly accurate estimate of the next off radar waypoint. The system uses standard aircraft profiles for these calculations and known winds. Whilst on radar, "radar data" is regularly updated to the system re position and estimates. Once an aircraft leaves radar, the system reverts back to the a/c profiles for its estimates. Not a perfect scenario but still fairly accurate. Since this data is general for an a/c type (eg. pa31... chieftain or navajo?), these system estimates are not good enough to be regarded as acceptable. The winds we have may not be right. It is unfortunate that in most cases, the system estimates are so close to the real estimate, that pilot estimates are sometimes not sought by the controller (i can only think this happens to a/c arriving at their destination), but the time is very rarely more than a minute out. Do pilots update their estimates after deciding to do a GPS approach? Generally not, because a couple of minutes either side of their estimate is not considered a big deal(correct me if I am wrong). I hear you on the controllers announcing position reports not required whilst identified octa. To my knowledge, AIP will not be updated to reflect this as it is simply wrong. If it happens again, file a CAIR report.
Cheers,
RS
Cheers,
RS
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Awstraya
Posts: 197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Roger. I did suspect as much.
With regard to your hypothetical Do pilots update their estimates after deciding to do a GPS approach? Generally not, because a couple of minutes either side of their estimate is not considered a big deal(correct me if I am wrong). IFR pilots are supposed to update their estimates if they become aware they are more than 2 minutes out - my understanding was that this was basically originally designed for non-radar environments so that DTI can be given/updated so that it is closer to the mark.
With the doodling speeds that I sometimes get around at, I suppose that I should update my times when manouevring around for some of the GPS approaches!!
With regard to your hypothetical Do pilots update their estimates after deciding to do a GPS approach? Generally not, because a couple of minutes either side of their estimate is not considered a big deal(correct me if I am wrong). IFR pilots are supposed to update their estimates if they become aware they are more than 2 minutes out - my understanding was that this was basically originally designed for non-radar environments so that DTI can be given/updated so that it is closer to the mark.
With the doodling speeds that I sometimes get around at, I suppose that I should update my times when manouevring around for some of the GPS approaches!!
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 279
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
THe times are certainly used for DTI purposes, but most importantly for SAR purposes. We allow 10 mins from the nominated time for arriving a/c, and then start looking at ways to make contact. Contact must be then attempted within 3 minutes. I presume the 10 mins allows for circuit traffic, a go around, estimate errors, taxi time etc. I hate having to chase someone and get the response, "standby, short final"- I feel bad and the pilot is interupted at the worst possible time. Point taken about vfr listening to ifr position reports. I fly vfr and must admit without my job background probably wouldn't have a clue where the positions are, however the one point I would know is the destination which is the leg where most of the level changing is going to happen anyway. Just a thought.
Cheers.
Cheers.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Infinity.... and beyond.
Posts: 354
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NoTimTams
You have raised one of the flaws in the NAS system, and one to which I have tried to obtain an answer on the "NAS Operational Questions" thread.
The short answer is that currently, radar identified aircraft in controlled airspace are not required to make position reports once radar identified, but outside controlled airpsace all IFR aircraft are still required to make position reports. (Primarily for the benefit of VFR aircraft listening out on the area frequency.)
When NAS 2A happens, the rules are conflicting and unclear:
The AIP Sup H23/03 says:
This is under the "Operations in controlled airspace" section, despite the fact that it mentions class G.
But AIP (unamended) still says (for OCTA operations):
Unfortunately, sloppy drafting by the NAS team has once again created uncertainty and confusion. The lack of accountability of those in 'power' is eroding the sense of certainty and the safety net that has been built up over many years.
The short answer is that currently, radar identified aircraft in controlled airspace are not required to make position reports once radar identified, but outside controlled airpsace all IFR aircraft are still required to make position reports. (Primarily for the benefit of VFR aircraft listening out on the area frequency.)
When NAS 2A happens, the rules are conflicting and unclear:
The AIP Sup H23/03 says:
ENR 1.1 para 8.2: Replace with:
8.2 Except when radar identified, position reports are required for all aircraft in classes A, C and D airspace, and for IFR flights or flights using the IFR Pick-up procedure after initial contact with ATC in classes E and G airspace.
8.2 Except when radar identified, position reports are required for all aircraft in classes A, C and D airspace, and for IFR flights or flights using the IFR Pick-up procedure after initial contact with ATC in classes E and G airspace.
But AIP (unamended) still says (for OCTA operations):
OPERATIONS IN NON-CONTROLLED AIRSPACE
58. POSITION REPORTS
[I]58.1 Position reporting is mandatory when operating under the IFR and must normally be made at the positions or times notified on the flight notification (See ENR 1.10 para 3.4 for flight notification requirements).
58. POSITION REPORTS
[I]58.1 Position reporting is mandatory when operating under the IFR and must normally be made at the positions or times notified on the flight notification (See ENR 1.10 para 3.4 for flight notification requirements).
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 279
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't even start me on NAS... change for the sake of change? Let's copy a system (U.S.) that is designed for 100% radar coverage and introduce it into a system of the where radar doesn't cover much more than the J curve down the eastern coast. Now that we have consolidated areas that used to be controlled with a radar and procedural controller and flight service, let's complete the circle by bringing cta back down to lower levels and let one person do the lot... expect no delay...yeah, right. Time to brush up on those step climb/step descent procedures. I should probably take my soapbox to another thread...
