Establishing LOC
 

My question : You are cleared for the approach on a specified heading, however due to wind etc the heading to intercept the LOC is not a very good one. Is it at the discretion of the pilot to adjust his heading as required since he has been cleared for the approach or does he have to ask ATC for a new heading?
.

It always seemed to me that ATC's concern is a) your geographical position (x,y,z), and b) your velocity vector. The direction you have to point your aeroplane to achieve these is your business, not theirs.

But then I haven't flown in controlled airspace for a while.

My impression of a cleared heading is that the atco wants you to actually fly in that direction, and thereby making it track. But it really depends on the situation. Some of them are quite good, and some of them are not. However they should try to give you correct headings, but they obviously don't know the exact wind. So if you are given a final intercept heading and you end up with a bad interception of the LOC, I would adjust my heading, without requesting it.

If you're on an assigned heading and you want to change it please ask before you do anything.

At Heathrow at least, on a closing heading if you choose to turn yourself there is real potential for losing separation with the traffic that's following depending which direction you decide on and how far you turn.

WF.

Thanks WF am well aware about the rules of heading assignment!! I was asking about a specific case.
I ask because I was flying the other day and after being given a final heading to intercept by ATC (leaving us high) the PF re-adjusted his heading saying to me "once you are cleared for the approach you can adjust your heading as you need to establish onto the LOC". Now I hadn't heard that before so on the ground I asked him where I could find this information written down and he wasnt sure.
I appreciate any clarification and any thoughts about this specific case and if there is any written rule anywhere anyone knows about.

Surely if ATC want one to track 360 (or whatever) they'll say "Track 360"?

This business of heading versus track seems to crop up quite regularly and, speaking as a controller, I find it quite worrying. If I give a pilot a heading to fly I mean FLY THAT HEADING. If I want you to take up a track to a particular place, I'll tell you to route direct to X. If I don't much care where you go, I'll clear you to go on on your own navigation.

When I give a heading I've taken into account the wind. If I've got it wrong I'll correct it.

If I've given a heading that isn't working well for the pilot for any reason, tell me about it and between us we'll sort it out in such a way that doesn't cause problems for other pilots.

A pilot who decides that when I said HEADING I really meant TRACK will cause problems for everyone at some point.

Things may change in the future with RNAV and stuff but, for the moment, if the controller says heading then he/she means heading. So please use HDG mode - that's what it's there for!

As to the original question - the same applies. If the closing heading isn't working tell the controller - if it's not a problem to other aircraft and you ask to sort it yourself you'll probably be cleared to do what you want.

I agree with Spitoon.

If you are giving a heading - FLY it! IF it is crap heading then say so - and we can change our plans. Don't forget we have no actual wind info for yr level - just the 2 min average for the runway which is often miles away (and 4000 ft away!)

As for "cleared approach"...? If you are on a heading to intercept the localiser then you are NOT cleared for the approach. SIMPLE AS THAT. With respect to your Capt he is taking the rules and bending them beyond belief. After all - you wouldn't descend would you?!!? So why change your heading??

WF is right - if you change your track and alter the track mileage you might find yourself closer to the proceeding/following aircraft.

Guess who will be given the go-around........

:(

Thanks guys for your replies......it seems only AlanM really addressed my query. I am well aware about asking ATC for heading changes and also about the track/heading issue, but was wanting to know only if there was any special case with regard to intercepting LOC which I was unaware of (but had been told so in the cockpit!). It is clear now that there is no such thing and AlanM thanks for addressing the original question and not going off on patronising tangents!!

"patronising tangents!!"



:yuk: I'm afraid the controllers were answering your question but for what ever reason it wasn't clear to you.

D.L.

... it might be worth posting a link to this thread next time someone brings up the "Report localiser established/descend with the glide vs Cleared ILS" topic.

It seems that some people feel more free to do their own thing if they are told "Cleared ILS"...

G W-H

I am not sure if anyone is patronising here - maybe just surprised that someone who I assume was yr Capt is suggesting that you can do your own thing when on an establishing heading for the localiser.

Will Mode S change operating procedures in cockpits?

Sorry if you thought my post was a patronising tangent. And I thought I'd tried to answer your question - I'd just tried to give you the background too.

A few years ago, on my innitial IR with the CAA examiner I was on a closing heading to the Localiser at Exeter. The heading wasn't working as I would have intercepted the LOC above the G/S so I gave myself an extra 15 degrees left. The intercept now worked well and the ILS was fine but the CAA man was not impressed!

He told me in no uncertain terms that a heading from ATC must be maintained or re-negotiated, that the tolerance for heading maintenance on the IR was 5deg (or perhaps10?) and that he had a good mind to fail me. In the end he made me promise never again to change heading without asking and gave me a pass; whew!

Almost an expensive mistake but a good lesson. As has been said here; if ATC give you a heading fly it, if they give you a track fly it, if it's not working out ask to turn: this applies just the same while intercepting an approach or in any other situation. If you are really lucky you might hear “own navigation, report localiser established". Nirvana!

3 point

All,

There was an interesting thread on "Radar Heading" back in 2003 in the ATC issues forum, with some points that might be pertinent to the current discussion.

Sorry, but I don't know how to post a link to an old thread...
(Maybe someone could let me know?)

Thanks and regards,

Shuttlebus

Most interested in 3Point's experience with the CAA. Because I don't mind displaying my ignorance here (I won't get any more flak than when I'm right!!).

I always thought a heading instruction should be maintained as stated, but that the purpose of the extra words "To close the Localiser" was to allow you to make those sort of corrections if the closure wasn't working out.

[Edited to add]: Just checked MATS (10.5.2) and the phrase is "Aircraft should be vectored either onto the Localiser or given a closing heading enabling the pilot to complete the turn on". That's where I got the idea that the word "closing" had that particular meaning.

3Point's CAA man may not have liked it but from my experience of working with them they're not always right, you know. (And to be fair, they don't always claim to be).

To my understanding, MINOR heading alterations do not have to be asked to ATC. (5 degrees or less). This will often be sufficient for a better LOC capture.
Anything more than a 5 degree deviation: ask your controller. They are there to help you.

Despegue:

ABSOLUTELY NOT! A radar heading is, as has been spelt out several times already, and instruction from a controller to fly a specific number of degrees, not +/- 5 as it suits you. He/she will have taken the wind into account and, in the case of a localiser intercept, will have calculated what heading you need to intercept the localiser and turn onto it before the glideslope demands a descent (in the UK at least). You can ONLY come off the radar heading when the localiser needle starts to move into the centre and you turn to capture it. You are effectively then released on your own navigation to maintain the centreline.

If the intercept heading is not going to give you localiser capture before you need to descend (within half scale localiser deflection), then ask for a lower level or a sharper intercept angle. Do not change the intercept heading on your own initiative. In most places, that heading is designed to keep you spaced from the other guys around you.

Copied.

Will inform my collegues about this.
To be honest though, I never have to change a heading when under UK radar vectoring. Not needed. However, sometimes in "less proficient" area's it is either this or overshooting, which results in a danger situation when parallel approaches are in use... Again I agree that one should ALWAYS ask/ notify ATC when doing any deviations of more than max. 5 of degrees.

just my humble view.

despegue

Perhaps your last post didn't read as you intended it to but the statement, beggars belief as it implies that in the face of advice from numerous ATCOs on this thread, that you'll still make heading changes up to 5 degrees of that assigned, and only then ask/tell ATC if you need to adjust heading by more than 5 degrees.

Perhaps the flow should be, "ATC, despegue requires a further right (left) x degrees.