PPRuNe Forums


Rotorheads A haven for helicopter professionals to discuss the things that affect them

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 20th Mar 2017, 03:58   #1 (permalink)
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: JPN
Posts: 10
For low altitude to commence approach in IFR

In IFR flight, upon reaching IAF with preceding trfc exsisting and can't get a descend clearance by IAF. In this case we need to hold over IAF to descend to the ALT wchich we can commence safe (not too deep) APCH.


I wonder which phrase is the appropriate one to request to ATC controller.


I use as follows, " request hold over (designator of IAF) to lose alttitude". I'm not a english native speaker and want to use a natural expression as possible in ATC.


Thanks in advance.
twinbird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th Mar 2017, 06:32   #2 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK and MALTA
Age: 54
Posts: 975
Twin bird, if you are under "Radar Control Service", ATC should position you to commence the approach at an appropriate altitude.

If you are flying procedurally, and not in receipt of a Radar Service, you would position yourself.

If what you described happened to you, the simple answer is to request a descent to a nominated altitude and you do not need to give the reason as it should be obvious to ATC. So just "Radar this is (callsign), request descent to altitude xxxx feet".

If, you are subsequently cleared for the ILS, and you are above the glideslope, you have no option but to go-around and reposition. I would suggest under such circumstances ATC would be at fault and you should have been requesting a descent in accordance with the procedure.

Finally, unless a hold is prescribed at the IAF on the approach plate, holding and descending at the IAF would be irregular and likely to chaos chaos is a busy ATC environment.
DOUBLE BOGEY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th Mar 2017, 16:35   #3 (permalink)
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Tax-land.
Posts: 800
DB, this guy is asking about Japan's airspace.
It may differ somehow.
tottigol is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th Mar 2017, 20:51   #4 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK and MALTA
Age: 54
Posts: 975
Tottigol, most ICAO contracting states do it the same way with minor differences posted in the AIP. Otherwise there would be complete chaos as the big jets nip around the globe. Pansops etc.

I would think the guidance I gave him would be relevant but maybe he will come back with some feedback.
DOUBLE BOGEY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th Mar 2017, 22:05   #5 (permalink)
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: JPN
Posts: 10
DB, this is the thing when we approach to non radar airport and fly procedurally. It's easy for pressurized aircraft to descent deeply with big rate of descent but I'm on non-pressurized A/C and cannot descent that deeper.
Of course holding pattern is published at IAF and we request hold and cleared to hold there. I think It would be bettter off adding the reason after " request hold" to improve situational awareness for both pilot and controller.
twinbird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th Mar 2017, 17:40   #6 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Germany
Posts: 37
Jets get even more problems with steep decents before commencing an approach due to the energy state of the A/C.
EDML is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT. The time now is 03:37.


1996-2012 The Professional Pilots Rumour Network

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1