Runway Heading
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,178
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't know if you can get a free copy.
8168 (large chunks also reproduced in Jepp Text manual) does not define 'runway heading' as a clearance - possibly because it doesn't really exist!
It does however state (referring to all 'procedures' in PANS OPS)
"All procedures depict tracks. Pilots should attempt to maintain the track by applying corrections to heading for known wind."
8168 (large chunks also reproduced in Jepp Text manual) does not define 'runway heading' as a clearance - possibly because it doesn't really exist!
It does however state (referring to all 'procedures' in PANS OPS)
"All procedures depict tracks. Pilots should attempt to maintain the track by applying corrections to heading for known wind."
PROCEDURES FOR AIR NAVIGATION SERVICES AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS (PANS-OPS, DOC 8168)
The following is taken from ICAO Doc 444 ‘Air Traffic Management’
Chap 12-9
“a) [AFTER DEPARTURE] TURN RIGHT (or LEFT) HEADING (three digits) (or CONTINUE RUNWAY HEADING) (or TRACK EXTENDED CENTRE LINE) TO (level or significant point) [(other instructions as required)];”
Chap 12-17
... heading to be followed “CONTINUE RUNWAY HEADING (instructions);
... when a specific track is to be followed TRACK EXTENDED CENTRE LINE (instructions);”
From this, ‘Heading’ means fly heading i.e. aircraft reference.
‘Straight Ahead’ appears to be a corruption of “Track Extended Centerline”, thus it means fly track.
If you do not know the difference between heading and track then you should not be flying.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm amazed at some of the stuff in this thread...
If an air traffic controller instructs a pilot to fly a heading, he expects the pilot to use his compass or gyro (or whatever) and NOT - DEFINITELY NOT - to take into account the wind effect. Radar controllers are perfectly capable of adjusting the headings they issue to take account of the wind. Golf Bravo Zulu... don't know where you've been but in 31 years I never once used the cursor on a PPI. Everything came out of my head, as it does with most controllers.
When I worked in Heathrow Tower and wanted to take someone off a SID for separation I would give them a heading to fly instead of "straight ahead", or "runway heading". I had taken account of the wind and knew pretty well where the aircraft would go. Maybe they don't teach ATCOs basic navigation skills nowadays?
If an air traffic controller instructs a pilot to fly a heading, he expects the pilot to use his compass or gyro (or whatever) and NOT - DEFINITELY NOT - to take into account the wind effect. Radar controllers are perfectly capable of adjusting the headings they issue to take account of the wind. Golf Bravo Zulu... don't know where you've been but in 31 years I never once used the cursor on a PPI. Everything came out of my head, as it does with most controllers.
When I worked in Heathrow Tower and wanted to take someone off a SID for separation I would give them a heading to fly instead of "straight ahead", or "runway heading". I had taken account of the wind and knew pretty well where the aircraft would go. Maybe they don't teach ATCOs basic navigation skills nowadays?
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,178
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
safetypee
Just to clarify, it isn't in Pans Ops 8168. It just refers to ICAO doc 444. (Everyone's got a copy of that in their bag then!)
I don't think anyone is confused between heading and track, it's just that some places seem to expect different things and clarification was sought at the start of the thread.
Where's RADAR HEADING defined then?
Just to clarify, it isn't in Pans Ops 8168. It just refers to ICAO doc 444. (Everyone's got a copy of that in their bag then!)
I don't think anyone is confused between heading and track, it's just that some places seem to expect different things and clarification was sought at the start of the thread.
Where's RADAR HEADING defined then?
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: LONDON
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not sure if this helps the debate but just in case:
ICAO DOC 9643 (copy infront of me) is the document that describes the applicable separations during multiple runway operations and was the basis for the recent design work for Mixed-mode and Runway Three at Heathrow; this document always refers to track when describing separation requirements. For example, during parallel runway ops. the missed approach track from one runway must diverge by 30 degrees or more from the initial departure track from a parallel runway.
Therefore, I would say where instructions are being given to ensure separation it seems probable that heading should never come into it - we should always be dealing in track (unless, of course, one issues a heading that allows for the drift).
Point 4
ICAO DOC 9643 (copy infront of me) is the document that describes the applicable separations during multiple runway operations and was the basis for the recent design work for Mixed-mode and Runway Three at Heathrow; this document always refers to track when describing separation requirements. For example, during parallel runway ops. the missed approach track from one runway must diverge by 30 degrees or more from the initial departure track from a parallel runway.
Therefore, I would say where instructions are being given to ensure separation it seems probable that heading should never come into it - we should always be dealing in track (unless, of course, one issues a heading that allows for the drift).
Point 4
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Europe-the sunshine side
Posts: 755
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
120.4 separation is assured if both planes operating on parallel rwy fly the same instructed procedure: heading or track and not a mix of those.
I'm amazed to see that are pilots ,or even ATC guys,who confuse these two procedures.
I'm amazed to see that are pilots ,or even ATC guys,who confuse these two procedures.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is simple english combined with basic navigation.
If you are flying a heading, you will drift depending on the wind. With a crosswind heading and track are different.
When sitting on the threshold, you can be told 1 of 3 things;
1. Fly straight ahead. Look out your window down the extended runway centerline and have a think about what heading you are going to have to fly in order for the aircraft to proceed straight ahead. Hint - in a crosswind it will not be the same as the runway heading.
2. Fly Runway Heading. Look at the chart and it will tell you what the runway heading is. Fly that heading. Simple. Since one is expected to keep the heading within 5deg and the runway number will be 5 deg or less from the actual heading, then either will do the same job but the actual heading is the most accurate.
3. Track Runway Centerline. Use basic navigation to ensure that the heading you fly causes the aircraft to track along the extended runway centerline. Gain simple.
PANS-OPS Part 1 is very clear that pilots should fly tracks when they are specified making an appropriate allowance for the wind but when being radar vectored no allowance for wind is made by the pilot.
It is also very clear that pilots should not accept radar vectors until clear of obstacles. To me that means that give a clearance of fly runway heading or fly xxx heading after departure, I will track the runway centerline until the minimum turn height for that aerodrome and then fly the assigned heading. That prevents my aircraft from drifting into close-in obstacles which can be a problem during strong crosswinds with a slow aircraft and lift-off well before the departure end of the runway.
Regards,
DFC
If you are flying a heading, you will drift depending on the wind. With a crosswind heading and track are different.
When sitting on the threshold, you can be told 1 of 3 things;
1. Fly straight ahead. Look out your window down the extended runway centerline and have a think about what heading you are going to have to fly in order for the aircraft to proceed straight ahead. Hint - in a crosswind it will not be the same as the runway heading.
2. Fly Runway Heading. Look at the chart and it will tell you what the runway heading is. Fly that heading. Simple. Since one is expected to keep the heading within 5deg and the runway number will be 5 deg or less from the actual heading, then either will do the same job but the actual heading is the most accurate.
3. Track Runway Centerline. Use basic navigation to ensure that the heading you fly causes the aircraft to track along the extended runway centerline. Gain simple.
PANS-OPS Part 1 is very clear that pilots should fly tracks when they are specified making an appropriate allowance for the wind but when being radar vectored no allowance for wind is made by the pilot.
It is also very clear that pilots should not accept radar vectors until clear of obstacles. To me that means that give a clearance of fly runway heading or fly xxx heading after departure, I will track the runway centerline until the minimum turn height for that aerodrome and then fly the assigned heading. That prevents my aircraft from drifting into close-in obstacles which can be a problem during strong crosswinds with a slow aircraft and lift-off well before the departure end of the runway.
Regards,
DFC
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: LONDON
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Alexban
I was referring to the technical requirement for the establishment of ATC procedures under ICAO. You are of course quite right, as long as they both fly either track or heading, separation should be maintained.
A departure will typically be following a SID and therefore flying a track. In order to separate a simultaneous go-around from an adjacent runway, it too should be issued a track (or a heading that accounts for the drift).
No confusion - if you are trying to separate against established procedures, track will always work, heading might not unless drift is allowed for.
I was once involved in an incident where a B767 was launched 1 minute behind a Concorde off 09R at Heathrow. The book says the Tower can only use one minute if both aircraft follow the same track. I had issued 240degree headings to both of them and did not expect to get them one mintue apart. Of course, the B767 cut the corner and they met just south of Heathrow, same level. Track is safest.
Point 4
I was referring to the technical requirement for the establishment of ATC procedures under ICAO. You are of course quite right, as long as they both fly either track or heading, separation should be maintained.
A departure will typically be following a SID and therefore flying a track. In order to separate a simultaneous go-around from an adjacent runway, it too should be issued a track (or a heading that accounts for the drift).
No confusion - if you are trying to separate against established procedures, track will always work, heading might not unless drift is allowed for.
I was once involved in an incident where a B767 was launched 1 minute behind a Concorde off 09R at Heathrow. The book says the Tower can only use one minute if both aircraft follow the same track. I had issued 240degree headings to both of them and did not expect to get them one mintue apart. Of course, the B767 cut the corner and they met just south of Heathrow, same level. Track is safest.
Point 4
Last edited by 120.4; 12th Jul 2006 at 13:06.
