PAR approach qualification

[Klauss]

Hi,
I have come across the PAR, and the fact that controllers providing this service need
a qualification and must have some currency/recency. Donīt know the details.

My question: Does anyone know about pilotīs qualification / experience requrirements
to fly PAR down to EU-OPS minima (200ft - 550m RVR) ? Where can I read up on it ?

Best,

[B737-pilot]

You can't read on that.
Do u training for SRA? In my humble opinion no. Some might argue : you need a procedure in OMb ; they might be right.

For PAR things go like this : they talk you down to the runway they give headings to keep the a/c on track and indications on how to ajust you V/S . The controler playes an important part in this kind of approach. The bigger the aircraft the more difficult it is. At minima if you - land otherwise go around.

[BOAC]

Klauss - I am not aware of any 'requirements' but it would probably be a good idea to talk to someone who knows about them - they are incredibly simple - you basically do exactly as the controller tells you and stay silent during the approach (he will be on continuous transmit anyway and won't hear you). What could be easier? All you need to know is the rate of descent you need for the glidepath you are flying - and set it when told.

[Type1106]

I'm beginning to feel very old - but maybe I am at 65.

Klauss, Precision Approach Radar was, at one time, common almost everywhere, but for a long time now it is usually only found at military airfields or joint/military fields (Norway is a good example).

As BOAC says, you basically do what the controller tells you and say nothing - unless he/she specifically asks you to respond. I don't know what a/c type(s) you are current on but if it is any of the types that rely on a high level of automation in normal operation ( such as the Airbus series) you may well find a PAR a little challenging.

For example, when the controller says 'commence descent for a 3 degree glidepath' do you know the rate of descent you need to maintain for your configuration? Good, successful, PAR approaches down to 200' DH require practice on both the part of the controller and the pilot.

Hope you get to do one sometime with a good controller - it can be a much more satisfying experience that the same old - yawn - coupled auto ILS!

Cheers

1106

[clunckdriver]

Why would one need an endorsment to fly a PAR/GCA? Any pilot should be able to {a} Fly a heading{b} Fly a sink rate. Most GCAs will suggest an initial rate of descent based on your IAS, if not then you should have a fair clue as to what you will need to maintain the glidepath. When on an All Weather Squadron this was our prime method of getting down when it was cruddy, great NCO controllers, talk you right to touch down, even in a four plane and would give you the "Cut" to chop the power, no bloody Apch Bans or any of that stuff, as to doing it in a "Bus", did a few at a USAF destination, piece of cake.

[Denti]

We did PAR-training during our initial IFR training, most of those approaches in Yuma. At that time flying a cheap and simple to operate training aircraft (Beech F33) it was much easier and more relaxed than flying a normal ILS, the controllers were a real pleasure to work with, a very nice experience. However over here in Europe it is quite hard to find any place that offers them on our commercial route network.

[Klauss]

Thanks for all the comments.

I fly a 744, and havenīt done a PAR for as long as i can remember. Maybe during basic
training 30+ years ago, but certainly not with a jet.

Asking about PAR crossed my mind when I thought about landing minima the other day.
Have to demonstrate successful, hand flown CAT 1 to minimums on every Sim-Check...
and do so. An ILS is the most flown app. there is - so, no problem. 200-550 = ok. Instrument
scan and flying are trained.

On the other hand, you have the PAR. No requirements, no experience, but the
same minmum as an ILS. Doesnīt make sense.

A disturbing link: Flying a PAR approach to oceana NAS believing it was to norfolk NAS ends in great confusion and incu... - NASA ASRS

Any thoughts ?

[BOAC]

Klauss - I think you are making this over-complicated - as you will see (we actually all agree! - is this a PPRUne record?) - it is the simplest form of instrument approach you can fly. As long as our Magenta line/FD fed youth can actually fly pitch and power, you just do as you are told. No interpretation of needles -all done for you.

When you arrive at 200/550 there is no difference to you as a pilot to 200/550 on an ILS.

My thoughts on your link? Lack of 'spatial awareness' aka airmanship - the same thing that makes people fly into mountains and land in BRU instead of FFT or was it the other way round?

[fireflybob]

PAR - very straightforward just fly the a/c accurately as requested by the controller.

Recall doing a PAR into Frankfurt in the B707 early 1970s. Also at that time places like LHR, MAN and (I think) LGW had PAR monitoring when flying an ILS below certain minima.

[Type1106]

Fireflybob,

Yes, that's correct but I cannot remember when this was withdrawn at LHR - I seem to recall it was still there in the early '80s. All PARs, as opposed to monitored ILS, were also hand flown, so I have a question for the modern high tech operator:

How would you fly a PAR if that was the only option? How late in the approach can you (i.e. what are the limitations on the equipment) continue on autopilot/autothrottle when not coupled to an ILS? Given that your FD will not have any electronic centreline or glideslope inputs, can you still accept the minimum of 550 RVR? Not a trick question just a request for information.

1106

[Welle]

PAR

I have some PAR experience with my previous employer - we did a lot of scheduled flights to small eastern european cities, some of those airports only with NDB and PAR facilities (like Baja Mare in Romania)
Flight Ops decided to implement PAR procedures into the OM-B and all pilots on the fleet were trained on the Sim during OPCs

No big deal to actually fly the Approach, but you need some trust to the controller on the other side of the radio...

fly safe
welle

[BOAC]

Type1106 - yes - on the 737 you would simply engage A/Throttle, Heading Mode and Vert Speed (if you needed to). I guess on the Airbus something very clever (that a lot of AB pilots probably will not understand) - or open another packet of biscuits for the dog

[clunckdriver]

BOAC, The PAR/GCA Apchs I flew on the bus were hand flown , manual thrust, just like any basic aircraft, did have one F/O tried to be clever and use the magic, scewed it up into a mess, next week we should be going to a destination with GCA,flying the little 421B, am looking forward to a return to my youth,! {If only my body could return to its previous condition!}

[Capn Bloggs]

BOAC, having done hundreds at 190KIAS in a previous life, I can assure you there is no way I'd do a GCA to 200ft using the automatics of a modern jet. And I very much doubt any regulatory authority would allow a crew to do one during normal ops without being trained and tested.

[captjns]

Operations Specifications issued to airlines include the type of approaches approved to be conducted. If the airlines' Ops Specs include PAR approaches, then the crew must be trained and checked out for such procedure in accordance with their Flight Training Operations Manual.

Back in the day... after the Radio Range had gone extinct, and before GPS, when getting my IFR rating some military facilities allowed us to fly practice PAR approaches. Really good stuff

[BOAC]

Likewise Capn Bloggs, hence

Originally Posted by BOAC

if you needed to

Captjns - I have never seen anything like that, nor have I ever had to decline a 'short-notice' SRA approach after ILS failure and divert because I have not done the sim exercise. Given it may be the rules now (gawd bless'em) , but.................................

[Intruder]

I've recently flown several PARs in the 747 Classic. Our requirements are "training" in PAR approaches (which is taken care of in initial and recurrent training), but they are restricted to Captains only for some reason.

OTOH, an FO could fly an ILS or visual approach while the PAR controller is conducting a PAR for currency/practice...

[Denti]

Somewhat weird, on one hand we have tons of complaint about babblespeak checklists, the loss of airmanship and too much use of automation and on the othe hand now we har requests for even more regulation, training and probably certification for the most simple type of approach to fly. Thank god i am allowed to fly any kind of approach to the minima set in my licence, it does not really matter if its a PAR, GLS or ILS. I have never received any simulator training for the GLS and yet we are certified to fly it to the usual CAT I limits with CAT III certification in process if the aircraft is equipped for it. Same for the PAR, since you do not need any equipment we are allways certified to use it if need be.

[clunckdriver]

Thank you Denti, you just saved me launching into another rant! Whats so bloody difficult about flying headings and sink rate as instructed?Looking in my logbook I flew my first GCA in the early fifties, Moose Jaw went flat in ice fog so a bunch of us on our first night solo flights {about 100 hours or lesss total time} bogged of to Saskatoon, were picked of by GCA and all landed in about a three hundred foot ceiling, {Sorry about the hero story, but again I just cant belive how complex some posters want to make flying an aircraft }By the way, we were flying Harvards, one six freq VHF and if you ere lucky you might have an ADF/LF Range reciever.The corporate aircraft I now fly is in private catorgary one of the main reasons I keep it that way is to avoid those who feel that if they write enough regs they will keep things safe, it just doesnt work that way.

[p51guy]

Back in the twin engine charter days my first PAR was into a Navy Base at San Nicolas Island off LA. It was about minimums and worked quite well for the first one. We did a few more after that but just listening to the controller worked quite well.