Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Tech Log
Reload this Page >

Flying TRACK iso HEADING

Tech Log The very best in practical technical discussion on the web

Flying TRACK iso HEADING

Old 23rd Mar 2021, 09:13
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: N/A
Posts: 16
Question Flying TRACK iso HEADING

4.1.3 IFR Vectoring instructions, in upper Airspace (above FL245 PBN/RNAV)

For ATC separation, flying a TRACK is for several reasons much superior to flying the legacy HEADING (precision and automatic wind drift correction).

How easy is it on your airliner/GA flight deck (except A320) / for your flight crews to adapt and
FLY TRACK (three digits), iso FLY HEADING (three digits)?

Thanks for your input.

Last edited by sputnik01; 23rd Mar 2021 at 10:32. Reason: clarificaton
sputnik01 is offline  
Old 23rd Mar 2021, 09:33
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: SS Enterprise
Posts: 38
I guess it depends if your flying a C172 or Airbus! Flying a defined track in a C172 could be challenging.
Qwark is offline  
Old 23rd Mar 2021, 10:11
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Wanderlust
Posts: 2,864
If ATC gives you heading you must fly heading and not track because his vectoring caters for drift etc. If there's a cross wind and instruction is to maintain RW hdg after takeoff flying the track may close in onto parallel RW traffic.
vilas is online now  
Old 23rd Mar 2021, 10:17
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,625
Airbus FBW heading selector has two modes: One maintains a selected heading, the other maintains a selected track. The track mode automatically adjusts for wind, as detected by the on-board ADIRS.

Very easy on Airbus !

As vilas says though, the assertion quoted by the OP about track versus heading is a bit suspect - I have rarely been asked by ATC to follow a track. Always headings.
Uplinker is offline  
Old 23rd Mar 2021, 10:51
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: France
Posts: 506
OP is precisely questioning this practise, and wondering why they don't ask to fly tracks.
You can't say that they don't ask to fly tracks because they ask to fly headings, that's a circular argument.
KayPam is offline  
Old 23rd Mar 2021, 11:50
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,625
OP has just edited his initial post. It isn't clear who is making the Track vs HDG assertion.

It is still not stated what document this is taken from and what authority they have. It could be the OPs own notes ?!
Uplinker is offline  
Old 23rd Mar 2021, 12:01
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Leeds
Posts: 21
It doesn't matter, it's an interesting discussion point.

All IFR aircraft need to be able to follow a track, to follow defined arrivals and approaches. Why not get vectored that way too?
tolip1 is offline  
Old 23rd Mar 2021, 13:23
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: USA
Posts: 658
The ability to follow a VOR radial or localizer, does not give the ability to fly an arbitrary track from an arbitrary point.
Vessbot is online now  
Old 23rd Mar 2021, 13:30
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Wherever I lay my hat
Age: 43
Posts: 550
Very easy in a Boeing. P/P360 would give you a pink string to follow north. But as mentioned above, no one's likely to ask you to do that.
rudestuff is offline  
Old 23rd Mar 2021, 17:15
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2020
Location: Home
Posts: 31
I've been out of operational controlling for many years but back in my day I sometimes put an aircraft on a track, usually DCT to a specific point, but sometimes also to fly an offset to that track for separation purposes. From the controller perspective I would suggest (nothing has changed in the intervening years), if it suits the situation, use the technique. As pointed out earlier, not all aircraft are able easily to set up a TRK to a random point so don't use tracks if any of the aircraft are unlikely to be able to do it easily. Never had any problems either if an aircraft requested a particular track and I vectored other aircraft on headings - that said, I didn't do all this in high density traffic, but if it's that busy I would expect aircraft to be following defined routes and I wouldn't be doing any vectoring.
Equivocal is offline  
Old 24th Mar 2021, 07:06
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Europe
Posts: 26
Engine Failure Procedures Track or Heading?

Using the BOEING OPT, what does it mean when the engine failure procedure calls for maintaining a certain number of degrees after departure? Does that number refer to TRACK or HDG?

Here's a specific example:

The engine failure procedure for the departure on runway 07R in HKG is depicted as follows: "At D3,0 SMT LEFT turn to 065. Intercept OUBD R-105 LKC. At D9,5 LKC RIGHT turn to 185."

Are the numbers 065 and 185 HEADINGS or TRACKS? I remember that the procedure design is including a certain amount of omnidirectional wind (30 knots if I am not mistaken), so a certain amount of drift is factored into the design. Common sense would certainly dictate that this is flown as a TRACK to be more accurate, but is there a binding LEGAL definition somewhere?

Much obliged
NGjockey is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2021, 00:42
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: SE QLD
Posts: 276
Procedures are designed with wind components taken into account. You can safely fly heading. Nothing wrong with flying as track either.
ScepticalOptomist is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2021, 04:10
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Wanderlust
Posts: 2,864
If there's large crosswind it will make a difference. If everyone else is drifting downwind an aircraft flying track will get into them. You have to do what ATC wants you to do.
vilas is online now  
Old 25th Mar 2021, 10:42
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: FNQ ... It's Permanent!
Posts: 3,700
Vilas. The last couple of posts are about engine out tracks! Not what ATC want you to do!
Capt Fathom is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2021, 12:04
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,320
Originally Posted by tolip1 View Post
It doesn't matter, it's an interesting discussion point.

All IFR aircraft need to be able to follow a track, to follow defined arrivals and approaches. Why not get vectored that way too?
Lots of small airplanes still flying the system that don't have RNAV/GPS.

Having said that, what about getting rid of magnetic headings and courses? That would make management of the system a whole lot easier.
aterpster is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2021, 12:05
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: I wouldn't know.
Posts: 4,239
I second that, as far as i know most of the merchant marine has switched to purely true a long time ago.
Denti is online now  
Old 25th Mar 2021, 12:54
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: on the golf course (Covid permitting)
Posts: 2,126
While flying true tracks would probably be the gold standard, surely until every aircraft using the airspace can do that you have to cater for those that can't?

TopBunk is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2021, 13:45
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Leeds
Posts: 21
aterpster

Yes, but these planes/pilots will still be required to, and have the ability to, adjust for wind and fly a track. That was the point I was making.
tolip1 is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2021, 14:01
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,320
Track is alien to controllers. They want heading. My company issued a bulletin on it in 1984 when I moved from the 727 to the 767.
aterpster is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2021, 14:09
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: USA
Posts: 658
Those airplanes are not required to, and do not have the ability to, fly a track.
Vessbot is online now  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.