contact approach

This forum has been developed to discuss ATS related topics.

Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, North Shore

lilfssister
Rank Moderator
Rank Moderator
Posts: 2783
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 2:51 pm
Location: Mysteryville Castle

Re: cloud breaking procedures??

Post by lilfssister »

dash2/3 wrote:cloud breaking procedures??

heard the term several times. never heard anybody asking for it as i understand it's for emergencies??? anyway, could someone in the know enlighten me as to how/why one would request it? whom one would request it?, and what the appropriate controlling agency could provide the pilot requesting it? lots of questions but like they say, "no such thing as stupid questions, the only stupid question is the one that wasn't asked..."
[

I've been puzzling over this one for a while.

Yes, you must declare an emergency.

One would request it if you're VFR above or in cloud and and not enough fuel to reach VFR conditions elsewhere.

One could request from any FSS or Tower that has DF...but not all provide this service. If there is good radar coverage there may be no cloud break procedures in place.

The "controlling agency" could be tower or FSS. To provide emergency DF procedures FSS has to ask if you will follow their instructions.

Pygmie got the basics pretty well covered. As I said I was puzzling over what to post. The most simple explanation is that using VDF, the tower or FSS will give you altitudes and headings designed to get you safely through a cloud layer, until you are in VMC and can land visually. Sort of like a full procedure ILS approach, but without the pilot being certified to fly IFR, or using the ILS, just following a specific route and altitude that we would give you based on your DF bearings and a bunch of very specific directions designed for us as to what those altitudes and headings should be.
---------- ADS -----------
 
grimey
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2979
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 1:01 am
Location: somewhere drunk

Post by grimey »

FSS wrote:God yes Chris... er Charlie, don't let it be known that FSS control anything, but maybe cloud breaking procedures, or in the past before your time, Radio Range Orientation or VOR Orientation. Whew, glad you made that clear.
No-compass homing could be considered controlling as well. But like lil said, we have to ask the pilot if he's willing to obey our instructions first, and it's only available at certain stations (those with VHF-DF equipment installed).
---------- ADS -----------
 
FSS
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 80
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2004 7:34 am
Location: All Over

Post by FSS »

I suspect that not many sites provide this anymore or have DF capabilities.
It's when a VFR pilot gets caught above cloud and would kinda like to get below it. If she/he agrees, the FSS will ask what heading they are flying and to do turns to determine whether they are flying to or from station. Once that is determine then the FSS issues headings to fly until the aircraft is inbound to an airport and not heading at any high spots, hills or towers which could mess this up. The pilot is then asked to desend, keeping said aircraft trimmed and careful watch on altimeter, reporting when clear of cloud. There of course other factors involved such as fuel, wx, etc. Ironically, for a period of time, YTH FSS were qualified in cloud breaking procedures while the controllers were not and if c/b procedures required, had to turn the aircraft over to the FSS. :D
As this was a tricky procedure for a low time VFR pilot, (who else would get caught in this situation?), it was a last resort thing, we are all familiar with the "60 second flight in cloud." The Radio Range and VOR stuff was to orient the pilot to pass over the said NavAid when she/he was lost, sorry, not lost, "just didn't know where I was." At one time a IFR pilot could fly coast to coast, through mountain passes, etc, following Radio Range legs, especially the guys, anything to do with "legs", they would follow..... :roll:
---------- ADS -----------
 
grimey
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2979
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 1:01 am
Location: somewhere drunk

Post by grimey »

FSS wrote: Ironically, for a period of time, YTH FSS were qualified in cloud breaking procedures while the controllers were not and if c/b procedures required, had to turn the aircraft over to the FSS. :D
Fort Nelson did a cloud break last year. Center was unable, and requested the FSS to do it IIRC.

YTH is no longer able to do so, no more DF.
---------- ADS -----------
 
bigfssguy
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 365
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2004 8:10 am
Location: Churchill MB

Post by bigfssguy »

When i was in school 3 1/2 years ago everyone learned the DF cloud break, no compass homing etc but few actually went to a station that had it. I believe the number was 1 out of 12. I have been to 3 different stations YXT, YTH, YYQ and none of them have had DF. Definately a useful tool though and i'm sure it has saved a few pilots before. ALso grimey i believe the phraseology is "are you willing to follow my instructions" not "obey" I mean we know FSS want to be kings/queens of the universe but come on buddy dial it down a bit..............
---------- ADS -----------
 
FSS: puting the Service back in Flight Services....
lilfssister
Rank Moderator
Rank Moderator
Posts: 2783
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 2:51 pm
Location: Mysteryville Castle

Post by lilfssister »

bigfssguy wrote: ALso grimey i believe the phraseology is "are you willing to follow my instructions" not "obey" I mean we know FSS want to be kings/queens of the universe but come on buddy dial it down a bit..............

Boys, boys, boys...settle down. As I said above:

673.4 A. 2 Phraseology:
CLOUD BREAKING ASSISTANCE CAN BE
PROVIDED. WILL YOU FOLLOW MY
INSTRUCTIONS?
---------- ADS -----------
 
FSS
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 80
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2004 7:34 am
Location: All Over

Post by FSS »

OK, didn't plan a history lesson until next Thursday, but...
When TC or was it DOT, maybe it was MOT put out their Canada Air Systems Plan (CASP) in the early 80's, one proposal was to blanket all of Canada with VHF/DF. Of course like much else in the two vol. plan, it didn't happen. It is a poor man's radar, but like someone said, very useful tool. Use of has potenially avoided many accidents/incidents. One such story was a late night call on 126.7 picked up by YTH FSS. Said a/c was calling Yellowknife! Duty FSS asked him if he could help as the DF indicated he was NW of YTH and by the sig strength within 50 - 60 miles of YTH. Pilot indicated he was a medevac out of Spence Bay destine for the "Knife. His fuel was down and once he was aware of where he really was, decided to land Lynn Lake. He advised he was on final which YYL advised, "by your bearing, not at YYL your not." He overshot Leaf Rapids and continued on to Lynn. Medevac pax got off and refused to get back on, company asked YYL FSS to have a/c refueled for another pilot who would be there in the morning to take it to YZF. Not sure what the outcome of this would have been without DF both in YTH and YYL.
TC decided that DF was too expensive to maintain and started pulling them out of sites in the 90's. One accident in southern ON was an a/c lost, low on fuel, poor wx and the FSS's in vicinty had their DF's removed. Unable to do anything and with no radar coverage, the poor sod flew until rolling up in bush and rocks, not surviving. Possibly a DF steer might have got him to an airstrip. Of course Ottawa knew best, cost conscientious, I'm surprised that there are still some around.
There were some Regions, YQM for one, that would not allow FSS to perform c/b on the assumtion they weren't smart enough or capabile of steering a/c and most pilots would come out of cloud upside down anyways. Duh, at least with DF he could have come out over the airport or other suitable terrain, at least know where to send CFR. One more story then I'll go, C46 departs YTH, declares emergency, going down, Reg. TC Safety Officer in FSS, commandeers chopper doing a run-up, given last bearing taken on C46, run out and picked up survivours and via direct to hospital. Total time, 30 mins. No DF; would have taken longer to find site. My theory was anything we could do on the ground to aid and assit those in the air was applicable.
---------- ADS -----------
 
FSS
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 80
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2004 7:34 am
Location: All Over

Post by FSS »

Double post, something ain't working, right, gets my number up though.
---------- ADS -----------
 
jonathan_tcu
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 66
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2006 3:59 pm
Location: Timmins, ON
Contact:

Post by jonathan_tcu »

YTS (Timmins) FSS has DF. I've seen it myself back in the early 1990's. Once an aircraft calls FSS, the dot blinks and FSS guys get the bearing for advisories.

As for contact approach issues, I've heard incoming flights who are VMC are questioned by ATC prior to final approach clearance or late night when no other traffic is reported if they have the field visual and issue a visual approach. During peak traffic periods, ATC suggests the pilots request a visual prior to dropping off radar or calling 20 DME, or they must request the contact approach. Some pilots still ask for visual approaches even when they don't see the field. :roll:
---------- ADS -----------
 
FSS wannabe, just curious about stuff, that's all
it'sme
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 165
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Canada

Post by it'sme »

Jonathan said "Some pilots still ask for visual approaches even when they don't see the field"

Golly gee, do it all the time. Requested and received a visual approach just yesterday......and no I didn't see the field at the time....we were still 60 miles away.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Fusion13
Rank 0
Rank 0
Posts: 6
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 9:25 pm

Post by Fusion13 »

Back to contact approaches...in a "radar to the ground" environment ATC can issue contact approaches to as many aircraft as they like as long as radar separation can be maintained. ATC requirements are 1 mile flight vis and ground contact, but if the pilot says he or she has the minima then it's not up to us to question it.

In a non-radar environment only one approach clearance can be issued at a time, regardless of the type of approach being flown. As was correctly pointed out earlier, the only exception to this is a subsequent visual approach when a/c #2 has #1 in sight. However, the procedure must be established - and the controller must be satisfied that the procedure is working - before radar identification is lost with either a/c, so this has minimal application.

As far as visual approaches go, if a pilot says they see the airport, who am I to argue??
---------- ADS -----------
 
charlie_g
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 310
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2005 6:24 am

Post by charlie_g »

it'sme wrote:Jonathan said "Some pilots still ask for visual approaches even when they don't see the field"

Golly gee, do it all the time. Requested and received a visual approach just yesterday......and no I didn't see the field at the time....we were still 60 miles away.
Did you report the field in sight?
---------- ADS -----------
 
pokaroo
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 162
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 12:06 pm

Post by pokaroo »

Back to contact approaches...in a "radar to the ground" environment ATC can issue contact approaches to as many aircraft as they like as long as radar separation can be maintained.
Isn't it provided the first aircraft is established on final, which takes away most of the advantage as most guys usually keep it tight when on a contact.
---------- ADS -----------
 
jonathan_tcu
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 66
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2006 3:59 pm
Location: Timmins, ON
Contact:

Post by jonathan_tcu »

charlie_g wrote:
it'sme wrote:Jonathan said "Some pilots still ask for visual approaches even when they don't see the field"

Golly gee, do it all the time. Requested and received a visual approach just yesterday......and no I didn't see the field at the time....we were still 60 miles away.
Did you report the field in sight?
Wasn't me flying, I just tune in and learn. Every now and then, be it MVFR or VFR/VMC conditions, some pilots who are new to the area, request a visual and ATC asks if the field is in sight. If so, visual is approved. If not, the pilot is told to request a contact or published approach and ask the local or remote FSS to hotline ATC and forward a visual approach request. I live in a non-radar environment where when a plane drops off radar and the pilot awaits ATC's final approach clearance, at that point, ATC states it's too late to ask for a visual because "I can't see you, so I can't approve a visual, but I can approve a contact approach on request". However, when I listen to aircraft in radar environments, like CYSB and CYYB during nights/weekends, it's radar all the way through, where ATC asks the pilot to report field visual. Wouldn't life be so much easier if every or almost every airspace was covered by radar? :lol:
---------- ADS -----------
 
FSS wannabe, just curious about stuff, that's all
Fusion13
Rank 0
Rank 0
Posts: 6
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 9:25 pm

Post by Fusion13 »

pokaroo wrote:
Back to contact approaches...in a "radar to the ground" environment ATC can issue contact approaches to as many aircraft as they like as long as radar separation can be maintained.
Isn't it provided the first aircraft is established on final, which takes away most of the advantage as most guys usually keep it tight when on a contact.
Well, not exactly, but you can't clear a/c #2 for the approach til in a position (usually on vectors) where he can't catch #1 no matter what track he flies. It's really the same as vectoring for subsequent visual approaches when the a/c will never get each other in sight.

Another technique is to determine if the pilot requesting a contact can comply with a particular restriction (i.e. present heading to final; turn final outside the river etc) and still conduct the approach. This can be used to ensure adequate spacing with preceding traffic
---------- ADS -----------
 
jonathan_tcu
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 66
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2006 3:59 pm
Location: Timmins, ON
Contact:

Post by jonathan_tcu »

I found this cassette recording from last Spring, between a CZYZ controller and a curious Georgian pilot who was declined a visual approach. He asked why.

Pilot: " (reviews contact approach procedures) Why can you not approve a visual?"

Controller: " We went this question up to Ottawa several years ago and asked, if a pilot can see the field, why can't we clear him for a visual approach? They came back to us and said, what a visual approach is supposed to do, is allow (ATC) to monitor your approach on radar, and point out any VFR's that we can see, and have multiple visual approaches where you can follow the person ahead. But we're supposed to be able monitor it on radar. It's just one of those things, where it's one of those rules and that's the interpretation.

Pilot: "I thought that part of the visual was supposed to relieve you of that stress factor."

Conversation continues and ends with....

controller: I often say that, when I explaining things, where I can't approve a visual but a contact is approved. And slowly one by one everybody in the north sort of catches up on it. And sometimes you can hear other people on frequency, you know where weather is wide open VFR and hear them asking for a contact approach, because they know the routine."

In our area there is no radar coverage below 10 000 feet as a rule. So, a pilot can request a visual prior to dropping off radar coverage. Other times, if an aircraft drops off radar way before his final approach clearance and he's descended to 5000 feet ( MSA), he is cleared for AN approach (of his choice, ATC does not require an approach type, unless the pilot requests a contact.
---------- ADS -----------
 
FSS wannabe, just curious about stuff, that's all
pokaroo
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 162
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 12:06 pm

Post by pokaroo »

I work the airspace you are talking about and you CAN give the visual even if the guy has dropped off radar. There had been some confusion in the past but things have since been sorted out.
---------- ADS -----------
 
jonathan_tcu
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 66
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2006 3:59 pm
Location: Timmins, ON
Contact:

Post by jonathan_tcu »

Thanks. I guess that's why during wide open VFR days, the controllers ask the pilot if he has the field visual. :lol:
---------- ADS -----------
 
FSS wannabe, just curious about stuff, that's all
Post Reply

Return to “ATS Question Forum”