Westjet Braking Action Report

[True North]

RCR. Please provide an example, I'm curious as to the difference between and RCR and an RSC.

I googled "Runway Condition Reading" - just so that I wouldn't be spreading second hand information without references (T.O.'s are at work):

Runway Condition Reading (RCR) is a measure of tire-to-runway friction coefficient. RCR is
given as a whole number. This value is used to define the braking characteristics for various
runway surface conditions. The reported RCR is therefore a factor in determining any
performance involving braking, such as critical engine failure speed and refusal speed. Some
airfields report runway braking characteristics in accordance with International Civil Aviation
Organization (ICAO) documents, as "good", "medium", and "poor." In order to relate these
ICAO categories to an RCR or when RCR values are not available, the following relationship
will be used:

Dry Good 23
Wet Medium 12
Icy Poor 5

Runway Surface Condition (RSC) is the average depth covering the runway surface measured to
1/10 inch (1 inch is equivalent to a RSC of 10). RSC types are listed below:

WR Wet Runway, standing water
SLR Slush on Runway
LSR Loose Snow on Runway
PSR Packed Snow on Runway
IR Ice on Runway

The RSC affects both the acceleration and stopping performance of the aircraft and must be
accounted for when determining critical field length, critical engine failure speed, and refusal
speed

I will stand corrected on the apparent link between "good, medium and poor" and the RCR - however, like it was just mentioned, I really can't take into account another type of aircraft's braking action when it comes to how it will affect me.

You can, or you can choose not to. That is entirely up to you but you will be severely limited because that may be all you get.

You still haven't told us where you get JBI reports and I'd like to know where you get Mu reports aside from U.S. I'd also like to know how you apply those reports.

Any word from Boeing yet on the Normal Configuration Landing Distances charts that are missing from your QRH?

[HeadingAltitudeSpeed]

This is only even a discussion because ATC couldn't figure how to enter "fairly good" into the computer. If you passed braking action "fairly good" to the next 50 pilots on approach or until a more clear and concise answer came over the air I bet no one would question what "fairly good" from a 737 ahead of you meant.

I'm so happy that you are able to understand the requirements of the tower controller and how things work for them. It is not as simple as juts passing verbatim reports. They are required to clarify and use the terms as directed.

Imagine in the cockpit and your seat mate decides to pull out his personal checklist instead of using the company approved one. It may be better, but are you going to use it and deal with the possible ramifications at a later date?

[J31]

This is only even a discussion because ATC couldn't figure how to enter "fairly good" into the computer. If you passed braking action "fairly good" to the next 50 pilots on approach or until a more clear and concise answer came over the air I bet no one would question what "fairly good" from a 737 ahead of you meant.

WestJet uses accepted braking terms but "fairly good" is not one of them. This kind of comment is sloppy and unprofessional not very "WestJetty" at all! You know, we want ATC to help us and stupid comments like "fairly good" does not foster good will.

[Jercules]

He doesn't know where he gets JBI reports because he's just started on a new aircraft type and cannot resist the temptation of telling everyone about it despite the fact that he knows very little about it. I don't know why some people think it's so important to look cool on the internet.

[SAR_YQQ]

He doesn't know where he gets JBI reports because he's just started on a new aircraft type and cannot resist the temptation of telling everyone about it despite the fact that he knows very little about it. I don't know why some people think it's so important to look cool on the internet.

Yup - that's me, to the tee.

I love looking important on an anonymous forum. /insert rolling eyes here.

go away troll

[kevenv]

He doesn't know where he gets JBI reports

Military towers in Canada were still reporting it as a JBI to military a/c after the change to CRFI was made. Perhaps they still are.

[Jercules]

Yeah I was a bit snippy...but braking action reports are useful. It's not always feasible to run a friction report between contaminate removal and arrivals. You would look pretty stupid if you landed your heavy after a nil or poor report and ended up in the weeds because you decided to base your decision on a six hour old CFRI or RCR that was more favourable. It's far from an exact science.

[kevenv]

From TC website:

James Brake Index

An index that is used at Canadian military aerodromes to report the runway coefficient of friction. It is determined via a vehicle-mounted decelerometer with a scale that is graduated in increments from 0 to 1. Small numbers represent low braking coefficients of friction while numbers on the order of 0.8 and above indicate the braking coefficients to be expected on bare and dry runways. JBI charts may be found in the Military Flight Data and Procedures section of the Canada Flight Supplement (CFS).

abbreviation: JBI
see also: Canadian Runway Friction Index (CRFI)

[co-joe]

What if he had said "really good" or "not so good"? Would those be too ambiguous to understand? Not proper radio phraseology at all but the meaning of "fairly good" to me is "fair".

I suggest an amendment to the AIM that reads:

Really good = good
fairly good = fair
not so good = poor
not good at all = nil

[HeadingAltitudeSpeed]

What if he had said "really good" or "not so good"? Would those be too ambiguous to understand? Not proper radio phraseology at all but the meaning of "fairly good" to me is "fair".

I suggest an amendment to the AIM that reads:

Really good = good
fairly good = fair
not so good = poor
not good at all = nil

Thanks so much for your understanding and assistance in providing a safe service. I will be sure to provide you with ambiguous information when requested and hope that you can interpret it on your own.

I thought a simple request to clarify the provided information would be simple. Is that Fair or Good? Maybe that is too complex of a question to ask a professional pilot such as yourself.

[co-joe]

Are you one of those guys that says "niner"? or "Fife"?

[W5]

You should try saying ''piss poor'', and see what reaction you get.

[HeadingAltitudeSpeed]

Are you one of those guys that says "niner"? or "Fife"?

When I am required to (issuing altimeter and altitudes). Interesting how you imply that is a bad thing, but again it must stem from your ignorance of the rules and procedures under which we must operate.

Are you one of those guys that skips the checklist after the first flight because if it was good this morning it must be ok now?

[Beefitarian]

I can't think of any reason a pilot would not use "niner" on the radio. You can't know how you're being recieved by the other person. Why take a chance of setting up a bad situation due to confusion of radio calls when it's so easy to avoid?

[co-joe]

Ya if you're trying to get a hold of someone on the HF maybe. Tell me what other word in the english language can possibly be confused for "nine" with respect to an altitude, runway number, or altimeter setting?

[Jastapilot]

For the record, "Niner" and "Fife" are the two most interesting words in my vocabulary. I will continue to use them at dinner parties to impress the girls thank you very much!

[SAR_YQQ]

I try and throw in a few "Wilco's" and "Affirmatives" when I talk with the ladies - they get super excited when I do that.

In an attempt to re-rail this topic:

JBI - still used at some RCAF bases - we convert to CRFI using a chart in the CFS
CRFI - used only in CANADA
RCR - used in USA, Europe, etc
Mu - very rarely used still, but conversion charts exist - in fact CRFI is based on Mu
IRFI - International version of CRFI in development, still haven't seen it yet
RSC - tells you what the runway is contaminated with (snow, ice, sleet), no friction index

[System Message]

The controller should have asked for the runway condition report with the landing clearance.

[chaz]

FWIW

JBI is CRFI. You will not find JBI anywhere. Even RCAF. There's a difference between how the distance tables are computed but the friction index value is identical. There are no charts to convert between the two as they are the exact same thing.

BACKGROUND ON NAME CHANGE JBI TO CRFI

Over the years, various types of friction testing decelerometers have been introduced by various manufacturers. The original measuring device used in Canada was called the James Brake Decelerometer (JBD), hence, the term James Brake Index (JBI). By the mid 1970’s, they were no longer available, so other decelerometers were tested and found to be comparable to the JBD. Devices now in use in Canada include the Mechanical Tapley Meter, Mechanical Bowmonk, Electronic Recording Decelerometer (ERD), Electronic Tapley Meter and Electronic Bowmonk. The term for the friction number provided at Canadian airports has been changed from JBI to Canadian Runway Friction Index (CRFI) to reflect the diverse use of different makes of decelerometers. There has been no change in runway friction measuring devices, testing methods, procedures or calibration methods as a result of this change in terminology.

http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/s ... 4-1657.htm

RCR (as an index) is a US Air Force thing. Only a handful of countries even release index values. Most just provide a description of contamination like our RSC.
http://www.easa.eu.int/safety-and-resea ... %20RCR.pdf

[ezalpha]

Can someone identify a Canadian publication that details the proper format for a pilot making a braking action report. I (controller) was raised on Good/fair/poor/nil. The use of MEDIUM is new to me although I understand it's an ICAO term.
Dave

[Oscar]

ezalpha,

As you mentioned, I cannot find an official Canadian publication that specifies anything other than good/fair/poor/nil.

Transport Canada documents reference the following definition:

braking action report
A report of conditions on the airport movement area that provides a pilot with an idea of the degree or
quality of braking that the pilot might expect (good, fair, poor, or nil).

Now, that said, airlines flying in Canada refer to their flight ops manual, quick reference handbook, or whatever other technical document they use in the cockpit to determine contaminated performance data.

Take for instance a Boeing aircraft. Boeing uses ICAO terminology and thus any pilot referring to a Boeing publication in the cockpit, is going to see reference to GOOD/MEDIUM/POOR in their performance charts.

So if a Boeing pilot gives a braking action report over the radio, they reason they might say medium in lieu of fair, is just simply due to the document they have to work with in the cockpit. It comes from the aircraft manufacturer.

Cheers

[Rockie]

FWIW, a "good" braking action report from a previous aircraft versus a "fair" one may determine whether I use full flap or a reduced setting, and full reverse instead of idle.

Accurate reports are very useful.

[ezalpha]

Thanks Oscar and Rockie. This began with a really old post. Not even sure how I found it. We recently heard from our western counterparts that some WJA crews were using the term MEDIUM and they were wondering if that's the same as FAIR. Sounds like we're getting caught up in word semantics and we should simply move on to more important things. But there's another side to it. Some operations (LAHSO, Preferential, ie. non-into-the-wind Runways, etc) reference braking action reports, but only to the extent that they use 'our' terms of good, fair, poor or nil. The term MEDIUM does not appear in our direction. If we simply equate it to FAIR and continue (or discontinue) running operations based on our interpretation, if something goes wrong, there may be a liability issue we didn't count on. For the most part, our approved phraseology is in sync with ICAOs, and we moving more-so in that direction. But ICAO rules are not the law of the land, CARs owns that spot.
I was amazed to find that the AIM wasn't more specific on this issue. Even our own ATC Manual of Operations doesn't include a list and explanation of those terms. I think it used to, but its not there now.

[Big Pistons Forever]

Brake reports are inherently subjective. Personally I never use fair, braking is either "good" the airplane stopped as I expected it would or "poor" there were portions where I was not getting the braking performance I wanted. I have never given a "nil" report as I have never experienced a runway where there was in fact no breaking effect available.

[Gannet167]

You also have to factor in how long the "aaaahhhhhh" was before saying "fair". If it's "braking action was, ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, well, faaaiiiir" that means it's not really that good but you don't want to screw over everyone else on approach who can't hear the words "poor" and continue.