Where have you been? What have you seen?
By Lefty
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1506151
Excellent write Peter (as usual).

Two questions.
There are two RNAV 01 at Colmar, one prefixed with "FNA" and one prefixed with "INA" - what does this mean?

You appear to have flown half of each approach (INA & FNA), e.g. You flew the first 3/4 using the INA RNAV 01 approach, but then you used waypoint GA508 (FAF and top of final descent) - which only appears on the FNA RNAV 01. Why doesn't GA508 appear on the INA approach?
User avatar
By GrahamB
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1506237
It is not uncommon in France to have an instrument approach depicted across two plates - 'INA' showing the initial phases, and 'FNA' showing the final phases.

In the case of Colmar 01 they sort of overlap, with the former showing initial fixes, holds and routing to the FA track, and the latter showing FA and MA tracks which follows the later segments of the INA from the north. If conditions permit and in some places you could get vectored to a point on the FNA plate and miss out the INA completely.
User avatar
By GrahamB
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1506478
James33 wrote:Shared on my aviation English learners' page as an example of concise phraseology.

That is the nature of IFR comms. For the most part the complete dialogue from startup to shutdown will be to standard template phrases, with most of the stuff that you have to keep saying (type, departure, destination, flight rules, route, request blah blah) under VFR already known to the controllers.
#1506666
As someone who is expecting to take the IR skills test in Jan - and hoping to do this sort of IFR flying in Europe myself - I found this very helpful. More please!! One quick question: in my training, I've been taught to say call sign and flight level/altitude (or passing level) on first contact with ATC but I noticed you tended just to give the call sign. Probably sounding pedantic but is there any reason for that?

Also - especially interested to see how it works inside the London TMA (my training is all around Gloucester/Cardiff/Coventry). Since I'll be flying out of Denham it's fascinating to see just how bloody busy it gets - amazed you managed to get your call in at all!

Stodge
User avatar
By MichaelP
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1506785
I note that the pressure was reducing throughout your flight. Didn't note the QNH on departure 1019/1020?
Based than on about a 4mb drop along the route assuming 1013/29.92" was set in the CRZ.

You filed FL100 when FL090 would have been appropriate for the direction of flight. You acknowledge this at 09:49.
In many places ATC would question this, especially here (VTCC), and over in Seattle and Vancouver. I know, because I have a preference for even altitudes too, and sometimes I don't think about what I'm requesting!
I requested 4,500 feet over the water a couple of weeks ago, when 5,500 feet would be more appropriate for the VFR direction of flight... In my defence I would be crossing the final approach path for busy Suvarnabhumi and 5,500 feet would therefore take me much further south east over the oggin.

Vancouver Terminal will sometimes give me a new code. So now I call them with "... squawking 5555". Perhaps when you call the French controller for the first time you could try "Lille N***** with you squawking **** level FL 90"...

I noted Strasbourg Approach is on 120.7, from memory this was Lydd's frequency too.

You checked GPS altitude against the pressure altimeter, this means Vertical Nav is approved for this approach, or is it just a good habit?

Happy Christmas,

Michael
Image
#1508417
" One quick question: in my training, I've been taught to say call sign and flight level/altitude (or passing level) on first contact with ATC but I noticed you tended just to give the call sign. Probably sounding pedantic but is there any reason for that? "

Once you are in CAS in the European IFR system, they have you on radar and can see your altitude, or the cleared altitude if you are climbing or descending. If they want a confirmation they will ask for it. There is no harm in giving them the level also, and on an IR test you really must do what your instructor told you the examiner expects.

But there are degrees... UK ATC are top notch, but in some places they struggle, especially with really marginal ELP (english language proficiency) so one needs to use belt and braces there, and sometimes I will give them the level and even the next 1 or 2 waypoints.

"I note that the pressure was reducing throughout your flight. Didn't note the QNH on departure 1019/1020?
Based than on about a 4mb drop along the route assuming 1013/29.92" was set in the CRZ."

It is usual for the GPS altitude (which is what the subtitle shows; that is the true altitude AMSL) to vary over a flight, due to pressure and temperature variations, even if flying at the same FL. No idea what CRZ is.

"You filed FL100 when FL090 would have been appropriate for the direction of flight."

In Europe, almost nobody cares because it is a radar controlled environment. Also there is almost no traffic at the lower levels FL100-200. There is virtually no GA. A few regionals fly in the high teens. Very occassionally ATC say they want you at FL100 or FL120 but not FL110 or some such; I recall this from Belgium.

"Perhaps when you call the French controller for the first time you could try "Lille N***** with you squawking **** level FL 90"..."

Lille should have had me on the handover from London Control, so they know about me. This isn't like a handover to London Info which is basically a dump :) It is also not like UK Class G "IFR" which is VFR in all but name and you generally need to give your squawk from changing from say Farnborough to Southend etc.

"You checked GPS altitude against the pressure altimeter, this means Vertical Nav is approved for this approach, or is it just a good habit?"

I don't know what vertical nav is. I can't fly LPV with my kit. On a nonprecision approach, one manages the descent oneself, as per the approach plate. I check the altimeter against the GPS as a habit, in case the wrong QNH was set. In countries with poor ATC ELP (which sadly includes France a lot of the time) one gets all kinds of chances for misreading. Often the ATIS is illegible also, especially in France. But it is also easy to set 1005 instead of 1015 etc. If the check against a (decent aviation) GPS fails then there is something seriously wrong. Units like the G496, and all IFR panel mounts, contain the geoid correction so they are accurate on altitude within 10-20ft. Phone and other consumer GPS are usually not corrected and a 160ft error is common around here.
User avatar
By MichaelP
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1509094
Some terms I use come from the airline world.

CRZ = Cruise

CLB CRZ DES APP, SID and STAR... MCDU, lots of these :D

Vertical navigation, VNAV, is where the GPS provides glide path information without the need of an ILS glideslope receiver.
I see you mention LPV approaches in your other write up which I am reading now...

I still think that considering the EFL issues, and the number of aircraft that might be handed over to a controller, that reporting your squawk code on first contact can only aid the location of your aircraft and perhaps reduce the workload required in issuing a new code for the controller to find you on the screen.

I always report my squawk on first contact now, and it works well... "Bangkok approach Hotel Sierra Mike Alfa India with you squawking 2106" ... "Hotel Alfa India is three zero miles on the 355 degree radial at three thousand feet inbound for landing with information Bravo"

"Seattle Approach, Diamond twenty, Charlie Golf Romeo Tango Juliet with you squawking 4567"

Flight planning the correct level for the direction of flight is something that will give the controllers confidence in the fact that you know what you are doing.
I would never do anything without a justification.
"Request FL 90 due to reported icing at FL 100" might be a good call.

I like the GPS - altimeter cross check.

In writing this there is no intent on my part to criticise what you do, you do much more IFR flying than me, my IR lapsed years ago. But if I can suggest something to make your life easier, I will. Please don't take it the wrong way.
#1509301
"Vertical navigation, VNAV, is where the GPS provides glide path information without the need of an ILS glideslope receiver."

However, VNAV means many things in aviation. If it means a GPS derived glideslope, that is a highly specific meaning.

"I still think that considering the EFL issues, and the number of aircraft that might be handed over to a controller, that reporting your squawk code on first contact can only aid the location of your aircraft and perhaps reduce the workload required in issuing a new code for the controller to find you on the screen."

I don't know what EFL is.

The squawk is absolutely not passed in the European CAS (Eurocontrol) IFR system. Never.

Most ATCOs here seem to have signed the OSA (Official Secrets Act) so rarely say much, but AFAIK in the IFR system your tail number is presented next to the dot. I have some photos from ATCOs showing this which of course I can't post :)

"I always report my squawk on first contact now, and it works well... "Bangkok approach Hotel Sierra Mike Alfa India with you squawking 2106" ... "Hotel Alfa India is three zero miles on the 355 degree radial at three thousand feet inbound for landing with information Bravo"

Maybe in the 3rd World that is done, but not here.

It is done in UK Class G IFR hacking around, but then they don't have Mode S (in most cases) so can't see your tail number.

"Flight planning the correct level for the direction of flight is something that will give the controllers confidence in the fact that you know what you are doing."

Not in Europe, generally. Here, traffic management is almost all done tactically using radar. Very few places care about the semicircular levels. The time I have seen it is on handovers say UK to Brussels (IIRC) where the handovers are under agreements for specific levels.

"In writing this there is no intent on my part to criticise what you do, you do much more IFR flying than me, my IR lapsed years ago. But if I can suggest something to make your life easier, I will. Please don't take it the wrong way."

Sure; I won't :)

I write only as I find things.
User avatar
By MichaelP
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1509333
EFL = English as a Foreign Language.

You do not need Mode S to tag your registration. In North America the controller issuing the code enters this into the system with your ident, and often your type.

When I file a flight plan here in Thailand I filed RV9, this is a known type (RV9A is not!).
They are very good at hand-overs in Thailand, but sometimes going to the military controller they appreciate the code on first call.

I began this habit in Canada where sometimes on first call the controller would assume he had to give you a code when in fact you are already tagged with registration and type on the radar monitor.

If you are flying from Vancouver or Victoria you have to call Kamloops FIC on the phone (land line) to be issued a code. If you arrive in the area squawking the VFR code (1200) you must contact Flight Service or a local airport and get a code. Vancouver and Victoria Airports are unable to give squawk codes... I think this is stupid.

So I wonder where this 3rd World really is?

What happened to Euro Control?

"Very few places care about the semicircular levels".
I don't care about what anyone else doesn't care about, I always try to do the job correctly.
It's an 'all things' attitude. If everything we do we do by the book except when we have a good justification for doing otherwise, we will always have less dirt to stick to ourselves, and always maintain a better opinion.
The fact that I question the use of wrong levels is an indicator of that.
How many people have questioned this who you do not know about, and is their opinion important to you?

I tell my students that if they talk to controllers precisely and correctly they will often get what they want.
If a controller has any suspicion that a pilot is not entirely competent, then the pilot might not get the routing or level he/she wants.

I am not always correct in what I do, and there have been criticisms throughout my career. But I do try to do it right.

Last week I took a Lao Airlines ATR72 flight from Luang Prabang.
Instead of using the easy turn around, going right and following the line around to the left to line up with the full runway distance ahead, on runway 23, he moved to the left side of the runway and turned tight right leaving 300m of runway behind. I was not impressed. I sent an email to this effect. (See Google maps, it shows the generous turnaround, runway 23 Luang Prabang).
If a pilot does a stupid thing like this, what other stupid shortcuts will he take, and will he have another crash like Pakse? (Apparent going below minimums, CFIT).
So opinion of a pilot is a product of what involved people observe. All we can do is be the best - most correct we can be.
By peterh337
.
#1510089
"The fact that I question the use of wrong levels is an indicator of that.
How many people have questioned this who you do not know about, and is their opinion important to you?"

Not sure I understand, Michael.

In the Eurocontrol system you are under positive radar control nearly all the time, especially in N Europe. So an ATC cleared level is not "wrong".
#1517454
GregoryHam wrote:how hard is it to get clearance from the air traffic control? Is it just a matter of asking or do you need a special license?


On this particular flight, Peter was flying in class A airspace (at least, for some of the time). VFR flight is not permitted in class A airspace so you need a full instrument rating in order fly there. Once you've filed the flight plan, the clearance to enter controlled airspace is very simple. If you watch the video, Peter's initial call to join class A airspace starts at 2:53. The clearance is issued at 3:15.

There are several bits involved in the "clearance":
1) an instrument rating to make it legal
2) an aircraft that meets the required capabilities, also to make it legal
3) a flight plan filed and accepted
4) the clearance to enter controlled airspace passed over the radio
kingbing liked this