Confusion about when it's my navigation, and when it's ATC

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


Mxsmanic wrote:
A Guy Called Tyketto writes:

Look CLOSELY at those charts, and I mean closely.

Which charts? I have VFR sectionals and TACs, plus SIDs, STARs, and
instrument approach plates, but no IFR charts.

I just told you. LOOP4, KEPEC1, ILS 25L at KLAS. Those are also
charts.

The aircraft is RNAV-capable, but I will grant that I didn't notice
that it was RNAV. I just look at the fixes and so on most of the
time, knowing that ATC will probably tell me to do something
different, anyway.

You should look at those, because if you choose the wrong
chart, and your equipment can't support the chart you're filing, you'll
be given another SID/STAR to use.

Yes, it's a BBJ2 or 737-800, and I know ATC a little in the area, as I
fly around there a lot.

You best look at the LOOP4 chart again, as you have 2 crossing
restrictions you must meet. You must cross the SMO R-160 at or
below 3000ft.

I believe the FMC knew that, although I wasn't watching to see. ATC
had already told me to climb and maintain 5000, which I assumed
overrode all other instructions.

If you lost your FMC, what would you do? You just can't let
your instruments do everything for you the moment you rotate. I'd
fathom to see what would happen if you were a /A and didn't have an
FMC.

Now, you're en route, and you're ready for the arrival. You're
still at FL290. Staying that high until your FMS starts to descend is
really going to increase your descent rate, as well as try its hardest
to maintain a slow speed for your descent. Not good.

I recall stepping through the legs looking for anything that seemed
like a steep descent and possibly tweaking some legs, although I don't
remember the details.

What I do remember is that I reached the top of my descent and the FMC
started down, then ATC called me and asked why I was low. So I reset
the MCP to FL290 and went back up. Seconds later, Center told me to
cross something at something (I don't remember what now). My guess
was that he forgot that I'd be starting my descent and remembered when
he saw me descending, so he called me on it and then cleared me down.

I doubt it. There's two places where the Center controller
could give you the crossing restriction; one at MISEN, the other at
CLARR. If he gave you the one at MISEN (which I know he did), it would
make the CLARR crossing restriction a lot easier to make.

"Cross CLARR at and maintain 13000 and 250kts. Las Vegas
altimeter xx.xx".

Yes, I recall getting that.

"Descend via the KEPEC1 arrival".

Unfortunately, they vectored me around, and then told me to follow
some traffic going the opposite way (towards the airport, whereas I
was still headed east). I messed up so much fiddling with the FMC and
autopilot that I couldn't follow the other guy in, so I had to go
around. Then it was more vectors, and following someone else in. I
gave up on the AP and flew by hand towards the other aircraft, then
intercepted the localizer and configured everything for a nice
autoland.

They had visual approaches in use. Also, it has been said
befo 99.9% of all landings are hand flown, not autolanding, unless
on a Cat III ILS approach. ILS 25L is not CATIII.


OK. I will ask next time. I have yet to do an approach (in the
presence of ATC) that followed the plates, though. Somebody always
wants me to do something different.


It could be because visual approaches may be in use over using
an instrument approach. It provides more flexibility with ATC, plus
puts separation responsibility back on the pilot. If you were following
traffic, and you were coming in too fast and had to go around, that may
not be ATC's fault. There would be some things you could have done to
slow your speed down.

BL.
- - --
Brad Littlejohn | Email:
Unix Systems Administrator, |
Web + NewsMaster, BOFH.. Smeghead! | http://www.wizard.com/~tyketto
PGP: 1024D/E319F0BF 6980 AAD6 7329 E9E6 D569 F620 C819 199A E319 F0BF

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFFnFyxyBkZmuMZ8L8RAlRPAJ46F/N4zOsSv1e6XGhgEKxPzl4IIQCfciYC
xuJph8+VuIj1wpVcmleP2to=
=LYDq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-----Original Message-----
From: Brad ] On Behalf Of A Guy
Called
Tyketto
Posted At: Wednesday, January 03, 2007 7:48 PM
Posted To: rec.aviation.ifr
Conversation: Confusion about when it's my navigation, and when it's
ATC
Subject: Confusion about when it's my navigation, and when it's
ATC

....
If you lost your FMC, what would you do?
....

He'd reboot - its Windows and Flightsim after all.

Jim Carter wrote:
He'd reboot - its Windows and Flightsim after all.

I just read about a guy who's Garmin mx20 died.

The screen went blank and then blue.

On the bottom of the screen:

"Microsoft Service Pack 2"

ak.

A Guy Called Tyketto writes:

I just told you. LOOP4, KEPEC1, ILS 25L at KLAS. Those are also
charts.

I have those.

You should look at those, because if you choose the wrong
chart, and your equipment can't support the chart you're filing, you'll
be given another SID/STAR to use.

On the 737, I have essentially everything. I usually check for
specific instructions or restrictions on the type of aircraft.

If you lost your FMC, what would you do?

I would use the MCP alone. If that fails, I fly the aircraft by hand,
which I can do, although it's rather tedious over long distances.

I do have a problem with transitions between automated systems and
flying by hand. Sometimes it's hard for me to keep track of what the
systems are doing and what I am doing. As a last recort I
occasionally disengage the automation entirely and fly by hand
(particularly for approaches and landings), but that is not the
objective, that's just to get on the ground safely.

You just can't let your instruments do everything for you
the moment you rotate.

You can if they work as designed. And real life comes very close to
that, although I understand most pilots fly the first part of the
departure by hand, and often landings as well.

I'd fathom to see what would happen if you were a /A and didn't have an
FMC.

I don't know what /A is, but if I don't have a FMC, I fly with
autopilot alone. If I don't have that, I fly by hand. However, I
would not want to fly an aircraft without at least an autopilot, if I
were planning anything other than practice in the pattern.

I doubt it. There's two places where the Center controller
could give you the crossing restriction; one at MISEN, the other at
CLARR. If he gave you the one at MISEN (which I know he did), it would
make the CLARR crossing restriction a lot easier to make.

I don't recall MISEN, but I recall the CLARR restriction. He said
cross CLARR at 12000 or whatever, and I was at FL290, and so I assumed
that my descent to CLARR was implied in this--otherwise how could I
follow the instructions. So when the FMC started down, I didn't say
anything, as I recall.

They had visual approaches in use.

Yes. Visual approaches seem to be popular when weather permits. I
still tune the ILS and follow it, if possible.

Also, it has been said befo 99.9% of all landings are hand
flown, not autolanding, unless on a Cat III ILS approach. ILS 25L
is not CATIII.

The aircraft will still autoland on it.

It could be because visual approaches may be in use over using
an instrument approach.

No doubt, although ATCs in simulation seem to enjoy making more work
for themselves, rather than less (in contrast to the real world).

It provides more flexibility with ATC, plus puts separation
responsibility back on the pilot.

That is probably the main motivation in real life. Simulation ATCs
just like to have more practice, understandably.

If you were following traffic, and you were coming in too fast
and had to go around, that may not be ATC's fault. There would
be some things you could have done to slow your speed down.

When he first called the traffic, it was at 11:00. By the time I saw
it, it was around 8:00 and moving fast opposite to my track. When I
called the traffic in sight, he told me to follow it, which required a
steep 180 to get behind him. As I was still in LNAV and was fooling
with the FMC and MCP trying to figure out why it had refused the
descent path for my approach, I got confused and had trouble turning
to follow the traffic. I was all over the place on the approach and
way too close to the other traffic (which had not yet touched down,
and I was only at 1500 feet or so and nearly abeam the threshold), and
finally I decided to go around--which was an adventure in itself since
I had not previously tried to go around with an FMC and fancy
autopilot in the mix. I disconnected everything and flew by hand to a
few thousand feet, and ATC vectored me around, which was troublesome
because the VOR he wanted was on my MFD but not tuned, so I had to try
to find it on the MFD and steer towards it. I finally stabilized and
there was another aircraft on the way in and I was told to find it and
follow it as before. This time I was much further out, however, and I
was able to line up better. Once I was nearly on the centerline I set
up the MCP for the ILS again, and then I set for autoland just to get
some rest. The landing proceeded uneventfully on 25R, I think.

I don't know if the ATC screwed up; he was a regular controller, not a
student. I certainly made a mess of it, though. It's good that I had
the seat belt sign on. I need to practice more with dealing with the
unexpected while using an FMC and/or autopilot.

This is all much easier when I fly the Baron, as the autopilot isn't
terribly fancy and there's no FMC, so I'm already on top of things
when ATC calls. But I've screwed up in that as well, in one case
trying to land on the wrong runway until I heard Approach telling
other people about a plane that didn't seem to know where it was
going, hint hint.

I haven't had any crashes, though, except in extremely strong winds
(near Denver, once at KVGT in incredibly gusty winds, etc.). I
haven't had a fatal crash in a long time. The last one was when I hit
a hill on the way out of Henderson Executive at night. I still don't
know which hill it was, as I had examined the chart carefully and was
sure that my departure was clear of terrain. But it was dark.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Mxsmanic,

Also, it has been said befo 99.9% of all landings are hand
flown, not autolanding, unless on a Cat III ILS approach. ILS 25L
is not CATIII.

The aircraft will still autoland on it.


But t odo that would be totally unrealistic. You can't have it both
ways: Either you strive for attempting maximum realism, or you fudge.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Thomas Borchert writes:

But to do that would be totally unrealistic.

Not at all. The aircraft is perfectly capable of autolanding in real
life. As far as I know, the actual ground equipment is the same for
all ILS categories. The aircraft equipment differs by category (the
higher the category, the fancier the equipment), but the 737-800 is
fully equipped for Cat IIIc autolanding.

I don't know how often autolanding is used in real life. Apparently
many pilots like to fly the landing and perhaps at least part of the
approach by hand. But they can still autoland if they want to.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

In article ,
Mxsmanic wrote:

The aircraft is perfectly capable of autolanding in real
life. As far as I know, the actual ground equipment is the same for
all ILS categories.

And you'd be *wrong*.

Buck Murdock writes:

And you'd be *wrong*.

OK. What's different about the ground equipment for the different
categories of ILS approach?

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Mxsmanic,

OK. What's different about the ground equipment for the different
categories of ILS approach?


That information is rather easy to find on the internet. Look it up.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Mxsmanic wrote:
Thomas Borchert writes:

But to do that would be totally unrealistic.

Not at all. The aircraft is perfectly capable of autolanding in real
life. As far as I know, the actual ground equipment is the same for
all ILS categories. The aircraft equipment differs by category (the
higher the category, the fancier the equipment), but the 737-800 is
fully equipped for Cat IIIc autolanding.

I don't know how often autolanding is used in real life. Apparently
many pilots like to fly the landing and perhaps at least part of the
approach by hand. But they can still autoland if they want to.


Not often. For the most, visual approaches are used over ILS
approaches. When cleared for the visual approach, you won't be using
autoland, as you won't be on an ILS approach, regardless of if you join
the localizer and track it. You're still on the visual approach.

BL.
- --
Brad Littlejohn | Email:
Unix Systems Administrator, |
Web + NewsMaster, BOFH.. Smeghead! | http://www.wizard.com/~tyketto
PGP: 1024D/E319F0BF 6980 AAD6 7329 E9E6 D569 F620 C819 199A E319 F0BF

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFFnXmXyBkZmuMZ8L8RAhhpAJ92Lh5yirlENcqWYuyvC6 pjGHKUHACgkS55
LIEW8SE3CIIXM6D0XJDlLsc=
=DrqL
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----