Anyone ever hear this from a controller

On Apr 26, 12:42 am, "Kobra" wrote:
Flyers,

I was flying IFR in VFR conditions and from NJ to Kissimmee, FL (KISM). As
I was approaching KISM the controller asked if I wanted to do a visual
approach or the ILS. Since I was in unfamiliar surroundings and wanted to
practice an ILS I said, "I'll take the ILS."

As I waited for the typical clearance of, "Cessna XXX, 5 miles from XYZ, fly
heading 180, maintain 2000 until established, cleared for the ILS XX
approach." I got, "Ok, just let me know when you want to start the
approach."

Huh!?! I didn't know what to do or say. I asked, "Do you want me to head
for the FAF?" Then another controller came on the frequency and said,
"Cessna XXX cleared for the ILS approach"

So I just headed for the FAF and began to intercept the localizer. The
controller than asked me what I was doing. I was so confused since they
were not using standard terminology. Thoughts anyone.

Kobra

When I am doing practices approaches in my local area, I sometimes get
asked where I want to begin the approach (from an official IAF or an
intermediate fix via radar vectors). I have never heard what you
describe, but when I am AT ALL confused or uncertain what the
controller expects, I always say where I'd like to begin the approach.

In your case, and to avoid ANY confusion, I probably would have
followed up with "Approach, Cessna XXXX would like to begin the KISM
ILS at XYZ. Can I get radar vectors to that point?"

--Jeff

On Apr 26, 12:42 am, "Kobra" wrote:
Flyers,

I was flying IFR in VFR conditions and from NJ to Kissimmee, FL (KISM). As
I was approaching KISM the controller asked if I wanted to do a visual
approach or the ILS. Since I was in unfamiliar surroundings and wanted to
practice an ILS I said, "I'll take the ILS."

As I waited for the typical clearance of, "Cessna XXX, 5 miles from XYZ, fly
heading 180, maintain 2000 until established, cleared for the ILS XX
approach." I got, "Ok, just let me know when you want to start the
approach."

Huh!?! I didn't know what to do or say. I asked, "Do you want me to head
for the FAF?" Then another controller came on the frequency and said,
"Cessna XXX cleared for the ILS approach"

So I just headed for the FAF and began to intercept the localizer. The
controller than asked me what I was doing. I was so confused since they
were not using standard terminology. Thoughts anyone.

Kobra

When I do practice approaches in my local area (VFR or IFR), I often
get asked by the controller where I want to begin the approach (an
official IAF or radar vector to some intermediate point). Whenever
I'm not 110% sure the controller and I have the same expectations, I
always transmit that "Piper XXXX would like to begin the approach at
XYZ."

I have never heard what you describe. But in your case, and to avoid
ANY misunderstanding of what happens next, I would have responded
"Cessna XXXX is ready to begin the KISM ILS approach and would like to
start at XYZ. Can you provide radar vectors?" I would not just "head
for" the FAF without response from the controller.

--Jeff

You should have asked for the full ILS with vectors to the IAF/FAF or
specified the IAF if not RV. Just because the controller is being informal,
doesn't mean you have to. I had a similar experience at KCLL once, it leaves
you wondering WTF you did wrong....


"Kobra" wrote in message
...
Flyers,

I was flying IFR in VFR conditions and from NJ to Kissimmee, FL (KISM).
As I was approaching KISM the controller asked if I wanted to do a visual
approach or the ILS. Since I was in unfamiliar surroundings and wanted to
practice an ILS I said, "I'll take the ILS."

As I waited for the typical clearance of, "Cessna XXX, 5 miles from XYZ,
fly heading 180, maintain 2000 until established, cleared for the ILS XX
approach." I got, "Ok, just let me know when you want to start the
approach."

Huh!?! I didn't know what to do or say. I asked, "Do you want me to head
for the FAF?" Then another controller came on the frequency and said,
"Cessna XXX cleared for the ILS approach"

So I just headed for the FAF and began to intercept the localizer. The
controller than asked me what I was doing. I was so confused since they
were not using standard terminology. Thoughts anyone.

Kobra

Did your enroute routing take you over an IAF or feeder fix? If so, you
should have just flown the previously assigned route until you were on a
published segment of the ILS approach.

Steve, I think you are correct. There was no IAF on the plate, but I did
have an assigned heading of 180 from a while back. Once the second
controller cleared me for the approach (as unorthodox as his verbology was)
I probably should have just stayed on a 180 heading until I intercepted the
approach course and then began my descent for glide slope intercept. It was
the unusual way in which I was handled that threw me off.

The only time I've ever heard someone ask for "the full approach" was if it
was NOT Radar Required and there was some sort of course reversal involved
that they wanted to practice.

I just expected to hear, "Ok, Cessna 07G continue heading 180, maintain 2000
until established, cleared for the ILS 15 approach." When I didn't receive
a heading I incorrectly assumed I could fly whatever heading I needed to
intercept the approach course at or prior to the FAF. Technically, I was
given a heading. It was 180. That was my last clearance and no one changed
it so I should have flown my last assigned heading. As others have said,
once I was confused as to the clearance I should have started asking
questions or for clarifications.

Thanks for all your help out there.

Kobra

Matt Whiting wrote:



Trainee controller. We have them a lot at ELM also.




A trainee controller has the experienced one sitting right next to him.
Some information is missing.

Kobra wrote:
There was no IAF on the plate, but I did
have an assigned heading of 180 from a while back. Once the second
controller cleared me for the approach (as unorthodox as his verbology was)



Completely illegal.





I probably should have just stayed on a 180 heading until I intercepted the
approach course and then began my descent for glide slope intercept. It was
the unusual way in which I was handled that threw me off.

The only time I've ever heard someone ask for "the full approach" was if it
was NOT Radar Required and there was some sort of course reversal involved
that they wanted to practice.

I just expected to hear, "Ok, Cessna 07G continue heading 180, maintain 2000
until established, cleared for the ILS 15 approach." When I didn't receive
a heading I incorrectly assumed I could fly whatever heading I needed to
intercept the approach course at or prior to the FAF.


No, that won't happen.

On Apr 25, 9:42 pm, "Kobra" wrote:
Flyers,

I was flying IFR in VFR conditions and from NJ to Kissimmee, FL (KISM). As
I was approaching KISM the controller asked if I wanted to do a visual
approach or the ILS. Since I was in unfamiliar surroundings and wanted to
practice an ILS I said, "I'll take the ILS."

As I waited for the typical clearance of, "Cessna XXX, 5 miles from XYZ, fly
heading 180, maintain 2000 until established, cleared for the ILS XX
approach." I got, "Ok, just let me know when you want to start the
approach."

Huh!?! I didn't know what to do or say. I asked, "Do you want me to head
for the FAF?" Then another controller came on the frequency and said,
"Cessna XXX cleared for the ILS approach"

So I just headed for the FAF and began to intercept the localizer. The
controller than asked me what I was doing. I was so confused since they
were not using standard terminology. Thoughts anyone.

Kobra

Since he didn't vector you (and I assume your route put you over an
IAF), he probably expected you to fly the PT. Maybe he thought you
were training and your CFII wanted you to fly the full approach (which
we often do).

-Robert, CFII

"Kobra" wrote in message
. ..


Steve, I think you are correct. There was no IAF on the plate, but I did
have an assigned heading of 180 from a while back. Once the second
controller cleared me for the approach (as unorthodox as his verbology
was) I probably should have just stayed on a 180 heading until I
intercepted the approach course and then began my descent for glide slope
intercept. It was the unusual way in which I was handled that threw me
off.


That would not be a proper clearance. You should have been issued an
altitude to maintain until established on the published approach as well as
a position.