Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 31, 2014, 10:48:49 PM
Home Help Login Register      
News: NEW Follow LiveATC updates on Twitter and Facebook


+  LiveATC Discussion Forums
|-+  Air Traffic Monitoring
| |-+  Aviation Audio Clips (Moderators: dave, RonR)
| | |-+  VOR Alpha into KMBO Approach with plate overlays and ATC COMS - Video
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Go Down Print
Author Topic: VOR Alpha into KMBO Approach with plate overlays and ATC COMS - Video  (Read 6312 times)
beechsundowner
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 203


WWW
« on: November 13, 2009, 04:49:43 PM »



I post this as I hope others can learn from my mistakes.  Comments here or on the video most appreciated.

I kinda got RIGHTFULLY chewed out by ATC today while doing the VOR Alpha approach.  I mistook an instruction by the controller as a clearance.

Couple of things. 

Human error obviously, and this is the first time this has happened to me.  Other then the simple not hearing correctly, was this really preventable?  I should have known by the lack of approach intercept instructions that it wasn't a clearance but as you can see from the communications, that escaped me since I was busy flying an airplane.

One question in my mind is on the second approach vectors to final, I was never issued missed.  Should I have been issued missed instructions or does the canceled approach missed instructions still stand?
Logged

cptkirk
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 45



« Reply #1 on: November 13, 2009, 05:57:08 PM »

okay, you asked forcomments so here goes.  

Yes this was preventable.  They issued you a vector to the approach but never cleared you for the approach.  You did read back the heading and "...cleared for the approach.." when you were not, and the controllers did not pick up on it either.   just need to make sure you always listen for that key phrase "Cleared for the VOR-A approach"  especially when on vectors to the approach.  In your case here you were given a vector to the VOR-A but since you were not cleared you should have kept flying that heading.  If you were getting close to a portion of the published approach segment without a clearance, you may just want to ask if they intend for you to fly through the approach segment.  They may issue you a quick clearance, or vector you back around.  The only time you could fly that approach as it was assigned to you with a vector to the approach would be if you lost comms.

As for missed instructions, you were VFR doing practice approaches and requested multiple approaches so they issued you missed instructions the first time instead of having you fly the published missed to get you back out for the second.  On the second approach you or someone with you (voice sounded different), said that after the second approach you would just depart VFR.  so no missed instructions were needed.
Logged

Kirk
ASEL Commercial & Instrument
beechsundowner
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 203


WWW
« Reply #2 on: November 13, 2009, 06:13:24 PM »

okay, you asked forcomments so here goes.  

Yes this was preventable.  They issued you a vector to the approach but never cleared you for the approach.  You did read back the heading and "...cleared for the approach.." when you were not, and the controllers did not pick up on it either.   just need to make sure you always listen for that key phrase "Cleared for the VOR-A approach"  especially when on vectors to the approach.  In your case here you were given a vector to the VOR-A but since you were not cleared you should have kept flying that heading.

Absolutely agree with the above.  Like you said, my problem was I heard vectors for the VOR Alpha as "cleared for the VOR Alpha", read it back as such and flew it accordingly until the second controller chimed in.  Clearly my mistake and acknowledge to the controller I thought I was cleared..  I know vectors alone are not a clearance for an approach and I must be cleared.

As for missed instructions, you were VFR doing practice approaches and requested multiple approaches so they issued you missed instructions the first time instead of having you fly the published missed to get you back out for the second.  On the second approach you or someone with you (voice sounded different), said that after the second approach you would just depart VFR.  so no missed instructions were needed.

No, on the second approach the instruction was "maintain VFR"  Even though I practice under VFR conditions, my experiences have been that I get missed instructions on multiple approaches.  Usually the verbiage going on memory is "Missed approach (instructions) remains the same" (or something to that effect)  This was not issued today.   

Talking with another pilot, he felt since I didn't get missed instructions, had I needed to go missed, to fly the published missed procedures which really does make sense but we both are not really sure.
Logged

sykocus
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 349



« Reply #3 on: November 14, 2009, 08:15:00 AM »

The voice of the female controller was in training the the male's voice right after was the person training her. You missed understood the control instruction and two controllers missed your readback. So there's plenty of blame to go around. I can offer this bit if info for future reference: if you're being vectored for final you will always be given your position (usually off the FAF), a turn and an altitude to maintain until established on the approach before being cleared. It doesn't all have to be done in that order, or in one transmission, but it almost always is. If you are receiving vectors and get cleared for the approach or think you are cleared without receiving all that info it should probably raise a red flag.
Logged

Yesterday I couldn't spell air traffic controller. Today I R one.
beechsundowner
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 203


WWW
« Reply #4 on: November 14, 2009, 08:41:37 AM »

If you are receiving vectors and get cleared for the approach or think you are cleared without receiving all that info it should probably raise a red flag.

Exactly, and I **think* with my hesitation when incorrectly reading back "cleared for the VOR Alpha", I think in the back of my head, I knew something was amiss as it "just didn't feel right"  Problem is figuring out what was missing while flying the plane without making errors.  The weird part was I didn't question it, as I really thought I heard cleared for the approach.  The direction of flight made sense for me hearing this since I was being turned toward the final approach course which in my head only "confirmed" what I thought I heard..

One thing for sure, the error was on me
.  No doubt about that. The controller in my eyes is a safety net that should have caught the error but when the chips fall, they fall on my shoulder.

I feel the video shows how easily one mistake by me could have really botched things up and while it sure would be nice to say "listen better", in 7 years this has been my first badly missed call.  As indicated in this very same video, when I miss a call, I question it and request clarification rather then guess.  My motto is I'd rather sound dumb on the radio then do something dumb in the air.

I know why I missed the initial call up to me was because I was focused on flying the plane and last thing I expected was to be breaking off the approach 1.7 miles from the FAF.  That was another oddity that I have never encountered, being so close to the VOR.  I have seen many times "keep your speed up" but that didn't happen yesterday.
Logged

fholbert
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 144



WWW
« Reply #5 on: November 14, 2009, 09:10:58 AM »

The pros NEVER do that!

Air Canada E190 near Kelowna on Nov 8th 2009, descent without clearance
By Simon Hradecky, created Tuesday, Nov 10th 2009 22:37Z, last updated Tuesday, Nov 10th 2009 22:37Z

An Air Canada Embraer ERJ-190, flight AC-1188 from Vancouver,BC to Kelowna,BC (Canada), was enroute at FL250 about 80nm west of Kelowna, when air traffic control cleared the flight directly to waypoint WTMAN, the instrument approach fix for the ILS approach to runway 16, and cleared the flight to intercept the localizer. About 50nm before reaching WTMAN the airplane initiated a descent to 9000 feet reaching 9000 feet 20nm from Kelowna. The airplane continued for a safe landing.

The Canadian TSB reported, that the descent was initiated without clearance. The area minimum altitude is 12600 feet, Kelowna's 25nm quadrant altitude is 7800 feet.

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/ACA1188/history/20091108/1942Z/CYVR/CYLW
Logged

Frank Holbert
http://160knots.com
beechsundowner
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 203


WWW
« Reply #6 on: November 14, 2009, 11:16:38 AM »

A couple of pilots suggested I file a NASA report so I submitted the following text between the lines electronically at http://asrs.arc.nasa.gov/report/electronic.html

Very nicely set up, complete a .pdf file, print and submit it. (can't save pdf file)  The nice thing is I got an electronic "receipt" of my report (better then mail!)

------------------------
Practicing approaches into KMBO Madison MS under VFR handling with KJAN.  I mistook an ATC instruction as a clearance for the VOR Alpha instrument approach and was corrected by a second controller.  To my knowledge, no traffic conflict was created by my erroneous turn inbound. 

Clearly a human error / misunderstanding on my part.  Only safety net of ATC that wasn't caught was the controller didn't catch my incorrect readback.
---------------------------
Logged

sykocus
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 349



« Reply #7 on: November 14, 2009, 01:56:22 PM »

for controllers ensuring proper readbacks are nearly as important as the actual control instructions themselves. with all the litigation that surrounds every aircraft accident the FAA has been really stressing this.

i had to do some research on your question about the missed approach. the instructions "maintain vfr" and "turn left 030 climb and maintain 30" (or whatever they were for the first approach) were climb out instructions not alternate missed instructions. missed approach instructions are for when you can't complete the approach. on a practice approach you generally go past the missed approach point all the way to the threshold and do a low approach, touch and go, etc. so the instructions the controller gives you can't be alternate missed, because it's understood you will by going to the threshold. the climb out instructions are for when you are done with that. but you got me thinking what a vfr should do on a practice approach can't complete the approach and I found this in the aim.


http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/ATpubs/AIM/Chap4/aim0403.html#4-3-21
4-3-21
c. VFR aircraft practicing instrument approaches are not automatically authorized to execute the missed approach procedure. This authorization must be specifically requested by the pilot and approved by the controller. Separation will not be provided unless the missed approach has been approved by ATC.
Logged

Yesterday I couldn't spell air traffic controller. Today I R one.
beechsundowner
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 203


WWW
« Reply #8 on: November 14, 2009, 02:13:55 PM »

for controllers ensuring proper readbacks are nearly as important as the actual control instructions themselves. with all the litigation that surrounds every aircraft accident the FAA has been really stressing this.

i had to do some research on your question about the missed approach. the instructions "maintain vfr" and "turn left 030 climb and maintain 30" (or whatever they were for the first approach) were climb out instructions not alternate missed instructions. missed approach instructions are for when you can't complete the approach. on a practice approach you generally go past the missed approach point all the way to the threshold and do a low approach, touch and go, etc. so the instructions the controller gives you can't be alternate missed, because it's understood you will by going to the threshold. the climb out instructions are for when you are done with that. but you got me thinking what a vfr should do on a practice approach can't complete the approach and I found this in the aim.


http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/ATpubs/AIM/Chap4/aim0403.html#4-3-21
4-3-21
c. VFR aircraft practicing instrument approaches are not automatically authorized to execute the missed approach procedure. This authorization must be specifically requested by the pilot and approved by the controller. Separation will not be provided unless the missed approach has been approved by ATC.

Oh my, you have opened my eyes on this one sykocus

I guess I wouldn't have known the difference as MAP is MAFCA which I would never go lower without seeing the field.  All my practice approaches, I never enter the pattern, just fly the missed instructions and request full stop for my last approach.

I had figured since JAN is an initial approach fix for both KJAN and KMBO, I would never get the published missed procedures as instructions for separation purposes??  Is my thoughts plausible?
Logged

sykocus
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 349



« Reply #9 on: November 14, 2009, 04:52:53 PM »

I looked up the approach and see what you mean about the MAP. Still there can be a subtle difference in the use of missed approach instructions and climb out instructions.  

There could be multiple reasons for not letting you do the published missed. Separation would be a big one. Having an acft do a course reversal on final is rarely good when you have any kind of traffic inbound to the same airport. It looks like this would be further complicated by the proximity to the final at JAN. Another thing is it's not very efficient. The controller gave you the first climb out before finding out you wanted your own nav for the 2nd approach. So he was probably planning on giving vectors on the 2nd approach which means there would be no point it having you start a turn back to the VOR. Another factor is, that having an acft doing the full procedure with a PT makes it harder for controllers (at least me personally) to judge the sequence.  With vectors to final it's much easier, because I control how wide and long the downwind is. If plan A doesn't work out I can tighten you up or widen you out, but I don't have as much flexibility when doing at PT.

However if you specifically want to do the published missed then there's no harm in asking.
« Last Edit: November 14, 2009, 04:54:48 PM by sykocus » Logged

Yesterday I couldn't spell air traffic controller. Today I R one.
beechsundowner
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 203


WWW
« Reply #10 on: November 16, 2009, 06:15:53 PM »

VOR Alpha Approach - Video with ATC COMS

The way "it should have happened".... 



This video shows the "behind the scenes" procedures I took in my prior video posted in this thread including the ATC instructions given at the appropriate times between my first and second approach.

Video displays the approach "as published" which means the before the VOR was my first approach that was canceled and the second approach is where I pick up crossing the VOR to the MAP so I munged both approaches to make it seem seamless as one approach in this video (I.E the way it should have been).  ATC COMS are placed where they did happen in the prior video.

For those interested in the intimate details of this video, the video includes my briefing, and navigation of a procedure turn including situational awareness approach chart overlays..  Approach charts display in the video before I execute the turns.

I hope that some of the ATC folks will find this enlightening to what happens "on the other side of the mic".  grin

I will say, this pilot prefers vectors over full procedure any day!!!  Much less workload on me as you will see on this video.
Logged

sykocus
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 349



« Reply #11 on: November 17, 2009, 04:55:14 PM »

maybe i missed it, but what was the purpose of resetting your chronograph?
Logged

Yesterday I couldn't spell air traffic controller. Today I R one.
beechsundowner
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 203


WWW
« Reply #12 on: November 17, 2009, 05:57:04 PM »

maybe i missed it, but what was the purpose of resetting your chronograph?

Hey sykocus

Hopefully I understand your question  grin

If you are talking about after I start my inbound turn when I reset the clock, the reason I reset the clock was tp set up timing from crossing the VOR to the missed approach point MAFCA.  As soon as I cross the VOR, I start the timer again. (should take 3 minutes 20 seconds with no wind considerations at 90 knots) 

The reason I time my outbound leg is to give me a reference point on when to turn inbound (I fly outbound for one minute, though some pilots will fly 2 minute legs)

Hope this answers your question!!! 
Logged

Trevor
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5


« Reply #13 on: November 19, 2009, 12:06:01 AM »

As a radar controller in Canada, if I issue a clearance or instruction and your read back is not correct and I don't catch it or correct it then the blame for the error is on me. It is the controller's responsibility to catch and correct read back errors. If an incident subsequently occurs then an investigation will be carried out. If it turns out that you (the pilot) did what you read back, even if that differs from what I said to you, then you are not blamed for the incident. If you do something different from what YOU read back, then you are blamed.

That said, even though you aren't at fault it's just another "hole in the cheese" if you don't question things when they seem wrong. You've already indicated that you do this already so it's not due to laziness or nervousness on your part, you just happened to be very busy at the time and that's understandable. Legally speaking the error in this case is on the controller (more specifically, the instructor and not the trainee).

Of course, maybe the rules are different in America, I don't know for sure. Anyway, keep up the good work with your videos - even though my airspace starts in the flight levels they provide some interesting insight into the life of a pilot.
Logged
Pages: [1] Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!