Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
July 01, 2016, 09:25:57 AM
Home Help Login Register      
News: Check out: FlightSimCon 2016 June 11-12, 2016

+  LiveATC Discussion Forums
|-+  Recent Posts
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10

 11 
 on: June 29, 2016, 07:52:35 AM 
Started by Meow7430 - Last post by Meow7430
Being a commercial airline pilot.. Flying enroute on long haul flights across europe.. Atc gives frequency changes.
What specific call should a pilot give on a new frequency?
I am sure about flight level and any direct route u r following has to be repprted to a new controller. And call sign obviously. But, should we also report position??

 12 
 on: June 29, 2016, 12:37:22 AM 
Started by 777lrf - Last post by 777lrf
I remember there was a feed that had all of Taiwan Center. Now I can't find it. Did it disappear?

 13 
 on: June 28, 2016, 05:20:02 PM 
Started by jkaleel - Last post by 777lrf
Quote
I've noticed that after a few minutes into a flight's departure, most of them are told to switch to frequency 127.27, Los Angeles Center.

The frequency is 125.27 (not 127.27), which is Los Angeles Center to the east of LAX. It's not covered by LiveATC as far as I can tell.

Of course more dedicated Los Angeles Center feeds to cover these enroute sectors would be great if anyone in the area can set them up (I'll donate $ to help).





Splitting up the ground freq and lax would be nice too as the airport is so busy. And a clearance feed would be good but I am getting greedy.

 14 
 on: June 27, 2016, 05:45:48 PM 
Started by mdk2015 - Last post by mdk2015
Thank you for your very detailed response. I greatly appreciate this and will note everything down that you have said.

Apologies my question is not clear - we are early stages and just performing DTI in a procedural environment - class G. We are yet to learn separation parameters like what you have mentioned.

So I was hoping to get more practice with this before we start actually separating aircraft.

Thanks again

 15 
 on: June 27, 2016, 02:03:11 PM 
Started by mdk2015 - Last post by tyketto
Hi I am currently in the academy for Enroute. I am just wondering if anyone knows if there is something on the web that can assist with separating aircraft. I am looking for a program that I can practice this on at home if possible to identify if aircraft will be in conflict.

If anyone could be of assistance would be greatly appreciated

Thanks


Before answering your question, think about the following questions back at you:

If the traffic you have under your control isn't separated by the time they are in your control, you already have a problem, and that problem existed prior to you (via another Enroute controller, or at the TRACON) level. The source of the separation problem would exist there, so as the enroute controller, why would you accept the handoff of an aircraft if it isn't in a situation that isn't under control?

Additionally, since part of the problem you are looking for is situation dependent (for example, the issue coming from the previous controller, versus an aircraft departing IFR off from an uncontrolled, Class G field which you are making room for them in your flow), you're talking about creating the loss of separation versus inheriting the loss of separation from another controller. For the latter, I refer back again to the above regarding why would you accept the handoff to begin with.

For the former, you have 3 options: vertical, horizontal, or speed.

  • Vertical: climb one of the aircrafts in conflict and/or descend the other until the immediate situation is resolved, then figure out how you're going to resolve it further before handing them off to another controller.
  • Horizontal: vector one off their current heading to accommodate for the other, then again, figure out how you're going to resolve the situation further down the road before handing them off.
  • Speed. Both horizontal an vertical are going to require speed to create the in-trail separation you are needing. One will need to be slowed to create the separation needed. Depending on how congested your flow is (I'm assuming they'd be on an airway or a SID that is joining an airway), you'll need to reduce the speed of the other aircrafts in your control to create the spacing needed for the separation. When that is done and you've fit them in, you're set.

But if anything, if you're getting traffic that isn't separated to begin with, you need to question the controller giving you that aircraft and refuse the handoff. you shouldn't be receiving a situation like that to begin with. Yes, it may happen from time to time, and ATC has the training to resolve it, but you shouldn't be getting set up to have an operational error (read: set up for failure) from the start.

BL.

 16 
 on: June 25, 2016, 08:55:03 AM 
Started by flyflyfly - Last post by sonnycol
FAR 91.3...

 17 
 on: June 25, 2016, 03:19:20 AM 
Started by mdk2015 - Last post by mdk2015
Hi I am currently in the academy for Enroute. I am just wondering if anyone knows if there is something on the web that can assist with separating aircraft. I am looking for a program that I can practice this on at home if possible to identify if aircraft will be in conflict.

If anyone could be of assistance would be greatly appreciated

Thanks

 18 
 on: June 24, 2016, 11:45:10 PM 
Started by Fryy - Last post by Fryy
I tried adding the frequency and kept getting an interference, almost encrypted type on it. Ill give it a shot again to see what happens.

 19 
 on: June 24, 2016, 10:23:30 PM 
Started by flyflyfly - Last post by semperflyer797
First off, I don't want this to sound like I'm saying it was all her fault or that she was a bad pilot.  I'm merely saying that she didn't appear to have been prepared for the situation she encountered and unfortunately didn't exercise enough pilot's discretion once she was in the situation she was in.  To begin with, the wind call out was 090 at 13G18 which would've meant she had a little bit of a tailwind component but not much at all as runway 35 is 356 degrees magnetic, but would've given her about a 15 knot crosswind component.  Not ideal conditions at all considering the other available runways at KHOU.  As far as picking another runway, unless runway 12L/30R was being used for something else or was closed, why didn't they hold off on a departure for a minute or two and allow her to land on it since it doesn't cross runway 4 and wouldn't have interfered as much with the landing traffic on runway 4.  Plus it would've given her the highest headwind component and least crosswind component.  Sadly I do believe she was allowing the controllers a little bit too much control of what she was doing.  A simple, "unable", most likely would not have resulted in her being asked to leave the airspace, but would've probably gotten the controllers to switch to using runways 12L and 12R since they were most aligned with the wind at that time.  So what if the airliners have a little bit longer of a taxi after landing.  Ultimately though she let the controllers have their way and failed to pilot the aircraft in a safe manner.

My grandfather told a story of when he was flying up north back in the day and had his carb start to freeze up and the carb heat was not working.  He said the closest suitable runway was at an air force base.  When he contacted the tower for clearance he was denied.  He was denied again even after informing them of the fact that he was declaring an emergency, and that he was a colonel in the air force.  His last transmission to the tower was something along the lines of, "well I'm going to be landing on runway xx and we can argue about whether or not I can land there once I'm on the ground".  He got an armed escort to the ramp and was taken to see the base C.O.  Once he explained what had happened to the C.O., the tower controller was called into the office and given an ass chewing to say the least.  I always took away from that story the fact that at the end of the day, the controller is gonna get in the elevator to get to the ground but we as pilots don't have that same luxury.  With that in mind we as pilots should always do what we believe is the safest for us to do if we encounter unusual situations.

 20 
 on: June 24, 2016, 01:52:29 PM 
Started by flyflyfly - Last post by jkh
I think this crash definitely deserves significant analysis, much more than the usual "she just shouldn't have been there!" sorts of snap-conclusions we pilots like to come up with.  It was, in fact, one of the 4 scenarios my aviation group covered in last week's ADM meeting and we made a number of observations about it:

1. She was just a little too accommodating to what was truly an unusual number of runway changes.  4!  35!  now back to 4!  How about 35 again!  It was getting a little ridiculous towards the end there, and she could absolutely have "taken charge" with the controller(s) without being pushy or rude simply by stating something like "I'd, uh, prefer to stick with 4 today - can I extend my downwind for the traffic?"  and had much more time to get herself set up in what were some windy, challenging conditions and let her elevating stress levels decrease.

2. She should never have been cleared for 35.  The wind was from 100 at 15g20 which gave her a substantial tailwind and crosswind component for that runway, increasing her groundspeed and throwing her glide slope calculations all out of whack (how often do we practice tailwind landings at controlled airports?  Maybe, like, NEVER??) which would certainly explain why she was consistently high on final.  Why wasn't she cleared to Rwy 17, where she'd have had a reasonable 5-7kt *headwind* to help things out?  Nobody else was using 17-35, she was in controlled airspace, why not simply give her a right downwind entry for 17 the first time she got "blown off track" after being told to go around for 4?  That would have *made sense* at least, which most of the rest of the instructions she got sort of didn't, and it would have reduced her workload substantially.

3. Yeah, the SR20 is a more difficult aircraft to fly than a 172 and I really wish they'd bring spin recognition and recovery back to GA overall, not because she could have possibly recovered from this situation once she entered it (flat spins in particular are hard to recover from even for aerobatic pilots) but because she'd have spent a lot more hours in incipient spin flight regimens and learning what the aircraft "felt like" as it was about to go over on its back, training her visceral response to do the right thing.

RIP to all involved.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10


Login with username, password and session length

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!