Deadly Vector and a Hand Off

[Captain]

Why do we have to wait for people to die before we change procedures?

KIAD. Dulles International in Washington D.C. Very often they land on 1L, 1C, and 1R and depart on runway 30. It's the departure off of runway 30 that I speak of today.

When departing off of runway 30 the procedure is to climb to 3,000' MSL on assigned heading. Tower usually assigns a heading of 270 to 300 degrees and tells you to contact approach.

The problem with this is that there are mountains to the West that are above 3,000 MSL. If a flight departs on a 280 heading level at 3,000' MSL and has a problem with the hand off then there is a situation that could be catastrophic.

I'd say that as a rule of thumb ATC should never be allowed to point an aircraft at terrain and then give them a hand off to another freq. I understand that pilots are responsible and should be able to comply with such a simple instruction. But I can see a crew new to the area making an innocent mistake with the frequency and it getting really ugly real quick...especially if the plane they're flying doesn't have GPWS.

It's such and easy fix. Simply climb the planes to 5,000' before the handoff or turn them away from the mountains. Easy peezy. Nobody has slammed into those mountains as of today...but I'd say eventually someone will if the procedure isn't changes. Hopefully it isn't an A380 with over 600 people onboard.

My point is this...ATC should never point a plane at dirt and then give a hand off. Given enough flights eventually that's going to end in a smoking crater.

What do ya'll think? I've had this feeling since 2000 or so and so far there have been no crashes. That could change today...or tomorrow...or next year or decade. It just seems like such an easy thing to prevent now before anyone dies.

 

[Geico266]

Makes sense to me.

 

[Henning]

Yep, I'm with you, but is there nothing in the clearance that gives you a climb like an MEA?

 

[l8evator]

Isn't this a good use of NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System? And worth a call to the facility?
It sounds to me that you have identified a useful improvement.

Scott

 

[Ted]

My point is this...ATC should never point a plane at dirt and then give a hand off. Given enough flights eventually that's going to end in a smoking crater.

I'm thinking about this and if there are other airports where I've seen similar. I think KMHT does that on the MHT5.MHT departure, which, IIRC, involves climbing to 3000 MSL, and I also recall that there are some hills that exist in the direction they typically vector you that are above 3000. Then they hand you off. I could be remembering incorrectly, it's been about a year and a half since my last flight out of there.

What do ya'll think? I've had this feeling since 2000 or so and so far there have been no crashes. That could change today...or tomorrow...or next year or decade. It just seems like such an easy thing to prevent now before anyone dies.

I agree that this is a problem (or rather could be), and I've always thought this is a problem with radar vectors in general. They make things easy but they do make the potential for flying into terrain in a lost comms situation. My feeling is if I had a lost comms in an area with terrain would be to climb like a homesick angel. I am also happy having the 530W with terrain for this reason. Situational awareness is key.

 

[Henning]

Isn't this a good use of NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System? And worth a call to the facility?
It sounds to me that you have identified a useful improvement.

Scott

Sounds like a great use for SVT.

 

[Palmpilot]

The clearances I get on the ground at PAO have me pointed at terrain at the time of the handoff, but at least there, they say "expect 5000 five minutes after departure," so if I didn't know the terrain or have a terrain database, at least I would know there was a problem after five minutes had gone by.

 

[gismo]

Don't those takeoff clearances come with a "Expect (insert filed altitude) in nn minutes"? It sure doesn't make sense to point an aircraft a mountain without something to deal with lost comm.

 

[Henning]

Don't those takeoff clearances come with a "Expect (insert filed altitude) in nn minutes"? It sure doesn't make sense to point an aircraft a mountain without something to deal with lost comm.

That's what I'm used to, actually I think you have to have an EFC or a full clearance in order to accept it don't you?

 

[Captain]

Every clearance has that 'expect FL330 in 10 minutes' thing...or five minutes.

But how often do you think about that? Is it 5 minutes from take off? 5 minutes from when you were handed off? 5 minutes from when you tried to check on? You don't even know there's a problem until you call and get no response. You wait and try again...no answer. Maybe you go back to tower and confirm the freq. Tower is busy. You wait. Finally you get in and ask, "say, tower...this is Cirrus 123...what was that departure freq?". Oh snap, you just off. It's 133.75, not 133.50! Okay, dial that in.

How long has it been now? We've been level at 3,000' MSL heading West towards terrain. Those hills are only 15 miles away. Ummm. Hope you're aware of them or at least have GPWS.

New Freq. "Um. Potomac, this is Cirrus 123 at 3,000, 280 assigned."

"Cirrus 123, Imeadiate climb 5,000."

"Cirrus 123, Altitude Alert. Climb Imeadiatly to 5,000."

"Cirrus 123, How copy? over..."

"Cirrus 123, Squak ident if you copy, over"


"United 1527, can you check guard for an ELT?"

 

[Everskyward]

Heck, at Centennial the first altitude is 8,000 going northwest. Then they hand you off to another controller.

 

[Palmpilot]

Every clearance has that 'expect FL330 in 10 minutes' thing...or five minutes.

But how often do you think about that? Is it 5 minutes from take off? 5 minutes from when you were handed off? 5 minutes from when you tried to check on?

I was taught to note my takeoff time, and pay attention to whether I got the promised higher altitude within that length of time after takeoff. That's consistent with the wording of the clearance, which at PAO is always "...five minutes after departure."

Airliners, on the other hand, usually get assigned SIDs around here.

 

[gismo]

Every clearance has that 'expect FL330 in 10 minutes' thing...or five minutes.

But how often do you think about that? Is it 5 minutes from take off? 5 minutes from when you were handed off? 5 minutes from when you tried to check on? You don't even know there's a problem until you call and get no response. You wait and try again...no answer. Maybe you go back to tower and confirm the freq. Tower is busy. You wait. Finally you get in and ask, "say, tower...this is Cirrus 123...what was that departure freq?". Oh snap, you just off. It's 133.75, not 133.50! Okay, dial that in.

If I can't get ATC on the radio and my elapsed time since takeoff is at the EFC time I'm going to climb unless I'm VMC at the time with nothing ahead to run into. I'll work on regaining comm before and after that but I'm not gonna drone on at the initial altitude assignment if there be rocks in the clouds nearby.

But I would like to hear from a controller as to whether the time given in the "Expect xxxxx feet in nn minutes" is designed to insure terrain clearance when comm is lost. If it's just a "standard" 10 minutes and the ridge ahead is only 5 minutes away you'd still be hosed.

 

[kkoran]

It's such and easy fix. Simply climb the planes to 5,000' before the handoff or turn them away from the mountains. Easy peezy. Nobody has slammed into those mountains as of today...but I'd say eventually someone will if the procedure isn't changes. Hopefully it isn't an A380 with over 600 people onboard.

It's not as "easy peezy" as you think. Having the local controller keep the aircraft until they reach 5,000' or get to a point where they could be turned away from the mountains [I guess a guy from Florida would consider those bumps to be mountains ] would make it nearly impossible for him to effectively control takeoffs and landings. It would probably create a greater risk of an accident at the airport caused by the controller's attention being diverted to a plane that departed 2 minutes ago (or in the case of a typical light plane, 5 minutes ago). It could be done, but it would probably cut the airport's capacity by at least 50%.

My point is this...ATC should never point a plane at dirt and then give a hand off. Given enough flights eventually that's going to end in a smoking crater.

So, an aircraft arriving into Denver from the east (or Salt Lake City from the west, being vectored for an approach would have to be turned away from the mountains for the handoff then revectored back on course?

 

[gismo]

It's not as "easy peezy" as you think. Having the local controller keep the aircraft until they reach 5,000' or get to a point where they could be turned away from the mountains [I guess a guy from Florida would consider those bumps to be mountains ] would make it nearly impossible for him to effectively control takeoffs and landings. It would probably create a greater risk of an accident at the airport caused by the controller's attention being diverted to a plane that departed 2 minutes ago (or in the case of a typical light plane, 5 minutes ago). It could be done, but it would probably cut the airport's capacity by at least 50%.


So, an aircraft arriving into Denver from the east (or Salt Lake City from the west, being vectored for an approach would have to be turned away from the mountains for the handoff then revectored back on course?

Is there any reason (other than SOP) that tower can't clear the airplanes to an elevation and/or heading that avoids terrain for the next 10 minutes before handing the plane over to the TRACON?

 

[kkoran]

Is there any reason (other than SOP) that tower can't clear the airplanes to an elevation and/or heading that avoids terrain for the next 10 minutes before handing the plane over to the TRACON?

The headings and altitudes on departure are dictated by the approach control facility. My guess is that at KIAD, the 280 heading is to provide the required separation from aircraft departing the parallel runways. The higher a plane is cleared to climb, the more airspace that the radar facility has to "sterilize" and, therefore, can't use for arrivals, overflights, operations to/from other airports, etc.

 

[Captain]

If IAD is departing 30 then they're most likely landing on the 1's (L, C, R). I have never in my life landed on 30 and only a handfull of times landed on 12.

As for the DEN and SLC arrivals I see your point. It would be exceedingly difficult to implament a 'no pointing at dirt during a handoff' rule. I guess I'm just concerned about the departure where day in and day out every single departure gets the same 280 heading and contact departure control. I've found myself pretty busy at that point in flight and can see a crew screwing it up and it becoming an issue.

As for the Florida jab and 'them hills ain't mountains'...I agree. I grew up in Colorado and get to the Rockies very often with my present gig. If my plane slamed into a 4,000' hill I'm just as dead and I'd be upset such a lowly thing killed my kids dad.

 

[Palmpilot]

I'm having a hard time figuring out how a pilot is going to call the next sector after a handoff and not notice that he didn't get a reply.

 

[Captain]

I'm having a hard time figuring out how a pilot is going to call the next sector after a handoff and not notice that he didn't get a reply.

Post #10 has an example.

 

[Henning]

I'm having a hard time figuring out how a pilot is going to call the next sector after a handoff and not notice that he didn't get a reply.

That's not even the only risk, you can be forgotten in busy traffic as well especially if you're a 182 flying out of a push at an air carrier airport. I've checked into a busy frequency with a "2704Y standby" as he starts machine gunning clearances non stop for the next 5 minutes.

This is why I don't fly single pilot IFR a lot, way to much stuff you have to track in the clouds with too much relying on other people in normal operatations and the detail you have to keep track of for when that doesn't happen as well as maintaining the acuity to catch when what should have happened didn't. Without SVT, I'm pretty uncomfortable with the information load I have to handle to feel safe.

 

[kkoran]

I think a more practical solution departure situations like this would be to publish SIDs that mimic the vectors currently given but then turn he plane away from the offending terrain. In normal operations, you wouldn't fly the whole procedure--you'd be vectored/cleared as they do now. Traditionally, this would require navaids at right locations to provide the needed course guidance, but it would be easy with GPS.

 

[wsuffa]

Is there any reason (other than SOP) that tower can't clear the airplanes to an elevation and/or heading that avoids terrain for the next 10 minutes before handing the plane over to the TRACON?

IAD, in particular, is as complex as they come, particularly that segment on the west side. Between arrivals into IAD and DCA, the SFRA & Dulles B (which force most VFR and general aviation IFR traffic on the west side), and the terrain, it makes for a pretty complex situation.

Knowing that, I'd have a plan "b" and brief it before departure. Altitude limitation in the clearance with an "expect" altitude? Be sure you know what it is. The SFRA is a bad place to have radio failure. And you can bet that if you follow IFR rules that ATC (and others) will know you've climbed out of an altitude if you have radio failure.

There's a reason the IFR rules read as they do....

 

[Palmpilot]

Post #10 has an example.

That appears to be a case of the controller not getting a response after a handoff. I was talking about the pilot not getting a response after a handoff.

If the plane hit terrain that quickly, it could have happened without the frequency change too. I don't see how the frequency change is the central issue.

Personally, I try to avoid flying in IMC without a terrain database display in front of me. They're not that expensive these days.

 

[Palmpilot]

That's not even the only risk, you can be forgotten in busy traffic as well especially if you're a 182 flying out of a push at an air carrier airport. I've checked into a busy frequency with a "2704Y standby" as he starts machine gunning clearances non stop for the next 5 minutes.

Yes, and when that is happening, you know that it's happening. That was my only point.

This is why I don't fly single pilot IFR a lot, way to much stuff you have to track in the clouds with too much relying on other people in normal operatations and the detail you have to keep track of for when that doesn't happen as well as maintaining the acuity to catch when what should have happened didn't. Without SVT, I'm pretty uncomfortable with the information load I have to handle to feel safe.

What's "SVT"?

 

[Henning]

Yes, and when that is happening, you know that it's happening. That was my only point.



What's "SVT"?

Synthetic Vision, your panel is a 3D graphic representation of your surroundings like MSFS with your flight info overlayed like HUD. It basically turns IMC into eVMC.

 

[vintage cessna]

Back in the 1970's a TWA flight cleared for approach to IAD slammed into a ridge west of IAD (revealing the location of a secret White House lodged in the side of the ridge) killing everyone on board. After that, ATC changed procedure requiring controllers to assign pilots a safe altitude to maintain until established on the IAP.

 

[Marc CYBW]

Interesting learning here. In Canada, EFC is denoted in a specific time as in EFC by 16:30.

I'll have to watch out for the different procedure when flying in the US this summer.

Marc

 

[kkoran]

Interesting learning here. In Canada, EFC is denoted in a specific time as in EFC by 16:30.

I'll have to watch out for the different procedure when flying in the US this summer.

Marc

I'm not sure we're talking about the same type of fruit. Are you saying when they issue an IFR clearance with a lower initial altitude, they provide a specific Expect Further Clearance time for the final altitude? In the US, it would be something like: Climb and maintain 3000, expect 8000 10 minutes after departure. EFCs with specific times are issued to airborne aircraft.

 

[Henning]

Why do we have to wait for people to die before we change procedures?

it's kinda funny that you ask that question really as it's pretty much what has to happen before we decide to make a change to anything that's screwed up, it requires a catastrophe before we change anything.

 

[Everskyward]

I'm not sure we're talking about the same type of fruit. Are you saying when they issue an IFR clearance with a lower initial altitude, they provide a specific Expect Further Clearance time for the final altitude? In the US, it would be something like: Climb and maintain 3000, expect 8000 10 minutes after departure. EFCs with specific times are issued to airborne aircraft.

I've never heard an EFC for the final altitude in Canada. In fact the local controller tells you to "contact departure when airborne". They don't give you a specific handoff after takeoff like they do in the US. I think I'm going to Canada tomorrow. I'll try to make note of exactly what they say in their clearances.

 

[Captain]

I've never heard an EFC for the final altitude in Canada. In fact the local controller tells you to "contact departure when airborne". They don't give you a specific handoff after takeoff like they do in the US. I think I'm going to Canada tomorrow. I'll try to make note of exactly what they say in their clearances.

In Canada the handoff from tower to departure is expected. They, however, are used to Americans not doing it often enough so you'll often get, "Bugsmasher 123, cleared for takeoff runway 9, contact departure when airborne." Those last four words may or may not be there. Either way, once the gear is up, flaps up, and a turn to whatever heading is started give departure a call.

btw, don't forget to call CANPASS at least two hours before arrival.

 

[Everskyward]

In Canada the handoff from tower to departure is expected. They, however, are used to Americans not doing it often enough so you'll often get, "Bugsmasher 123, cleared for takeoff runway 9, contact departure when airborne." Those last four words may or may not be there. Either way, once the gear is up, flaps up, and a turn to whatever heading is started give departure a call.

btw, don't forget to call CANPASS at least two hours before arrival.

We go to Canada often. So far I have not forgotten.

 

[Captain]

Present company excluded of course!

: )