Do Controllers Get Training on IAP Procedures ?

ARFlyer

ARFlyer

En-Route
Joined
Dec 31, 2011
Messages
3,187
Location
Central AR
Display Name
Display name:
ARFlyer
Had an interesting exchange today while with my IR student. We went down to a local airport that has the closest B/C. While asking Center for the approach, I got the choice to receive vectors or proceed direct DOGGE. I choose DOGGE for my student to practice the full procedure.

Upon reading the plate, I noticed that DOGGE was a NO PT IAF for which we were unable to accept, as we were inbound from the North. I advised Center we needed MARIE for the procedure turn. Center came back confused saying that MARIE was a hold and that DOGGE was correct. I advised that MARIE was a hold but that we can do the procedure turn as a HOLD-IN-LIEU. Center still seemed confused why MARIE was a valid IAF, but cleared us direct. Few minutes later Center asked us to confirm that DOGGE was a NO PT IAF and that that we were legal to do MARIE.

So did Center just have a brain fart, a student slip up, or are they not trained on how IAP's are flown? Not annoyed at the controller, just concerned.

http://155.178.201.160/d-tpp/1607/00420LBC4.PDF
 
Vectors to DOGGE is the likely real world solution.

I suspect its NoPT because Dogge is on V289 and they dont want you doing turns and holds on an airway.

Maybe by trying to do full procedure for the training you simply tripped up something that controller hadn't come across operationally. yet. He probably knows his airspace (dimensions, etc), but doubt he's pulled the plate out in a while.
 
They were probably confused. MARIE is the hold on the published missed for the ILS22. Since RWY04 has a RNAV IAP there probably isn't a lot of requests for the BC04.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
northtechsan said:
They were probably confused. MARIE is the hold on the published missed for the ILS22. Since RWY04 has a RNAV IAP there probably isn't a lot of requests for the BC04.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Nice avatar!
 
ARFlyer said:
Had an interesting exchange today while with my IR student. We went down to a local airport that has the closest B/C. While asking Center for the approach, I got the choice to receive vectors or proceed direct DOGGE. I choose DOGGE for my student to practice the full procedure.

Upon reading the plate, I noticed that DOGGE was a NO PT IAF for which we were unable to accept, as we were inbound from the North. I advised Center we needed MARIE for the procedure turn. Center came back confused saying that MARIE was a hold and that DOGGE was correct. I advised that MARIE was a hold but that we can do the procedure turn as a HOLD-IN-LIEU. Center still seemed confused why MARIE was a valid IAF, but cleared us direct. Few minutes later Center asked us to confirm that DOGGE was a NO PT IAF and that that we were legal to do MARIE.

So did Center just have a brain fart, a student slip up, or are they not trained on how IAP's are flown? Not annoyed at the controller, just concerned.

http://155.178.201.160/d-tpp/1607/00420LBC4.PDF
Click to expand...

Doubt if it was a brain fart. More likely not adequatley trained. My guess is that approach isn't used much and they were outside of their "rote" learning. Not supposed to happen, but it does.
 
AggieMike88 said:
Caught my eye as well. My Dad was a captain for Braniff until 1982.
Click to expand...

I'm a Braniff brat, mom was a FA from 1663-1982. She worked the last DFW-HNL flight on 5/12/82


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
DrewG said:
Your mom has some good genes to have worked 319 years! :biggrin:

Seriously, though - cool avatar!
Click to expand...

That's what I get from using my iPhone...
1963-1982


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
northtechsan said:
I'm a Braniff brat, mom was a FA from 1663-1982. She worked the last DFW-HNL flight on 5/12/82
Click to expand...
Also a braniff brat. Dad started about 1968. Ask her if she remembers Tom Farlow (my dad) and Don Faruta, one of Dad's long time friends from Braniff
 
northtechsan said:
They were probably confused. MARIE is the hold on the published missed for the ILS22. Since RWY04 has a RNAV IAP there probably isn't a lot of requests for the BC04.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I've never heard anyone using it beyond the occasional training approach. They try to land 22 as much as possible.

luvflyin said:
Doubt if it was a brain fart. More likely not adequately trained. My guess is that approach isn't used much and they were outside of their "rote" learning. Not supposed to happen, but it does.
Click to expand...

That's what I thought happened. I had a trainee controller the other day in SHV that "lost the picture". The guy was trying his hardest, but got relived after he accidentally tried to turn us into someone.
 
I never trained in or practiced an ILS back course with my -II, mostly because there weren't any around. Several months later, less than a year, we are off on a merry jaunt to see the inlaws. Being a good boy, and expecting clouds enroute, I filed. As we get closer to central NC, clouds appear and ATC descends me (miraculously) between them for several thousand feet before I get inside.

On that fun descent, watching cloud tops on both sides (maybe a 1/4 nm gap I'm flying through), the nice folks cleared me for the ILS Back Course approach. Yep, here's the plate. So I accepted and started looking at it, thinking to myself, Gee, I've never done a back course before . . . The very next page was a GPS to the same runway. So I asked if I could do the GPS instead, and they quickly changed my clearance. This was in Fall 10 or spring 11, and I still haven't flown an ILS Back Course.
 
I've never flown a BC in anger, either, though I flew the one at KPTK many times in training. The one time in hard IMC that I was offered the LOC BC, I asked for the LPV instead, and I would not have gotten in if I had accepted the BC. I suspect that's common and going to become more common in the future. Unless there are obstacles preventing LPV minimums, most runways with a LOC BC will probably have a LPV approach with lower minimums. If you need to get in and can fly the LPV, you'll choose that over the BC.
 
An HSI makes a back course approach fly just like a localizer approach.
 
You can practice on any localizer. Get up to altitude above the traffic below and practice joining the localizer outbound. Hell, maybe you do that anyway on an ILS with a procedure turn. If your taking off VFR straight out, going backwards up a localizer, is a great time to practice. An extra set of eyeballs with you is a good idea so you spend more time watching the needles. Other than "reverse sensing" a BC is just another approach
 
Brad Z said:
An HSI makes a back course approach fly just like a localizer approach.
Click to expand...
Unless it's on a G1000 PFD.

You can set the course to your intended course to get normal sensing, but it will yell at you for it. Garmin thinks your course should be the front course.
 
MAKG1 said:
Unless it's on a G1000 PFD.

You can set the course to your intended course to get normal sensing, but it will yell at you for it. Garmin thinks your course should be the front course.
Click to expand...
That's kinda stupid. Oh well, BC approaches are going away.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top