[Lost Comms] SLUGG7 and Landing at KDTO

AggieMike88

AggieMike88

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
Jan 13, 2010
Messages
20,804
Location
Denton, TX
Display Name
Display name:
The original "I don't know it all" of aviation.
SLUGG7 Arrival: (page 1) http://155.178.201.160/d-tpp/1704/06918SLUGG.PDF (page 2) http://155.178.201.160/d-tpp/1704/06918SLUGG_C.PDF

KDTO ILS 18: http://155.178.201.160/d-tpp/1704/05866IL18.PDF

@JCranford and I flew Sunday out to Eastland (KETN) and back. On our return, we were issued the SLUGG7 arrival. This ends at the LIKES intersection and we were vectored through the SW corner of the DFW Bravo to KDTO as expected. And then near the airport, the arrival controller vectored us to the localizer for the requested ILS 18 approach.

John brought up a good question that I wasn't certain about the answer.... Say we went [7600] before arriving at LIKES and we're fully in the goo. What is the proper procedure? I've included a screen shot of the sectional to depict where LIKES is on the southwest side in relation to Navy Fort Worth, Meacham, Alliance, and Denton Airports.

upload_2017-4-11_11-55-17.png

My thought is to remain at last assigned altitude which should be high enough to avoid all obstacles, especially any tall buildings and towers around Fort Worth. Then proceed directly to KDTO, maybe descending to 3000 MSL (the normal altitude given as we approach KDTO from the south) once north of KAFW's D-space, join the outbound localizer, execute the procedure turn, and land via the ILS18.

But I am curious as to what the folks here have to contribute.
 
I think there is some guidance on this and it isn't "continue on your merry way"

Some guy departed in Nebraska and went 7600 into Stapleton. The FAA said nu-unh. Your situation is a bit shorter but my planning so far has been to avoid the busy airspace if the voices in my head get unnaturally quiet.
 
Lets try it today Mike. We'll squawk 7600 at LIKES and blast north. See what happens...

:D
 
On my Checklist, I have the following concerning Lost Comms

VFR – In VMC & can stay VMC, continue under VFR & land as soon as practical

IFR CONDITIONS Route, Altitude, Leave Clearance Limit to Shoot Approach

ROUTE – AVE. F – Assigned, Vectored, Expected, Filed
1. Route assigned in last ATC Clearance received
2. If being radar vectored, fly directly to fix/route/airway specified in vectoring
3. In absence of assigned route, fly route ATC told you to expect (EFC)
4. In absence of expected or assigned routing, fly what you filed in flight plan​

ALTITUDE – Fly the Highest of these three for segment of flight you’re on
1. Assigned altitude – Altitude assigned in last clearance
2. Expected altitude – Altitude you expect (“55WB, expect 7000 in 10 min”)
3. MEA – MEA for the segment you are on as shown on chart​

LEAVE CLEARANCE LIMIT
Clearance Limit is a fix from which the approach begins?
YES – Start descent and approach as close to the EFC time if one received, or as close as possible to the ETA from flight plane or amended ETE
NO – Leave clearance limit at the EFC or upon arrival over the clearance limit. Proceed to a fix from which an approach begins and commence descent and approach as close to the ETA as calculated from the filed plan or amended ETE
​

So part of my question has to do with the Route portion of this. Since hypothetically we had yet to get our vector departing LIKES as expected, what should we be doing once at LIKES to get from their to KDTO?
 
Since the SLUGG7 arrival ends at LIKES and the IAF for ILS18 @ KDTO has only one IAF at the PINCK LOM, you gotta navigate there using ADF (or approved GPS). (since all full approaches must start from an IAF)
I'd assume you'd go --D-> to PINCK at 3000 and then fly the full approach including the PT etc.
 
BigBadLou said:
Since the SLUGG7 arrival ends at LIKES and the IAF for ILS18 @ KDTO has only one IAF at the PINCK LOM, you gotta navigate there using ADF (or approved GPS). (since all full approaches must start from an IAF)
I'd assume you'd go --D-> to PINCK at 3000 and then fly the full approach including the PT etc.
Click to expand...
This is what I would have been thinking to do if I was flying. And what I would have been expecting as a controller.
 
No ADF. But Fortunately we have a GNS480 in the Skylane and a GTN750 in the Bonanza. So we can get to the LOM easy enough.
 
Clark1961 said:
I think there is some guidance on this and it isn't "continue on your merry way"

Some guy departed in Nebraska and went 7600 into Stapleton. The FAA said nu-unh. Your situation is a bit shorter but my planning so far has been to avoid the busy airspace if the voices in my head get unnaturally quiet.
Click to expand...

It's hard to know how to apply that case to the present situation without knowing the details. What reason did the FAA give, and what did they think the pilot should have done instead?
 
AggieMike88 said:
No ADF. But Fortunately we have a GNS480 in the Skylane and a GTN750 in the Bonanza. So we can get to the LOM easy enough.
Click to expand...
Yeah. Ya gotta have ADF or an authorized substitute to do the Approach period. Even if you get vectors to final.
 
Prior to reaching LIKES, had you been advised to expect ILS18? If so, they'd be expecting that when/if you went dark.

So leaving LIKES D-> PINCK and then full procedure seems like what they would expect.
 
BigBadLou said:
Since the SLUGG7 arrival ends at LIKES and the IAF for ILS18 @ KDTO has only one IAF at the PINCK LOM, you gotta navigate there using ADF (or approved GPS). (since all full approaches must start from an IAF)
I'd assume you'd go --D-> to PINCK at 3000 and then fly the full approach including the PT etc.
Click to expand...
That makes sense, but I would only remain at 3000 if I was familiar enough with the obstacle environment to know for sure that this met the altitude requirement in 91.177. Otherwise, I would climb to 5000 in order to be above the grid MORA of 4200 in the DTO area.

An aircraft with neither GPS nor ADF could do it by flying direct MQP V17 UKW, followed by the published transition route to PINCK. [Oops, disregard that sentence. I overlooked the "ADF required" note.]

https://skyvector.com/?ll=33.154190355116555,-97.46517499370931&chart=464&zoom=5&fpl=LIKES MQP V17 UKW PINCK
 
Ravioli said:
Prior to reaching LIKES, had you been advised to expect ILS18? If so, they'd be expecting that when/if you went dark.

So leaving LIKES D-> PINCK and then full procedure seems like what they would expect.
Click to expand...

Yes, when we checked in with Regional Approach, John had made the request for the ILS 18 and had gotten "expect that" from the controller.

And later on during the flight, a mile or three north of NFW, we were given "Direct PINCK"
 
I'm no expert, but I'd be asking myself what the controller would be expecting . . .if not technically correct, I think ATC is expecting you on the ILS 18, from your description, and that's what they'll see you doing, if you start Direct to PINCK.

I'm thinking that if you don't go wandering about, and it's clear that you're proceeding in a logical fashion to initiate the ILS 18 appch, ATC will understands what's up, and you can get on the ground and out of everyone's way.
 
Sundancer said:
I'm no expert, but I'd be asking myself what the controller would be expecting . . .if not technically correct, I think ATC is expecting you on the ILS 18, from your description, and that's what they'll see you doing, if you start Direct to PINCK.

I'm thinking that if you don't go wandering about, and it's clear that you're proceeding in a logical fashion to initiate the ILS 18 appch, ATC will understands what's up, and you can get on the ground and out of everyone's way.
Click to expand...

This.

By your description you were expecting ILS-18. Had a briefing at a TRACON about this and supervising controller said that in a real life 7600...because they do not know what other issues you could be dealing with in the cockpit they are declaring you an emergency and clearing the airspace for you to get on the ground ASAP regardless of by the books procedures...and are expecting you to make your way to the approach as expeditiously as possible.

You need to keep yourself alive, but they want you on the ground ASAP rather then guessing your intentions and locking up airspace and will not bust you for not exactly following protocol.

Thought that was interesting insight to what the controllers expect real world vs what book teaches and all its nuance.
 
Palmpilot said:
It's hard to know how to apply that case to the present situation without knowing the details. What reason did the FAA give, and what did they think the pilot should have done instead?
Click to expand...
Land as soon as possible once com is lost.
 
Clark1961 said:
Dunno and rather irrelevant.
Click to expand...

In order to avoid the enforcement issue that the pilot in Nebraska ran into, it's necessary to understand why he was sanctioned. Right now I don't understand it, because unless VFR conditions were encountered on the way, 91.185 instructed the pilot to continue to the filed destination.
 
Cell Phone, DFW approach is 972-615-2569 and or 817-222-5006. Not sure which one would be best just numbers I have collected over the years.
 
Palmpilot said:
In order to avoid the enforcement issue that the pilot in Nebraska ran into, it's necessary to understand why he was sanctioned. Right now I don't understand it, because unless VFR conditions were encountered on the way, 91.185 instructed the pilot to continue to the filed destination.
Click to expand...
Following 91.185 to the letter may cause many problems in busy airspace. I'm thinking he was sanctioned for really bad judgement.
 
Clark1961 said:
Following 91.185 to the letter may cause many problems in busy airspace. I'm thinking he was sanctioned for really bad judgement.
Click to expand...
I vaguely remember hearing about the case before, but my recollection was that there was something more substantive involved than that. Does anybody else remember the case? If someone at least remembers the name of the pilot, that should be enough to retrieve it from the NTSB case database.
 
Clark1961 said:
Following 91.185 to the letter may cause many problems in busy airspace. I'm thinking he was sanctioned for really bad judgement.
Click to expand...

It's not our job as a pilot in IMC to worry about the problems in busy airspace. 91. 185 in IMC is exactly what controllers are expecting. They can easily re vector and clear the path. They don't want someone just shot gunning and make thier own clearance.
 
TommyG said:
It's not our job as a pilot in IMC to worry about the problems in busy airspace. 91. 185 in IMC is exactly what controllers are expecting. They can easily re vector and clear the path. They don't want someone just shot gunning and make thier own clearance.
Click to expand...
Ummm, no. I believe controllers have said to land as soon as possible.
 
AggieMike88 said:
SLUGG7 Arrival: (page 1) http://155.178.201.160/d-tpp/1704/06918SLUGG.PDF (page 2) http://155.178.201.160/d-tpp/1704/06918SLUGG_C.PDF

KDTO ILS 18: http://155.178.201.160/d-tpp/1704/05866IL18.PDF

@JCranford and I flew Sunday out to Eastland (KETN) and back. On our return, we were issued the SLUGG7 arrival. This ends at the LIKES intersection and we were vectored through the SW corner of the DFW Bravo to KDTO as expected. And then near the airport, the arrival controller vectored us to the localizer for the requested ILS 18 approach.

John brought up a good question that I wasn't certain about the answer.... Say we went [7600] before arriving at LIKES and we're fully in the goo. What is the proper procedure? I've included a screen shot of the sectional to depict where LIKES is on the southwest side in relation to Navy Fort Worth, Meacham, Alliance, and Denton Airports.

View attachment 52688

My thought is to remain at last assigned altitude which should be high enough to avoid all obstacles, especially any tall buildings and towers around Fort Worth. Then proceed directly to KDTO, maybe descending to 3000 MSL (the normal altitude given as we approach KDTO from the south) once north of KAFW's D-space, join the outbound localizer, execute the procedure turn, and land via the ILS18.

But I am curious as to what the folks here have to contribute.
Click to expand...

I sure would not descend lower than my last assigned altitude until I arrived at the IAP. I would then descend in the procedure turn.

Also has your filed ETE converted to ETA expired?
 
Last edited:
Clark1961 said:
Ummm, no. I believe controllers have said to land as soon as possible.
Click to expand...

I always hear people say this. How many controllers do you think the FAA employs? How many have said this?

If the a handful of controllers believe the training procedures, the regulation, and the AIM should be changed, they should lobby the FAA to do so instead of spreading their personal beliefs on websites.
 
I would follow the clearance instructions up to LIKES. then
1. If filed with /G then head to OTYIG intersection, intercept the LOC and complete the approach as per TPP since they ( controllers ) are expecting you to do so
2. If filed without G then intercept 110 radial BOWIE VOR with nav 2. Tune in nav 1 to LOC fly the needle and complete the approach
 
blueskyMD said:
I would follow the clearance instructions up to LIKES. then
1. If filed with /G then head to OTYIG intersection, intercept the LOC and complete the approach as per TPP since they ( controllers ) are expecting you to do so
2. If filed without G then intercept 110 radial BOWIE VOR with nav 2. Tune in nav 1 to LOC fly the needle and complete the approach
Click to expand...

Except OTYIG is probably not in your database. If you want to learn why look up NACO chart symbols.
 
Last edited:
Actually, it probably is in the database. It only exists because the databases need fix names for such things. You shouldn't get it operationally though.

But, I'm not sure why anybody would go there anyhow. That's not a legal place to start the approach. You gotta go to PINCK absent vectors.

Without /G or an ADF, you should have told ATC unable when they told you to expect that approach.
 
flyingron said:
Actually, it probably is in the database. It only exists because the databases need fix names for such things. You shouldn't get it operationally though.

But, I'm not sure why anybody would go there anyhow. That's not a legal place to start the approach. You gotta go to PINCK absent vectors.

Without /G or an ADF, you should have told ATC unable when they told you to expect that approach.
Click to expand...
Oh it may be in there, but you cannot retrieve it from the data. And the controllers do have it either . If you have an E chart subsription, search it, mine does not have it.
 
Last edited:
AggieMike88 said:
SLUGG7 Arrival: (page 1) http://155.178.201.160/d-tpp/1704/06918SLUGG.PDF (page 2) http://155.178.201.160/d-tpp/1704/06918SLUGG_C.PDF

KDTO ILS 18: http://155.178.201.160/d-tpp/1704/05866IL18.PDF


John brought up a good question that I wasn't certain about the answer.... Say we went [7600] before arriving at LIKES and we're fully in the goo. What is the proper procedure?

View attachment 52688

But I am curious as to what the folks here have to contribute.
Click to expand...
There's no 'proper' procedure for this if you had no /G capability. Since ADF is required and PINCK is a 15 NM range LOM, you'd need to improvise. Carswell Field is almost directly enroute, so I'd go there (108.7) and measure a radial outbound to PINCK with your plotter.

dtuuri
 
Direct PINCK, OTYIG, PT, OTYIG, PINCK, RWY 18.

If you go missed, go to alternate.

ATC will keep all traffic away from you until you land or reestablish communication.

Use your damn bluetooth or your handheld to do that.
 
Clip4 said:
I always hear people say this. How many controllers do you think the FAA employs? How many have said this?

If the a handful of controllers believe the training procedures, the regulation, and the AIM should be changed, they should lobby the FAA to do so instead of spreading their personal beliefs on websites.
Click to expand...
Yeah I'm sure you are right that we aren't supposed to think and take appropriate action. There is no PIC authority involved in any emergency situation. Yup, that's the ticket for sure. Just tie up busy airspace while ignoring the readily available airports.
 
Clark1961 said:
Yeah I'm sure you are right that we aren't supposed to think and take appropriate action. There is no PIC authority involved in any emergency situation. Yup, that's the ticket for sure. Just tie up busy airspace while ignoring the readily available airports.
Click to expand...

If the FAA wanted "In the event of a communication failure under IFR, the PIC shall land at the closest suitable airport", don't you think the FAA is smart enough to write a reg that says that? Sure would have saved about 6 paragraphs explaning a procedure you believe they never expected you to comply with.
 
Last edited:
Clip4 said:
I always hear people say this. How many controllers do you think the FAA employs? How many have said this?

If the a handful of controllers believe the training procedures, the regulation, and the AIM should be changed, they should lobby the FAA to do so instead of spreading their personal beliefs on websites.
Click to expand...
What I've heard controllers say is that they will clear traffic out of your way and watch to see what you will do. I don't think I've ever seen a controller say that you MUST land as soon as possible, but I've also never seen one say that must fly all the way to your filed destination. While it's true that the number of controllers I've seen weigh in on this subject over the years could be described as "a handful," I think it's significant that all of the ones I have heard from say pretty much the same thing. If you find one who says something significantly different, let us know.

Note that AIM 6-4-1a and b give the pilot wide latitude in how to handle the situation, especially this passage: "Whether two-way communications failure constitutes an emergency depends on the circumstances, and in any event, it is a determination made by the pilot."
 
Clip4 said:
If the FAA wanted "In the event of a communication failure under IFR, the PIC shall land at the closest suitable airport", don't you think the FAA is smart enough to write a reg that says that? Sure would have saved about 6 paragraphs explaning a procedure you believe they never expected you to comply with.
Click to expand...
Get real and do it real fast. DFW bravo specific situation vs a reg written to cover any situation. Whatever you do don't use good judgment and just follow a reg.
 
Carswell would be my LAST choice. I'd go next door to Meacham before landing at a Naval Air Station / Joint reserve base.

Don't get me wrong, they are very nice about shooting practice PAR, PSR, and no-gyro approaches... but don't put the rubber on that road. Low approach only.

And, yes, those approaches are N/A when comms are failed.
 
Ravioli said:
Carswell would be my LAST choice. I'd go next door to Meacham before landing at a Naval Air Station / Joint reserve base.
Click to expand...
I didn't say I'd land at Carswell, I said after flying there I'd measure a radial to PINCK, the LOM/IAF at DTO.

dtuuri
 
Clark1961 said:
Get real and do it real fast. DFW bravo specific situation vs a reg written to cover any situation. Whatever you do don't use good judgment and just follow a reg.
Click to expand...

<30 minutes. That is the time to travel the 42 miles under the OP's scenario and complete a full approach in a plane with a ground speed of 120 kts.
dtuuri said:
I didn't say I'd land at Carswell, I said after flying there I'd measure a radial to PINCK, the LOM/IAF at DTO.

dtuuri
Click to expand...

And that is when the FAA can violate you. You are only allowed to use your emergency authority to the extent required to meet the emergency. You can toss 91.185 overboard and head to an airport with an IAP under PIC emergency authority, but you can't be flying all over the place (flying past perfectly acceptable airports) under 91.3 to get to your original destination.
 
Last edited:
Clip4 said:
And that is when the FAA can violate you. You are only allowed to use your emergency authority to the extent required to meet the emergency. You can toss 91.185 overboard and head to an airport with an IAP under PIC emergency authority, but you can't be flying all over the place (flying past perfectly acceptable airports) under 91.3 to get to your original destination.
Click to expand...
:confused: Huh? I agree about only using emergency authority to the required extent to meet the emergency, but in this scenario I haven't even declared it was an emergency for me and don't think the OP specified one either. Carswell to PINCK is virtually the same route as LIKES to PINCK, so unless it's VFR that's how I'd go. I think the FAA would commend me, not violate me.

dtuuri
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top