North Pole Approach Plates

After having flown over the North Pole a few times to and from JFK, I never realised that my route preparation was lacking by missing this essential bit of enroute airfield info and approach plates for the North Pole (click on the image to go to the web page and read the notes carefully).

Seasons Greetings

Seasons Greetings from Airline Command.


I hope you’re lucky enough to be spending this holiday season with your families and loved ones.

If you’re working or are spending a night away at an Outport or down route (like me), enjoy yourself.

Cheers, Jack.

Visual Approaches (Part 3)

This is Part 3 of this Visual Approach article.

In Part 1 we asked the question “Are Visual Approaches A Threat?” My own conclusion is that visual approaches as an approach type are safe and appropriate in most conditions; they are NOT a threat.

In Part 2 we looked at what the threat really is - it is us, the pilots.

Read on to find out what to do about it.

---

What To Do About It?

If your own personal opinion is that visual approaches are indeed a threat, then you just have to always refuse or decline any offer of a visual approach. Pretty easy really. (I just hope that I’m never a passenger on one of your flights – especially if you attempt a visual approach when something bad has happened, you need to get on the ground in a hurry and you cock it up when it really counts.)

But what about those pilots who would like to re-acquire, improve and refine their manual handling skills? What can they do about it?


Things To Consider BEFORE Your Visual Approach

Request A Visual Approach

Most places that international airlines operate into, the local ATC will NEVER voluntarily offer a visual approach. Sometimes they legally are not permitted to offer visual approaches.

However, you can always request a visual approach, even if ATC is not permitted to offer you one. ATC will either deny the request (nothing lost) or approve it (great, some manual handling skills practise). You might be surprised at the number of airfields that you can actually execute a visual approach.

Sometimes a visual approach does not even occur to ATC as a possible approach option. ATC sometimes falls into the same narrow mind-set (and never think outside the box) that we pilots slip into.

Generally, if you never ask for it, you will never get it.

Choose Your Battles Wisely

Just because a visual approach is available does not mean that you should always execute one.

Some visual approaches are easy, simple and have a wide margin for error. Others are hard, complex, require above average handling skills and have little margin for error. If you haven’t done a visual approach for some time or are not totally confident in your handling skills, then perhaps you should decline the hard visual approach and bide your time and wait for a better day when an easier visual approach presents itself.

If you, or your crew, are fatigued perhaps a visual approach is not a smart idea.

If you are a First Officer make sure you have a good working rapport with your Captain before you blurt out that you want to do a visual approach. Some Captains are...how do I put this diplomatically?...dinosaurs, old farts, only worried about their pension/retirement/Ferrari/fourth marriage. For this type of Captain a visual approach is too hard, too risky or just not worth the hassle. Ensure that you scope out the Captain if you’ve never flown with him before and try to work out if he is keen/motivated or bored/indifferent before bringing up the subject of a visual approach. If your Captain declines your request for a visual approach – well just get on with your job and don’t rock the boat (too much).

If the airfield has problematic ATC instructions, close parallel runways, significant terrain on the approach path or heavy traffic, then maybe you should consider a visual approach another day.

If the aircraft has significant defects, MEL items or your crew tasks and workload are excessive, then defer to another day.

If the approach is at night or the sun is in your eyes and the windscreen is covered in bugs, the visibility is marginal or you have never operated into this airfield before, then maybe a visual approach is not the best option.

This a risk versus reward decision. If the costs outweigh the benefits, if safety is adversely compromised, then swallow your pride and try again when the aviation gods are on your side.

Make sure that you choose your visual approach battles wisely and only attempt them when things are stacked in your favour; not against you.

Terrain Separation

When cleared for a visual approach you are responsible to maintain adequate terrain separation for the entire approach path from the time you are cleared for the visual approach (which may be during the descent at some distance from the airfield). If terrain is a significant factor at a particular airfield, it may require that you fly a “tight”, curved, modified flight path to avoid the significant terrain or a specific type of circuit (e.g. only right hand circuits).

Each airfield will have different requirements and local knowledge is especially invaluable in these “difficult” airfields.

Only request or accept a visual approach at night if you are 100% certain of where the terrain is located, where it is in relation to your flight path, the visibility is very good and you are very familiar with that particular airfield.

Traffic Separation

If ATC clear you for a visual approach and you accept, you are now totally responsible for your own traffic separation. If you are number two, you are responsible for positively acquiring and maintaining an adequate visual traffic separation and wake turbulence separation with the preceding aircraft.

If you are cleared for a visual approach to a parallel runway you are responsible for ensuring you aim at the correct runway (sometimes a problem at SFO) and not flying through the extended centreline from a base turn position and maintaining finals tracking of the extended centreline.

The “rules” may be slightly different depending on which country you conducting the visual approach in. For example in the USA if preceding traffic is not sighted, ATC may still clear an aircraft for a visual approach. In this case, ATC retain responsibility for traffic and wake vortex separation. If preceding traffic is sighted, and a call to ATC made to that effect, the crew are then responsible for traffic and wake vortex separation.

At some airports ATC may "expect" or desire that you execute a visual approach so that they can reduce the traffic separation and so squeeze more aircraft onto the runway in a given time. SYD does this (although you are expected to follow the ILS pretty closely) and LAX does this also (I haven't operated into LAX for a number of years, but from what I recall you'd better be looking out and actively scanning and aquiring the preceding traffic and at the same time ensuring you line up on the correct of four runways). Are you ready for this?

Missed Approach

For whatever reason if you ever have to execute a missed approach from a visual approach, how would you do it? What lateral flight path would you take? What altitude would you climb to?

This is always a perennial problem. Everybody (pilots and ATC) seem to have different, conflicting interpretations about this.

Some pilots (and possibly ATC) just assume that the published ILS or instrument approach missed approach is the correct missed approach procedure to follow for a visual approach. But you’re not flying the published approach.

What you assume and what ATC assume may be entirely different. Perhaps there is some local ATC procedure. If you’re not sure ask – before you have to do a missed approach.

If you can't think of what to do and you have to execute a missed approach, climb ahead on runway heading to 1,500 AAL and contact the Tower ASAP. Be prepared for a left visual circuit (or as dictated by the particular terrain, airspace and local procedures) or a specific track and altitude to slot you back into the approach stream. Realise that the Tower will probably working quite hard at this stage as they have to contact Approach/Departures and arrange something non standard and unexpected.

Local knowledge is important, so maybe you should contact ATC (remember that thing called a telephone?) well before the approach and find out.

Stabilised Approach Criteria

Just because you are executing a visual approach doesn’t mean that you fly the aircraft wherever or however you want to. Most airlines these days have very strict Stabilised Approach Criteria, that apply to both instrument and visual approaches.

Ensure that you are extremely aware of these Stabilised Approach Criteria and configure and fly the aircraft to comply with them.

Airspace Requirements

Some airfields have tight or oddly shaped Control Zones. Sometimes their Control Zone does not extend vertically very high. All these things limit where you can manoeuvre the aircraft while doing your visual approach (both laterally and vertically). For example Taipei has parallel runways and just to the East another military runway. Imagine the chaos you would cause if you elected to fly over this other close by airfield on a downwind or base leg!

Others will have the approach path overflying the departures path.

To find some guidance have a look on the published instrument approach charts. If there is a circling approach restriction (i.e. no circling to the East, or outside of 4 nm), then that is something to consider when planning your flight path for the visual approach. It might not apply to your visual approach, but consider why that circling restriction is in there and use some common sense and airmanship.

Again local knowledge and prior planning is required.

Plan it – Brief It

Plan how you’re going to fly this visual approach.

Will you do a straight in approach, join on a left/right base, a left/right downwind, upwind? Is there other traffic that you need to follow or be aware of? When will I start to configure, slow down, turn base? Will I initially use the autopilot and auto thrust (and if so when will I disconnect them) or will I adopt the Rambo visual approach and do everything manually (remember to choose your battles wisely)?

What actions are required by the PF and PM as laid down in your company’s SOPs, NPs, FCTM, FCOMs. When was the last time you read about the procedures required to fly a visual approach?

Spend a bit of time briefing how you will fly the visual approach (e.g. left downwind, with such and such a flap set, at XXX airspeed at 1,500 feet). You are sharing your mental model and communicating your intent with the other crew members. They are not mind readers.

The other pilot can now more effectively monitor you and the progress of the visual approach.

Even if you don’t intend to conduct a visual approach, practise thinking to yourself how you would manoeuvre the aircraft if you were cleared for a visual approach on every approach that you conduct. Start exercising your visual approach brain muscle and get it into shape for the time you actually complete a visual approach.

This is one of my pet peeves – pilots who have forgotten to think like pilots. Pilots who can’t fly aircraft. Are you one of them?

Excess Energy

Most visual approaches (in an international airline environment) are granted during the descent after you have everything set up for an instrument approach. The first thing that pops into my head when I hear “Cleared for a visual approach” or ask for a visual approach is EXCESS ENERGY.

Generally a visual approach will chop off a whole bunch of track miles (sometimes up to 15 nm which is an excess of 4,500 feet on a 3 degree profile). You will now very likely be both too high on the vertical profile and be too fast – both are an excess of energy – energy that you have to now dissipate somehow.

Speedbrake, putting flap out, extending the L/G are all methods of getting rid of this excess energy. Sometimes you may have to configure the aircraft slightly non standard (e.g. extend the L/G early or out of "normal" sequence).

You may have to build some extra track miles into your flight path by extending downwind or flying a wider than normal downwind.

Remember you are now flying a visual approach and you can manoeuvre the aircraft (within reason) anywhere you like. This excess energy also poses some problems that you will have to solve to comply with the Stabilised Approach Criteria.

This is pure piloting. This is where the art of aviation trumps the science. Looking out the window and using your skill and judgement.

I can’t tell you how to solve this problem as each visual approach has its own unique vertical, lateral and longitudinal flight path characteristics. That’s what pilots sit in front of aircraft for – you do remember how to fly an aircraft don’t you?!! You still have that skill and judgement don’t you?

---

Stay tuned for Part 4...and think about how you would respond to the question "Are visual approaches a threat?" (maybe I've got it completely wrong!)

New Stuff On Airline Command

Things have been hectic on the home front lately - hence the lack of new articles in the past few months. Kids leaving school, car prangs, planning a house move; you know how it is?!!!

Two things to keep an eye on though are the new Visual Approach articles (Are Visual Approaches A Threat?) and a continuation of the Monitoring articles.

I think monitoring is so important (it's where everything we do as pilots starts) that it's been given its own section within the index of the Airline Command articles.

Read, learn, adapt, improve and enjoy.

Visual Approaches (Part 2)

This is Part 2 of this Visual Approach article.

In Part 1 we asked the question “Are Visual Approaches A Threat?” My own conclusion is that visual approaches as an approach type are safe and appropriate in most conditions; they are NOT a threat.

Read Part 1 here. Read on to find out what the threat really is.

---

We Are The Threat

In Part 1 most pilots that I asked the question “Are visual approaches a threat?” answered with “YES! But...”

The real threat/problem is alluded to in the “YES! But...” part of the answer. The most common qualifier that follows the “But...” part of their answer is currency (or more accurately a lack of currency).

I argue that it is we, the pilots, who are the threat.

Many of us are incapable of flying a competent, safe manually flown visual approach, judging angles, glidepath, rates of closure, centreline tracking, configuration and energy management, selecting (and holding) attitudes. Either that, or they probably actually can do this but are not confident enough to try these basic skills.

Do you recall all these basic aviation skills? Are you able to apply them? When was the last time you applied them?

Visual approaches are Piloting Skills 101. It is what you learn from your very first flight. Being able to fly a visual approach is a basic, fundamental piloting skill – but I think some of us pilots have forgotten how to do it; and do it competently and safely.

We are breeding a generation of pilots who can’t manually fly aircraft. They might be really good Play Station/Nintendo gamers and be able to operate the aircraft slickly using the aircraft’s automatics, FMGS and computers, but ask them to look out of a window and manually fly the aircraft and that’s where the threat, risk and compromised safety occurs.

Sure they sit at the pointy end of the aircraft and have wings pinned to their chests, but they are just along for the ride when they are forced into some form of manual flight.

We have a generation of passengers, not pilots.

We are the threat.
Why Can’t We Fly Visual Approaches Correctly?

In an international airline operation visual approaches are often a rarity (but not as rare you think, as we will see in Part 3).

As a result we don’t get to fly too many visual approaches. With the lack of practise and currency our manual handling skills deteriorate, degenerate, atrophy and erode.

With degraded skills comes the very real increased possibly of making a mistake and by extension decreasing safety. Or you really do make a mistake during an actual visual approach.

We then become under-confident in our abilities to safely execute a visual approach.

The ultimate result is that we don’t even attempt them.


It becomes a circular self-fulfilling prophesy.

And it’s not only the more junior, less experienced pilots. First Officers will occasionally ask to do a visual approach when they are PF and the Captain declines because;

• “I don’t get paid for this”,


• “I’m too old for this”,


• “It’s not worth the risk”,


• “I don’t trust you (unlikely that they will say this one out loud)”, or


• “...Insert your own lame excuse here...”

First Officers then learn from their Captains that visual approaches really are a “threat”.

“The greater danger for most of us lies not in setting our aim too high and falling short; but in setting our aim too low, and achieving our mark.” – Michelangelo

Do you aspire to self-induced mediocrity?

As I said it becomes a perpetuating self-fulfilling prophesy.

---

Part 3 is here...and think about how you would respond to the question "Are visual approaches a threat?" (maybe I've got it completely wrong!)

Visual Approaches (Part 1)

This article is purely my own personal thoughts.

It has been fermenting quietly below the surface since Brad posted this item some time ago on the Airline Command Google Groups Discussion forum (have a read to get the gist of what all this is about).

It has been given further impetus after various “incidents” concerning visual approaches in the airline environment have occurred. It was finally brought to the boil after I discussed visual approaches with various First Officers that I have flown with lately on line flights...many completely divergent to my view of a visual approach.

This article discusses visual approaches primarily from an airline perspective, and in my own particular case, from an international airline, controlled airspace, high traffic, multi-crew, wide-body, glass cockpit aircraft perspective.

It is direct (brutally direct in some parts) and some people may not particularly like some of my opinions or conclusions – tough! It is mean to be in-your-face to knock pilots out of their comfortable complacency and to generate some thoughtful discussion.

And it's something that you as a Commander you need to have a long hard think about.

Be a pilot or a passenger – it’s your choice.

What’s This Rant All About?

The answer to the question “Are Visual Approaches A Threat?” is the main intent of this article.

However the bulk of this article discusses the justifications for my answer. Along the way we will look at other aspects of visual approaches, but the core, fundamental intent of this paper is to determine if visual approaches are indeed a threat and therefore unsafe.

If so, we should not be doing them.

Are Visual Approaches A Threat?

“Are Visual Approaches A Threat?”

I’ve asked this question to numerous F/Os that I’ve been flying with and a few Captains as well recently. Almost unequivocally the answer has been “YES!”

Well if visual approaches are such a threat (i.e. increased risk with commensurate decrease in safety), why do we continue doing them?

Why aren’t visual approaches banned and replaced with full precision or non precision approaches?

If a visual approach is so fraught with danger, why is it the very first type of approach an ab initio pilot learns (visual circuits)? If visual approaches are so dangerous why don’t new pilots start off by flying radar vectored ILS approaches?

Usually the immediate response to the question is “YES!”, followed by an imperceptible pause with a qualifying “But...” added afterwards. The responder then usually goes into a “Yes. But...” clarification and explanation of how they are uncurrent or the crews that they fly with are uncurrent, or they haven’t flown a visual approach for years, or a visual approach is not appropriate in our airline operation.

I contend that visual approaches as an approach type to get the aircraft onto the runway are safe.

“Are Visual Approaches A Threat?” I answer “NO!”

In fact, I consider a visual approach to be safer in most cases than ATC vectoring you all over the sky to intercept a localiser and glideslope.

So if visual approaches are not a threat (as I contend), what’s the problem?

---

Stay tuned for Part 2...and think about how you would respond to the question "Are visual approaches a threat?" (maybe I've got it completely wrong!)

Why Bother With Monitoring?

Why should we even bother with monitoring?

What’s the big deal?

I monitor...I monitor OK...I think(?)...I hope(?)...Jeez – I dunno!

In this article we'll examine why YOU should devote a lot of time to refine, develop and improve your monitoring skills; why monitoring is so important - both as a pilot and as a Captain.

Monitoring Is A PRIMARY TASK

There’s no getting around it – monitoring is a PRIMARY TASK for every pilot...for ALL crew.


Monitoring is “Piloting 101”.

Monitoring is a basic, essential, fundamental aviation skill.

You cannot fly without monitoring (well...you can, but only for a short time before you fall out of the sky).


Monitoring provides feedback on the flight parameters; it tells us how the trajectory, configuration and energy management of the aircraft is going (how fast, how high, what heading, what attitude, what power etc.).

Monitoring provides feedback on how your team/crew is going; whether they are functioning correctly or not.

Monitoring provides feedback on your operational situation; how much fuel do you have and is it enough, what’s the weather like, how are the aircraft systems doing, how’s the schedule going.

Let’s reiterate what monitoring provides – FEEDBACK (and through that feedback information, facts, data, numbers and parameters).

Remember Rule 1 of aviation? ALWAYS, ALWAYS fly the aircraft!! To fly the aircraft requires monitoring.


Monitoring Is Where It ALL Starts

When you monitor you gather information, data and parameters through your eyes, ears, fingers/bum, nose and tongue (your senses). You then mentally process that “raw data” so that you RECOGNISE or notice that information. You then understand what that information means and you then REACT (hopefully thinking ahead to be proactive).

Does this seem familiar? Notice, Understand, Think Ahead (NUTA). It’s the three levels of SA.

Monitoring is where your SA starts. And SA drives decision making.

Monitoring provides data for you to formulate TEM and CRM strategies, communicate with your team and crew, manage your workload, provide Leadership, utilise airmanship, drive the commercial task etc.


So you can see that if you monitor poorly, you will fly poorly and you will Command poorly.

This is NOT your goal. Your goal is to aviate and Command to high standard. Therefore you will need to practise and discipline yourself to develop highly refined and efficient monitoring.

Monitoring Is An ACTIVE SKILL

Monitoring doesn’t just happen.

Monitoring is an ACTIVE SKILL that you have to diligently and consciously apply. It’s not easy and you’ve got to be constantly working at it.


Perhaps the best analogy for the ACTIVE SKILL of monitoring is learning to instrument fly for the first time. When your instructor took away that big, real horizon by putting you “under the hood” or “under the bag” you had to essentially learn how to fly again. It didn’t come easily (if it did you’re a freak!) and you had to practise, practise, practise to develop the skill and expertise of instrument flying.

Monitoring is the same. It requires conscious, dedicated, practise to develop the skill and expertise of monitoring.

The more you practise, the better you will get. The better your monitoring the better your piloting and the better your Command.

Summary

Monitoring is a PRIMARY TASK for all crew.

Monitoring is an ACTIVE SKILL.

Monitoring is where it ALL starts.

That’s why we bother with monitoring and why monitoring is such a big deal.

---

Other Monitoring articles can be found here:

What Is Monitoring?
How To Monitor.
Monitoring – It May Save Your Life
Workload Vs Monitoring