Vectors to final
10-29-2015, 07:51 AM
#11
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: 767 Captain
Posts: 3,988
Originally Posted by Tummy
10-29-2015, 08:57 AM
#12
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jan 2014
Posts: 218
Originally Posted by Adlerdriver
One other minor technique issue: Would you consider a different vertical mode than FLCH for a low altitude descent? Don't know your exact equipment (777 uses more advanced logic) but earlier model Boeings descend in idle always when using FLCH.
I usually try to avoid an idle descent when below about 3000 AGL unless absolutely necessary. Seems like maybe a more controlled descent using v/s might have been a better technique, especially for only 700 feet to lose. Then maybe you intercept the g/s on your way down and never have to level off (assuming you get onto the LOC). Otherwise you get down almost immediately, have to level off and drive only to recapture descent and start down again. Just a thought.
I usually try to avoid an idle descent when below about 3000 AGL unless absolutely necessary. Seems like maybe a more controlled descent using v/s might have been a better technique, especially for only 700 feet to lose. Then maybe you intercept the g/s on your way down and never have to level off (assuming you get onto the LOC). Otherwise you get down almost immediately, have to level off and drive only to recapture descent and start down again. Just a thought.
10-29-2015, 11:35 AM
#13
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Position: Guppy Capt.
Posts: 1,887
At 2800' you were below MSA too...
Looking at the chart, coming from the southwest, between BUZON and TELEX, the altitude is 2100, and the highest point in that area is 1806.
I assume you were coming from the North, where the highest in that area is 1505.
My OPINION is you were good to start down....
Looking at the chart, coming from the southwest, between BUZON and TELEX, the altitude is 2100, and the highest point in that area is 1806.
I assume you were coming from the North, where the highest in that area is 1505.
My OPINION is you were good to start down....
10-29-2015, 12:34 PM
#15
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2010
Position: CRJ
Posts: 273
I have seen this quite a bit at multiple airports. While I am certainly not the authority, and I am not quoting anyone, this happens a lot.
Similar to the OP, on a vector at a much higher altitude, "heading 120, cross xxx at or above 2100, cleared for the visual". Ok so say we are at 4000. At some point we need to get down to cross xxx at or near 2100 to be stabilized. Many instances this has resulted in a dive to 2100. One time we came extremely close to a radio tower, and "obstacle" was announced by the aircraft. A slow reasonable descent should be considered in my opinion. I have suggested many times to take the sector MSA into account until capturing the LOC where we are protected from obstacles/terrain. Thoughts?
Similar to the OP, on a vector at a much higher altitude, "heading 120, cross xxx at or above 2100, cleared for the visual". Ok so say we are at 4000. At some point we need to get down to cross xxx at or near 2100 to be stabilized. Many instances this has resulted in a dive to 2100. One time we came extremely close to a radio tower, and "obstacle" was announced by the aircraft. A slow reasonable descent should be considered in my opinion. I have suggested many times to take the sector MSA into account until capturing the LOC where we are protected from obstacles/terrain. Thoughts?
10-29-2015, 12:37 PM
#16
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2005
Posts: 249
Link to FAA ATC Handbook: http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Order/ATC.pdf
Reference Para 5-9-4 c. Example 3:
[Aircraft 3 is being vectored to intercept the final approach course beyond the approach segments, 5 miles from Alpha at 5,000 feet. The MVA for this area is 4,000 feet. “Five miles from Alpha. Turn right heading three three zero. Cross Alpha at or above four thousand. Cleared I−L−S runway three six approach.” (See FIG 5−9−1.)]
This is equivalent to the clearance received for the ILS at JFK. The MVA would have to be 2100' based on the clearance received.
In 5-9-1, Vectors to Final Approach Course, it also states: [c. For a precision approach, at an altitude not above the glideslope/glidepath or below the minimum glideslope intercept altitude specified on the approach procedure chart.]
If the expectation was to remain at 2800', then this clearance would have put the aircraft above the glide path once established on final course.
Reading through the handbook, my interpretation is the clearance to maintain at or above 2100' until Telex allows the pilot to descend to 2100' prior to being established.
Reference Para 5-9-4 c. Example 3:
[Aircraft 3 is being vectored to intercept the final approach course beyond the approach segments, 5 miles from Alpha at 5,000 feet. The MVA for this area is 4,000 feet. “Five miles from Alpha. Turn right heading three three zero. Cross Alpha at or above four thousand. Cleared I−L−S runway three six approach.” (See FIG 5−9−1.)]
This is equivalent to the clearance received for the ILS at JFK. The MVA would have to be 2100' based on the clearance received.
In 5-9-1, Vectors to Final Approach Course, it also states: [c. For a precision approach, at an altitude not above the glideslope/glidepath or below the minimum glideslope intercept altitude specified on the approach procedure chart.]
If the expectation was to remain at 2800', then this clearance would have put the aircraft above the glide path once established on final course.
Reading through the handbook, my interpretation is the clearance to maintain at or above 2100' until Telex allows the pilot to descend to 2100' prior to being established.
10-29-2015, 02:10 PM
#17
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2008
Position: B757/B767
Posts: 180
Not a controller, but did visit the TRACON asking a bunch of questions:
ILS 13L very rarely used. While you're on the base (heading 030-060) you're going up the East River and they have to keep you at 2800 to assure terrain clearance with the WTC (1750 height).
Once they turn you on an intercept heading (090 and clockwise), you are heading AWAY from the obstacles and they're able to give you lower.
Traffic is NOT a factor since only JFK traffic will be in the sector. They wouldn't have IFR traffic passing underneath you -- that's for sure. The nearest IFR traffic would be LGA arrivals going up the Hudson at 4000.
If the controller says Telex at or above 2100 (it's really 1800 I believe), then s/he doesn't care what you do altitude-wise as long as you don't 1) Climb, or 2) cross Telex below the altitude specified.
My $0.02.
ILS 13L very rarely used. While you're on the base (heading 030-060) you're going up the East River and they have to keep you at 2800 to assure terrain clearance with the WTC (1750 height).
Once they turn you on an intercept heading (090 and clockwise), you are heading AWAY from the obstacles and they're able to give you lower.
Traffic is NOT a factor since only JFK traffic will be in the sector. They wouldn't have IFR traffic passing underneath you -- that's for sure. The nearest IFR traffic would be LGA arrivals going up the Hudson at 4000.
If the controller says Telex at or above 2100 (it's really 1800 I believe), then s/he doesn't care what you do altitude-wise as long as you don't 1) Climb, or 2) cross Telex below the altitude specified.
My $0.02.
10-29-2015, 03:32 PM
#18
ATC retired/121 hired
Joined APC: Dec 2012
Position: 121 FO / glider for fun
Posts: 164
Retired ATC guy and former part 121 FO. My guess is you were given the heading to intercept and not a clearance for the approach, because the controller was waiting for you to pass the obstruction that caused the higher MVA. Once past he issued the clearance allowing decent. I believe you passed through area C on the MVA chart. Also if you look on the approach chart there is a transion from BUZON to TELEX at 2100msl. From your desription that seems about where you were. Conclusion - you were good to decend, but, captain does have final authority 
10-29-2015, 10:55 PM
#20
Disinterested Third Party
Joined APC: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,026
Originally Posted by dustrpilot
It shouldn't be this hard
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The controller could not issue a lower altitude, even a crossing altitude as the new limit, while on a vector, unless that altitude was possible between the point of issuance and the crossing (TELEX), and that altitude is above MVA.
The original poster was cleared down to 2100' and could have descended to and maintained that altitude to cross TELEX. It's pilots discretion on the descent in this case; descent can be commenced at
any time to cross TELEX at or above 2100.
MSA is an emergency altitude and while on vectors for the approach, is irrelevant.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
