By Sebastian Wheeler
Just a slight query related to the above:
I was fortunate enough to partake in a weeks worth of work experience with NATS recently, and while at whitely on the ADC sims, I heard the following phraseology being used "G-ABCD, Cleared to enter controlled airspace via Route A, at or below altitude 2000 feet, QNH 1014."
Upon asking one of the pseudo-pilots about the change, I was told it is "new phraseology" can anyone else confirm whether this is the case? Apparently, it was put in place after some confusion from pilots after receiving a "not above" clearance.
By Thomas Wowk
As above, how do you guys assess the runway surface condition on VATSIM? Do you make a visual assessment from the visual control room in correlation to the current/prevailing weather conditions or do you assess this purely off the METAR/TAF?
The only reason i ask it that the surface condition of a runway really affects our landing performance (each operators SOP's may be different for the same aircraft type) Specifically if the runway is declared as DRY full length our crosswind limitations may be increased, whereas if the runway is declared WET full length, crosswind limitations are decreased. If i also needed to return after departure due to an emergency and perform an overweight landing, a DRY/WET surface also makes quite a difference for our overall LDA requirements.
By Thomas Wowk
For the ones who enjoy carrying out IFR circuits in large aircraft, Doncaster Sheffield (EGCN) accepts visual circuits for aircraft above 5,700kg - B737/B757/B767/B747 etc.
The circuit profile & procedure can be found in the textual data in the AIP for EGCN. Primarily speaking only one aircraft can be in the circuit at a time. Be nice to get TWR on at EGCN from time to time to accept more training traffic within the network.
The circuit profile briefly summarised as below:
Visual circuits by aircraft above 5700 kg must comply with the following noise abatement procedures.
i. Runway 02 After departure turn right crosswind at no greater than 2.5 DME, fly downwind at 2000 FT QNH, report final south of Bawtry (3 DME) and not below 1500 FT QNH.
ii. Runway 20 After departure climb on track 190°, at 1.5 DME turn left crosswind, fly downwind at 2000 FT QNH and report final not below 1500 FT QNH
By Chris Pawley
The Letter of Agreement between London and Amsterdam (Dutch vACC) is revised to take into account changes in AD3 at the end of 2018. It's available here.
By Harry Sugden
I've been working to trawl through the agreements in the sector file to introduce more of the arrows to indicate that an agreement is climbing/descending (rather than level by the point shown), so you should start to see more of these with an update to 2019/05 when it's out.
If you have no idea what I'm talking about, the first few were introduced in December, and are as shown in this procedure change post. (And also here:)
[If you're not seeing them, you might need to expand the width of your Sector exit point name column to 6 rather than 5.]
As they are rolled out, I'd quite like to know whether people find the fix name useful at all. They're perhaps advantageous in that they give you a rough idea of where the transfer takes place, but I'm of the personal opinion that they might look better as simply an arrow in order to differentiate completely from those agreements that are actually level by.
What do you think?