I must admit to only knowing the very basics of the SRA procedure but is the sort of thing that whets my appetite for getting back into the ATC chair (been out of it for what seems ages now). I might have to give it a go sometime soon if I can get a half decent mentor (wonder who would fit the bill there then <g>)
Phil Fossil wrote:
Indeed. An SRA is a joint procedure and responsibilities are shared between the controller and pilot. With an ILS or other procedural types of approach the captain remains responsible for all navigation and is solely in command of the approach. With an SRA the controller becomes responsible for centreline guidance and passes altitude/height advisories to the pilot to enable him to calculate his rate of descent. The pilot is still responsible for working out his MDH and MAP so he still needs the plates in front of him. An SRA in FS is tame by comparison to real life. FS doesn't suffer from sudden winds shifts or eddies from nearby hills and it doesn't emulate the wind backing and decreasing as you descend. In real life you cannot give the pilot a single good heading to keep him on the centreline - it is constant heading changes during the descent. In nasty weather it is a real battle to keep the aircraft on track. I never had the chance to use a PAR which gave the controller vertical guidance as well. PAR's were withdrawn just after I started in ATC although Dublin kept their system going for a few years longer. I think the civil useof PAR's was stopped after a couple of accidents.bones bones@xxxxxxx -----Original Message----- From: jhb-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:jhb-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of F FISHER Sent: 19 October 2009 17:23 To: jhb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [jhb] Re: SRA Peter I suspect a pilot also needs to know the procedure as well, that I myself do not.Frank F
