HOW LATE can a LANDING CLEARANCE actually be received? | Real Airline Pilot
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 8 июн 2024
- Join my channel!
/ @a330driver
If you don't want to join, but still support me consider a small donation:
www.buymeacoffee.com/737NGDriver
And if you really love the videos, consider becoming a Patron:
/ 737ngdriver
Join my Discord Server!
/ discord
My system specs:
Intel i9-14900k
RTX4090
Corsair DDR5 7200 48GB RAM
Asus ProArt Z790 Board
Windows 11 Pro
My hardware:
Thrustmaster Boeing Yoke
WinWings Orion2/F16 Grip
Thrustmaster Pendular Pedals
Honeycomb Bravo Throttle 
Игры
IRL when the frequency is blocked by a light aircraft we will try to transmit anyway. Because our transmitter is much more powerful our message will probably be heard.
If I start flying again, I'll have to remember to get a more powerful radio in case some bozo want's to stomp on my comms with ATC because he fells more important. Especially when as this video state, if you *could* land if you know the situation and defend it. Either way, you should get a call from CASA, FAA, or whoever.
Hi Emanuel, I have a request if it is possible for you to realize it. Since about a week Ryanair has opened new routes for Reggio Calabria airport in🇮🇹, since always Reggio airport has hosted only a320 and 320neo. I don't know if you knew but it is the most complicated airport to land in Italy, to land on runway 33 you need a certificate and only the captain is qualified for runway 33. It would be great if you could make a video/tutorial for runway 33 at Reggio. Thank you. ❤
I always appreciate your time in making these videos for the flight sim community.
Perfect! Totally agree!
Going around on the latest case you presented would introduce now a mid-air collision threat!
👏🏻
Really like the short and informative videos. 👍🏻
I saw a video of an Air France A330 landing in BLR. ATC told pilots to expect landing clearance at 1 or 2 miles.
As always a very interesting video. Here's one topic I would love to hear more about - it's more real-world than sim flying but still - how are pilots in Europe currently dealing with the GPS jamming that is going on in some airspace? What are the implications for navigation and general operations?
There is still IRS and conventional navigation to fallback on. In my operator, we are currently not conducting any gps based approaches in countries where gps jamming might be a problem so we either fly an ILS where available or we fly a VOR (non coded approach) which means flying it with heading select and vertical speed or FPA since the guidance given by the fmc coded procedure might not be reliable as it is still dependent on gps inputs.
Should neither of these be suitable options, we can actually still perform RNP approaches as long as we have more than 5km visibility and we raise the minimums for the approach to a value equal to MSA
Super interesting. Thanks!
I think one point in virtual environment to keep in mind is that maybe the other player aircraft is not rendering (had that a couple of years back quite often in xplane with ivao).
One time I was gliding with minimal power over the rwy, when the controller woke up and gave me the clearance, even after multiple attempts from my side, this was during a solo vfr school flight. 😅
In retrospect, yes I should gone around and circle back. 😅
I handle it like this ....Something between "MINIMUM" and something lower depending on weather conditions and the overall situation.... but very very latest at around 80ft RA
I once had to hold off touching down while waiting for clearance to be given.
There was a category a aircraft departing and we were told to expect late clearance.
It was a long runway so performance was not an issue and a go atound would have been more dangerous.
It was only a couple of seconds at most and then we were cleared and touched down.
Safety of the aircraft takes precedence over atc calls.
I was flying an approach with my fenix a320 vatsim and got a really really late clearance i was almost at rubway and wanted to do a go-around and got it a second before go-around,
Well, just in time for me. I was flying a few days ago to Gatwick on Vatsim, but got my clearence at like 30 feet, I executed a go-around at 40 feet, I felt it was too late. I was flying CAT I manually. I belive, in a real scenario, this would have worked with landing immediatly, but there you have a PM doing the radios and the callouts. Alone I felt, it would have been a bit hard to manage a readback and execute a safe landing at the same time. At least, I buttered the second attempt with - 106 FPM.
Lately I've had to do A LOT of go arounds because the CTR controllers won't give me a landing clearance, especially in London Control airspace.
Even though there's no one else landing at EGLC I do a go around to avoid being yelled at by the controller, which is kinda frustrating.
I get that it's a very busy airspace and that they're understaffed, but I don't know how to handle the situation any other way.
A couple of weeks ago In did 2 go arounds, and eventually the controller (rage) quit because he was overwhelmed with all the traffic in the area.
Can you please next cover the “land after” clearances
I remember during my instrument training we were down at Orlando Samford and approach completely forgot to hand us over to tower, so let’s just say it was really close
Did they not try to call you on guard? That’s how I „got switched“ a few times when approach forgot us. Usually it works out just fine that way.
@@A330Driver no, my CFII switched to tower and asked them and got landing clearance then switched back to approach and told them, I was just trying to fly an Rnav approach. But I have heard of them using guard like you said
BTW little of topic here, there is a simbrief aircraft profiles available for the Dukes now, all of them.
Nice!
Thanks for the informative video! I wonder if we can land before we can make the readback call of the landing clerance. In my training airport, there is also a busy traffic flow and we can also sometimes get really late landing clerances. Sometimes even when we are over treshold. It seems logical to be able to land before making a readback but I wonder if it's legal.
Yes, absolutely. ATC will know how busy you are.
I'd counter that and say that text is the equivalent of guard and the controller has that option if the frequency is blocked. I know it's not RL, but I would still go around without clearance.
Writing that text might take too long in such a situation though
@@A330Driveron Ivao the Aurora ATC software has a shortcut to send standard messages such as landing clearance on the text channel.
I've had it happen multiple times before where the approach controller never handed me off to tower, and I was landing at night, so I would be going around at around 500 feet. Figured by the time I got a message across about the landing clearance, I wouldn't have enough time to switch to the tower frequency (I'm hand-flying) and get the landing clearance before I touched down, and it's also harder for me to see if there's traffic on the runway. Also had it happen once in South America where I asked center to deviate around thunderstorms. They handed me off to approach. I contacted approach, they cleared me for the ILS and had me contact the tower....when I was still going down through flight level 190. When I was established on the ILS, I contacted the tower, and no response. I called an additional three times, and still no response. I landed anyway because it was day time, so it was obvious no one else was on the runway. As I start to exit the runway, I get yelled at by the ground controller for not contacting him, but how could I when tower wasn't even talking to me.
If the approach controller doesn't hand you off just remind the controller, that always works.
You could also set the tower frequency on standby so you can switch with a single press of a button.
@@AntoniosSpiliotopoulos I would have if I was even able to get a word in, but he was issuing so many instructions to so many planes that I wasn't ever able to get a word in without stepping on somebody.
how about the land behind clearances. I've heard of them before in super busy European airports where they tell you cleared to land "behind ...."
Isnt that only in the US
Do you mean land after? “Behind”is commonly referred when you’re waiting to taxi or takeoff and they’ll say “behind landing/departing company A320 line up and wait 27R behind”. You then wait until the aircraft passes you and then you can line up without waiting but still wait for takeoff clearance. You repeat “behind” twice so ATC know you heard them correctly
It's a rare procedure on vatsim. Atc will prefer tight spacing or go arounds. Would be nice to hear that from time to time.
@@FlopsAviator1I think he means “land after”. What you’re thinking of is when they clear you to land 12th in line. Land after the way I understand it is saying to the PIC you may land but the runway is still occupied and it’s their decision whether to land or not if other aircraft is far enough down the runway they’ll vacate in time (might be slightly wrong on that)
@@FlopsAviator1 no there are offical procedures at Heathrow or Gatwick for example (its in the airport briefing charts, e.g for Gatwick in the Chart 20-1P5)...in the us there isnt something like "official airport procedure".. it just common in the us
Why is it forbidden to use the guard freq on vatsim?
What about a "land after' clearance?
So if you get a wery late landing clearance like at 50 feet, do you have to read it back before you land or can it be read back upon touchdown?
You can read it back on touchdown, the clearence is already recieved. The readback is just so atc can be sure that you heard it and doesn't need to be done while the aircraft is in the air.
You might want to take into consideration that it might be difficult to land the plane and talk to atc at the same time though.
@@AntoniosSpiliotopoulos well in a irl situation th PM should be talking to atc so that'd help with the workload
I probably wouldn’t bother, neither as single pilot in such ops, nor as PM in a multi pilot cockpit. ATC would know you’re busy at that point and when they see you landing they’ll know you understood the clearance.
Ok
As a pilot not from the US what do you think about the way we do landing clearances?
Since I’m not from the US I grew up and learned it the other way and thus probably am a bit biased towards the way everyone else does it. I mostly see the increased risk of a go around instruction not making it to the pilots (see the SFO incidents for example) with your „cleared to land at all times“ strategy. So far it’s worked out but the number of near misses on runways in the US is pretty high compared with the rest of the world.
That tells me that the other system seems to be better simply by the data we have on close calls.
@@A330DriverI read an interesting report on Eurocontrol’s website, a 2017 comparison of air traffic management related performance, U.S. vs. Europe. It’s a long read with some interesting charts but the conclusions summarize it well. The biggest takeaway for me was that the U.S. controlled 47% more IFR flights with 32% fewer full time controllers. Staffing shortages have been cited as a likely cause for safety lapses and the increase in near-collisions in the U.S over the last decade. The Senate just signed an aviation safety bill last week to fund an increase in FAA staffing with a mandate to hire to maximum capacity at its training academy and comes with a requirement that the FAA install new technology at airports to help controllers keep closer tabs on ground traffic. Hopefully this is a step in the right direction for reducing these embarrassing incidents.
I'm a real sim pilot with no time for go-around. Just log off.
Sehr hübsches Thumbnail!
Danke 😊
Interesting information for sure. Joking it’s irrelevant when people are playing controllers on vatsim in msfs as your just pass thru another plane anyway 😂
4:50 don't you mute guard during ten checks ?
We used to on the 737, yes. Not at my new airline however, in fact we monitor guard at all times for amongst others this reason.
(*received 😉)
Meow
😂😂😂