Protecting us from ourselves...

BE19Pilot

BE19Pilot

Flying a Box
Looks like we are no longer authorized to do the ILS15R, circle-to-land 4L in BOS in the SAAB. Not sure what to think about this latest managment/FAA "knee-jerk", but I will refrain from voicing that in this public forum lest I get a nastygram from the CP office for degrading the fine reputation of our august airline.

Disgusted (again),

ex-Navy Rotorhead
 
Was there any explanation as to why the decision was made?

I don't see anything wrong with being disgusted about a change in policy / procedure, so long as it's clear there was at least some literature providing information as to how / why the change came.
 
Well, it might be like ROA and AVL for us. Guys kept getting terrain warnings on visual approaches, so they nixed the visual approaches at night.
 
I remember when we took out all of our circling approaches at CHQ.

Everyone was getting all puff chested and "We've been doing it for years".

The company made a decision not to circle to that runway, arbitrary or not. Why are you all stewed up? Your not a lesser pilot because your airline chose not to do that maneuver anymore.

In comparison to many maneuvers done every day, the circle is the least safe. Not to say it's not safe, but it's not a straight-in ILS.
 
I indeed the read the "Read & Sign" accompanying the change in policy, and the memorandum addressed issues that could be applied to more than one CVFP that comes to mind. This particular procedure isn't very far off the XWY 31 in LGA for those of you that have done them both (And I have many times in both BOS & LGA). I can tell you exactly why this change in policy was made, but it isn't for a public forum to discuss it. I will say that it was a situational awareness issue (again).
What a couple of you are failing to realize in critiquing my negative reaction to this policy change has nothing to do with "puffing out my chest". This has everything to do with the "knee-jerk", leading by memorandum policy making that is going on in this industry. I don't think anyone wants to have managment or the FAA hovering around the crewroom 24/7, but it would be helpful to see the "suits" walking in now and again. Perhaps having some "Commander's call" or "Captain's call" style of meeting to let people air their concerns and have their questions answered face-to-face in an open forum.

STILL disgusted...
 
Velocipede said:
I think the FAA is just deleting circling authorizations for airlines. We basicly lost ours a couple years ago.
Click to expand...

This wasn't a circling approach. It couldn't be authorized as a circling approach. It's usually called the ILS15R visual transition to 4L. Basically you shoot the ILS15R, then they clear you for the left downwind visual 4L. It's one of the best approaches we do (did), and on the rare instance that Boston was delayed it would get the turboprops in when everyone else was still on the ground. It's a shame to see that option go.

And Scott, as usual, I agree with you on all counts!
 
This approach can allow you to get in the airport when turbojets can not. I think he's disgusted because there is no justification in removing it. It's a proven and safe approach.
 
BE19Pilot said:
I indeed the read the "Read & Sign" accompanying the change in policy, and the memorandum addressed issues that could be applied to more than one CVFP that comes to mind. This particular procedure isn't very far off the XWY 31 in LGA for those of you that have done them both (And I have many times in both BOS & LGA). I can tell you exactly why this change in policy was made, but it isn't for a public forum to discuss it. I will say that it was a situational awareness issue (again).
What a couple of you are failing to realize in critiquing my negative reaction to this policy change has nothing to do with "puffing out my chest". This has everything to do with the "knee-jerk", leading by memorandum policy making that is going on in this industry. I don't think anyone wants to have managment or the FAA hovering around the crewroom 24/7, but it would be helpful to see the "suits" walking in now and again. Perhaps having some "Commander's call" or "Captain's call" style of meeting to let people air their concerns and have their questions answered face-to-face in an open forum.

STILL disgusted...
Click to expand...

The original post didn't say it was a charted visual. There is a difference between a charted visual and a circling approach.

I'm not sure what info they gave you, since you chose to leave that out. Maybe there were airspace problems on one too many occasions and BOS tower said no more. Maybe they just want to wait in line like the big boys. Maybe there was an audit by CAL or someone and they put the kabosh on it. Maybe it was a flippant decision.

I was involved in making policy changes. Some well-thought out changes seemed "knee-jerk" due to timing of a incident (revision/bulletin was at the Fed's house for approval when incident occurred), some were in fact knee-jerk (everytime someone took off without min fuel it got added to a checklist, to the point it was glossed over alot - bad), some were due to an ongoing problem at a specific airport and looked knee-jerk.

However, airlines have proven time after time they go from brush fire to brush fire, never fixing the big problem.

I was just giving examples I had seen over the years when a policy change made pilots feel like they were handcuffed from excercising their skills. Nothing more, nothing less.
 
SpiraMirabilis said:
This approach can allow you to get in the airport when turbojets can not. I think he's disgusted because there is no justification in removing it. It's a proven and safe approach.
Click to expand...

Yes, thats correct. And, also for the complete fraud that the FAA and industry is trying to sell with this "single-level" of safety nonsense. I don't think that industry or government would really want the flying public to know exactly what a ragged edge we operate in every single day. Have any of you considered the fact that you are being held to a high professional standard, yet many of the supporting and ancillary functions are being filled with people that have just rudimentary training and no "horse-sense" when it comes to aviation.
Finally, the procedure for those of you that aren't aware of it. Is NOT a true circling approach, nor is it a CVFP(Charted Visual Flight Procedure).

Polar,
I'm with ya' man...It's seems like being proactive, and having a bottom-up review of safety and operations is alien to this industry. After all, you are the end user and any changes should reflect your needs and inputs to operate as efficently and as safely as possible. However, the FAA charter of supporting air commerce AND safety are always in direct conflict with one another. In some cases the FAA yielded to pressure, and made some changes that have yet to really be proven effective. Specifically, the 737 rudder(US737 PIT) and fuel tank (TWA 800) are all examples of solutions that weren't supported by data. No firm conclusions were really decided in either of those accidents, but a lot of money was spent to satisfy the politicans.
We are going thru some pain at my outfit, and some of it is systemic to the industry. We will all be seeing the fallout soon, and hopefully there will be some constructive solutions to prevent another accident. I don't think that dropping the 15R/4L visual transition is anything more than the FAA "doing something". Sort of along the lines of the TSA reacting to the "shoe-bomber". Only a perception of safer skies.
 
SpiraMirabilis said:
This approach can allow you to get in the airport when turbojets can not. I think he's disgusted because there is no justification in removing it. It's a proven and safe approach.
Click to expand...

Given the way Pinnacle operates, this is only gonna be the first of many. Certain airports, like the two already mentioned, we can't do visual approaches when it's clear and a million at night when the tower is closed. In order to stay legal, I had to shoot a FULL GPS approach into IDA one night. I watch Skywest call the field and get in about 10 minutes ahead of us. To rub salt in the wound, it was a high speed, they stay at the same hotel, so this little gimmick resulted in us waiting longer on the hotel van. That's neither here nor there.

There's been several policy changes here that we weren't told why or what triggered it. Speculation is rampant when that happens, which, IMO, is not a good thing. Since Colgan is now guided by the same management philosophy, I can only guess they'll be seeing the same "Commitment to Communication."
 
Teller1900 said:
This wasn't a circling approach. It couldn't be authorized as a circling approach. It's usually called the ILS15R visual transition to 4L. Basically you shoot the ILS15R, then they clear you for the left downwind visual 4L. It's one of the best approaches we do (did), and on the rare instance that Boston was delayed it would get the turboprops in when everyone else was still on the ground. It's a shame to see that option go.

And Scott, as usual, I agree with you on all counts!
Click to expand...

That's too bad you guys can no longer do that as it really is a good approach. I can't tell you how many times that approach has saved us from dealing with ground stops.
 
i am going to keep my mouth shut on the reasons for discontinuing the use of the circle but i did get the chance to do it a few weeks ago. i am glad to be one that has done that approach and it will be sorely missed.
 
Velocipede said:
I think the FAA is just deleting circling authorizations for airlines. We basicly lost ours a couple years ago.
Click to expand...

Are many airlines allowed to do Radar Approaches, ala ASR/PAR? When I was flying civilian cargo, our OpsSpecs allowed ASRs but not PARs, for some weird reason.

Polar,
I'm with ya' man...It's seems like being proactive, and having a bottom-up review of safety and operations is alien to this industry. After all, you are the end user and any changes should reflect your needs and inputs to operate as efficently and as safely as possible. However, the FAA charter of supporting air commerce AND safety are always in direct conflict with one another. In some cases the FAA yielded to pressure, and made some changes that have yet to really be proven effective. Specifically, the 737 rudder(US737 PIT) and fuel tank (TWA 800) are all examples of solutions that weren't supported by data. No firm conclusions were really decided in either of those accidents, but a lot of money was spent to satisfy the politicans.
We are going thru some pain at my outfit, and some of it is systemic to the industry. We will all be seeing the fallout soon, and hopefully there will be some constructive solutions to prevent another accident. I don't think that dropping the 15R/4L visual transition is anything more than the FAA "doing something". Sort of along the lines of the TSA reacting to the "shoe-bomber". Only a perception of safer skies.
Click to expand...

Agree. Have never been a fan of "change for the sake of change", or for a perception of safety. AF does this alot....knee jerk responses to procedural changes (or deisred changes) after an accident, even before the investigation is complete. One high-profile Class A accident I was IO on, the heat from above to "make a change!!"....primarily from O-6s with nothing else to do with their time, was a constant battle. At least if a change is made, it'd be good to have a short explanation of why it was made so as to give the perception that some rational thought was put into it.

TWA 800, agree the data there was sketchy.
 
I just don't see the big deal here.. It has been proven (statistically) that these types of approaches have a higher risk associated with them.

Why not ask the company to get a RNP or GPS 04L I see there is one in place already for 04R
 
Kind of dbag for the SKYW van not to wait for you. We fly into the same airport at the same time, and stay at the same hotel as Lynx and we always make sure the van waits, and they do the same even if it is an extra 10 minutes. It's courtesy.
 
i enjoyed par approaches when i had to take students out to mcas yuma as well as fhu. glad to keep the controllers current! :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top