Articles - Kuwait Air Traffic Control

(1) 2 3 4 ... 25 »

فواز الفرح: نأمل الموافقة على زيادة بدلات عاملينا بالمطار

Posted by kuwaitatc.com on 2010/2/23 17:00:00 (22 reads)

اعرب رئيس الادارة العامة للطيران المدني فواز الفرح عن امله ان يوافق مجلس الخدمة المدنية على الطلب الذي تقدمت به الادارة للمجلس منذ اكثر من عام ونصف العام لزيادة البدلات والمكافآت الخاصة للعاملين بالادارة اسوة بما تم مع جهات اخرى اقرت زيادات كبيرة لكوادرها خلال السنوات الاخيرة.

فتح الأجواء

واوضح الفرح لـ «الوطن» ان طبيعة العمل في مطار الكويت الدولي لا تقل اهمية عن طبيعة العمل بتلك الجهات، مشيرة الى ان الادارة ملتزمة تطبيق سياسة «فتح الاجواء» التي تنتهجها الكويت من اجل تنمية وتشجيع حركة الملاحة والنقل الجوي من والى مطار الكويت الدولي مما ضاعف اخيرا من حجم المهام والمسؤوليات الملقاة على عاتق عامليها في هذا المرفق الحيوي.

خدمات جليلة

واكد الفرح ان الادارة قدمت خدماتها في المطار لأكثر من 8 ملايين مسافر واكثر من 150 الف طائرة خلال العام الماضي، الامر الذي يقتضي منح حافز مادي مناسب لجميع العاملين في الادارة الذين يعملون بتفان واخلاص على مدار الساعة لتأمين المسافرين والحرص على سلامة حركة الطيران المدني في البلاد وانتظامها مع جميع دول العالم.

ظروف شاقة

وذكر الفرح أن العاملين في الادارة كسائر العاملين في المطارات الدولية يتعرضون لظروف عمل شاقة نتيجة ضوضاء الطائرات وانبعاثاتها علاوة على مسؤوليات الامن والسلامة الملقاة على عاتقهم.

زيادات خليجية

واشار الفرح الى ان طلب الادارة لزيادة البدلات والمكافأة الممنوحة لعامليها يشمل منح بدل خاص للمراقبين الجويين نظرا لحساسية عملهم الذي يستلزم اعلى مستويات الاداء البشري والدقة والتركيز من خلال النظم والتجهيزات الرادارية لتنظيم حركة الطائرات في الاجواء وتحقيق افضل درجات السلامة في ادارة الحركة الملاحية، لافتا الي ان سلطات الطيران المدني في الدول الخليجية المجاورة قامت خلال السنوات الاخيرة بزيادة الرواتب الممنوحة للمراقبين الجويين العاملين لديها بمعدلات كبيرة نظرا لخصوصية تلك المهنة وندرة عدد المتخصصين فيها.

Article ID : 256

Read More... | 3 comments

Light, Moderate or Severe Turbulence…How Are They Defined?

Posted by raed on 2010/2/17 1:10:00 (20 reads)

Lately I’ve noticed a bunch of news coverage about flights experiencing turbulence especially after the Air France flight over the Atlantic. While as tragic as that flight was for those people, turbulence is not an uncommon thing. Anyone who has flown has probably experienced some level of turbulence. In fact it’s graded and is talked about frequently between pilots and controllers. But what cases it?

Turbulence can be caused by many different things including thunderstorms. However, turbulence doesn’t have to require a full blown storm cell to be happen. In fact some turbulence is created through other processes. Convective currents or thermals are created when the heat from large bodies of land radiate heat into the cooler air and create some pretty good bumps. I’ve flown over some really strong thermals in the heat of Texas in the summer. Those bumps made me feel like I was riding a bronco. Yee-haw!

But turbulence can also be experienced when flying close to a mountain range, or at higher, cruise altitudes when an aircraft is entering or leaving the jet stream. In both of those cases the turbulence would be in clear air away from the clouds. An aircraft can experience turbulence when flying low to the ground (during take off or landing) where turbulence is formed by winds interacting with land masses and buildings or even from a larger aircraft flying in front of a smaller aircraft and creating wake turbulence.

“So what is the the difference between turbulence levels and how are they defined?”

According to the Aeronautical Information Manual (AIM) there are 4 major categories of turbulence: Light, Moderate, Severe and Extreme.

^1.High level turbulence (normally above 15,000 feet ASL) not associated with cumuliform cloudiness, including thunderstorms, should be reported as CAT (clear air turbulence) preceded by the appropriate intensity, or light or moderate chop.
Intensity	Aircraft Reaction	Reaction Inside Aircraft	Reporting Term-Definition
Light	Turbulence that momentarily causes slight erratic changes in ;altitude and/or attitude (pitch, roll, yaw). Report as Light Turbulence or Turbulence that causes slight, rapid and somewhat rhythmic bumpiness without appreciable changes in altitude or attitude. Report as Light Chop.	Occupants may feel a slight strain against seat belts or shoulder straps. Unsecured objects may be displaced slightly. Food service may be conducted and little or no difficulty is encountered in walking.	Occasional – Less than 1/3 of the time. Intermittent – 1/3 to 2/3. Continuous – More than 2/3.
Moderate	Turbulence that is similar to Light Turbulence but of greater intensity. Changes in altitude and/or attitude occur but the aircraft remains in positive control at all times. It usually causes variations in indicated airspeed. Report as Moderate Turbulence; ¹ or Turbulence that is similar to Light Chop but of greater intensity. It causes rapid bumps or jolts without appreciable changes in aircraft altitude or attitude. Report as Moderate Chop.¹	Occupants feel definite strains against seat belts or shoulder straps. Unsecured objects are dislodged. Food service and walking are difficult.	NOTE 1. Pilots should report location(s), time (UTC), intensity, whether in or near clouds, altitude, type of aircraft and, when applicable, duration of turbulence. 2. Duration may be based on time between two locations or over a single location. All locations should be readily identifiable.
Severe	Turbulence that causes large, abrupt changes in altitude and/or attitude. It usually causes large variations in indicated airspeed. Aircraft may be momentarily out of control. Report as Severe Turbulence. ¹	Occupants are forced violently against seat belts or shoulder straps. Unsecured objects are tossed about. Food Service and walking are impossible.	EXAMPLES: a. Over Omaha. 1232Z, Moderate Turbulence, in cloud, Flight Level 310, B707.
Extreme	Turbulence in which the aircraft is violently tossed about and is practically impossible to control. It may cause structural damage. Report as Extreme Turbulence.¹		b. From 50 miles south of Albuquerque to 30 miles north of Phoenix, 1210Z to 1250Z, occasional Moderate Chop, Flight Level 330, DC8.

Thankfully extreme turbulence is as the name implies, extremely rare and modern radar systems, weather prediction equipment and crew training make running into it almost non-existent. Pilots are encouraged to provide pilot reports (PIREP) on what their ride condition is to air traffic control to assist with other aircraft who will follow behind. PIREPS are always provided with the following information such as location (nearest VOR or point), time (in Zulu) and when observed, altitude, type of aircraft, temperature, precipitation, etc. PIREPS are so important that pilots are required to report conditions they experience that are different than forecasted.

Now reporting moderate to severe turbulence at 12,500 feet in a Cessna 172 may not be terribly important to a Boeing 757 that is transitioning through that airspace. It makes logical sense because a larger, heavier aircraft is not going to be affected by the same level of winds as a smaller, lighter aircraft would be. However if a larger aircraft is experiencing moderate turbulence, that could be severe for smaller aircraft. As part of the forecast, if there is any significant weather a AIRMET (Airman’s Meteorological Information) is released indicating potential and less severe weather conditions. These are typically referred to as weather advisories. A SIGMET (Significant Meteorological Information) is an advisory that concerns the safety of all aircraft. They can be convective SIGMETs which indicate thunderstorms or non-convective which would include severe turbulence, severe icing or dust or ash that is affecting an area of 3,000 square miles.

So what does all of this mean for the typical traveler on a commercial airplane? It means that even though at times the ride may be a little bumpy, that as many safety precautions are being taken as possible. For the squeamish air traveler, they should probably think of light or moderate turbulence like driving down a road that is need or repair or has a few pot holes. Nothing that will damage your vehicle, but just spoils an otherwise smooth ride. So when the pilot turns on the seat belt sign, and the flight crew tells you to return to your seats…they aren’t doing so to be a nuisance, they are doing so to protect you. It doesn’t mean that you’re going to be in a severe turbulent situation like windshear (shown on the radar below), it’s just better to be prepared for the worst and hope for the best.

Article ID : 253

Read More... | 2 comments

Balanced Approach to Aircraft Noise Management

Posted by Tatalia on 2010/2/13 3:07:33 (20 reads)

Balanced Approach to Aircraft Noise Management

In 2001, the ICAO Assembly endorsed the concept of a "balanced approach" to aircraft noise management (Appendix C of Assembly Resolution A35-5 (pdf)). The Assembly in 2007, reaffirmed the "balanced approach" principle and called upon States to recognize ICAO’s role in dealing with the problems of aircraft noise (Appendix C of Assembly Resolution A36-22 (pdf)). This consists of identifying the noise problem at an airport and then analysing the various measures available to reduce noise through the exploration of four principal elements, namely reduction at source (quieter aircraft), land-use planning and management, noise abatement operational procedures and operating restrictions, with the goal of addressing the noise problem in the most cost-effective manner. ICAO has developed policies on each of these elements, as well as on noise charges.

Reduction of Noise at Source

Much of ICAO's effort to address aircraft noise over the past 30 years has been aimed at reducing noise at source. Aeroplanes and helicopters built today are required to meet the noise certification standards adopted by the Council of ICAO. These are contained in Annex 16 — Environmental Protection, Volume I — Aircraft Noise to the Convention on International Civil Aviation, while practical guidance to certificating authorities on implementation of the technical procedures of Annex 16 is contained in the Environmental Technical Manual on the use of Procedures in the Noise Certification of Aircraft (Doc 9501).

The first generation of jet-powered aeroplanes was not covered by Annex 16 and these are consequently referred to as non-noise certificated (NNC) aeroplanes (e.g. Boeing 707 and Douglas DC-8). The initial standards for jet-powered aircraft designed before 1977 were included in Chapter 2 of Annex 16. The Boeing 727 and the Douglas DC-9 are examples of aircraft covered by Chapter 2. Subsequently, newer aircraft were required to meet the stricter standards contained in Chapter 3 of the Annex. The Boeing 737-300/400, Boeing 767 and Airbus A319 are examples of "Chapter 3" aircraft types. In June 2001, on the basis of recommendations made by the fifth meeting of the Committee on Aviation Environmental Protection (CAEP/5), the Council adopted a new Chapter 4 noise standard, more stringent than that contained in Chapter 3. Starting 1 January 2006, the new standard became applicable to newly certificated aeroplanes and to Chapter 3 aeroplanes for which re-certification to Chapter 4 is requested.

A Noise database Noise dB was developed in 2006 by the French DGCA under the aegis of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). The site is in its final experimental phase and data should be considered preliminary. The final Noise dB was made available in June 2006. The goal of this database is to provide certification noise levels for each aircraft type guaranteed by certification authorities. The Noise dB application is intended as a general source of information for the public.

Land-use Planning and Management

Land-use planning and management is an effective means to ensure that the activities nearby airports are compatible with aviation. Its main goal is to minimize the population affected by aircraft noise by introducing land-use zoning around airports. Compatible land-use planning and management is also a vital instrument in ensuring that the gains achieved by the reduced noise of the latest generation of aircraft are not offset by further residential development around airports. ICAO guidance on this subject is contained in Annex 16, Volume I, Part IV and in the Airport Planning Manual, Part 2 — Land Use and Environmental Control (Doc 9184). A revised edition of this manual is being produced. The manual provides guidance on the use of various tools for the minimization, control or prevention of the impact of aircraft noise in the vicinity of airports and describes the practices adopted for land-use planning and management by some States. In addition, with a view to promoting a uniform method of assessing noise around airports, ICAO recommends the use of the methodology contained in Recommended Method for Computing Noise Contours around Airports (Circular 205).

Noise Abatement Operational Procedures

Noise abatement procedures enable reduction of noise during aircraft operations to be achieved at comparatively low cost. There are several methods, including preferential runways and routes, as well as noise abatement procedures for take-off, approach and landing. The appropriateness of any of these measures depends on the physical lay-out of the airport and its surroundings, but in all cases the procedure must give priority to safety considerations. ICAO's noise abatement procedures are contained in Annex 16, Volume I, Part V and Procedures for Air Navigation Services — Aircraft Operations (PANS-OPS, Doc 8168), Volume I — Flight Procedures, Part V. On the basis of recommendations made by CAEP/5, new noise abatement take-off procedures became applicable in November 2001.

Operating Restrictions

Noise concerns have led some States, mostly developed countries, to consider banning the operation of certain noisy aircraft at noise-sensitive airports. In the 1980s, the focus was on NNC aircraft; in the 1990s, it moved to Chapter 2 aircraft; today, it has moved to the noisiest Chapter 3 aircraft. However, operating restrictions of this kind can have significant economic implications for the airlines concerned, both those based in the States taking action and those based in other States (particularly developing countries) that operate to and from the affected airports. On each occasion, the ICAO Assembly succeeded in reaching an agreement – contained in an Assembly resolution – that represented a careful balance between the interests of developing and developed States and took into account the concerns of the airline industry, airports and environmental interests.

In the case of Chapter 2 aircraft, the ICAO Assembly in 1990 urged States not to restrict aircraft operations without considering other possibilities first. It then provided a basis on which States wishing to restrict operations of Chapter 2 aircraft may do so. States could start phasing out operations of Chapter 2 aircraft from 1 April 1995 and have all of them withdrawn from service by 31 March 2002. However, prior to the latter date, Chapter 2 aircraft were guaranteed 25 years of service after the issue of their first certificate of airworthiness. Thus Chapter 2 aircraft which had completed less than 25 years of service on 1 April 1995 were not immediately affected by this requirement. Similarly, widebody Chapter 2 aircraft and those fitted with quieter (high by-pass ratio) engines were not immediately affected after 1 April 1995. Many developed countries including Australia, Canada, the United States and many in Europe, have since taken action on the withdrawal of operations of Chapter 2 aircraft at their airports, taking due account of the Assembly's resolution. This has had a substantial impact in reducing noise levels at many airports. However, the benefits of removing Chapter 2 aircraft have now been largely achieved.

In the case of Chapter 3 aircraft, the ICAO Assembly in 2001 urged States not to introduce any operating restrictions at any airport on Chapter 3 aircraft before fully assessing available measures to address the noise problem at the airport concerned in accordance with the balanced approach. The Assembly also listed a number of safeguards that would need to be met if restrictions are imposed on Chapter 3 aircraft. For example, restrictions should be based on the noise performance of the aircraft and should be tailored to the noise problem of the airport concerned, and the special circumstances of operators from developing countries should be taken into account (Appendix E of Assembly Resolution A35-5 (pdf)).

Noise Charges

ICAO's policy with regard to noise charges was first developed in 1981 and is contained in ICAO's Policies on Charges for Airports and Air Navigation Services (Doc 9082/6). The Council recognizes that, although reductions are being achieved in aircraft noise at source, many airports need to apply noise alleviation or prevention measures. The Council considers that the costs incurred may, at the discretion of States, be attributed to airports and recovered from the users. In the event that noise-related charges are levied, the Council recommends that they should be levied only at airports experiencing noise problems and should be designed to recover no more than the costs applied to their alleviation or prevention; and that they should be non-discriminatory between users and not be established at such levels as to be prohibitively high for the operation of certain aircraft.

Practical advice on determining the cost basis for noise-related charges and their collection is provided in the ICAO Airport Economics Manual (Doc 9562), and information on noise-related charges actually levied is provided in the ICAO Manual of Airport and Air Navigation Facility Tariffs (Doc 7100).

Article ID : 252

Read More... | 1 comment

VOR approach

Posted by ALI DEHRAB on 2010/2/9 22:23:18 (39 reads)

Today we'll be talking about the most common non-precision approach, the VOR approach. As the name implies, VOR approaches are approach procedures which use VORs as the primary navigational aid. A lot of VORs are located at the airport, but there are many which are located away from the airport. Approach procedures can be based on either. So, now that we know what VOR approaches are, let's brief our chart and then go flying... Since we've already gone over chart symbology, I'll just touch lightly on most of these things. "A" tells us that we're going to be doing the VOR (or GPS) Rwy 11R approach at Vero Beach. Because the approach is categorized with a runway number (11R), we know that the final approach segment of this approach will bring us to within 30 degrees of the extended centerline of 11R. We also see that the primary navaid is the Vero Beach VOR (VRB), it's frequency being 117.3. "B" points to VRB and we see above the ID box that this is an Initial Approach Fix (IAF). This is where we will start the approach. You will see that there are two other IAFs, both located at the start of the DME ARCs.

Since we'll be discussing DME ARCs in their own lesson, we'll skip those for now. "C" shows us our procedure turn, the course reversal we will fly to establish ourselves on course. "D" illustrates the missed approach procedure. Again, ATC will usually want to expedite your return for another approach with radar vectors, so you won't be flying a published missed very often. "E" illustrates our final approach segment and shows us our Minimum Descent Altitude (MDA). Once we pass the Final Approach Fix (FAF), we'll descend down to 380ft MSL. "E" also tells us that we need 1 mile visibility for this approach. If you look to the right of "E", you'll see the "Circle-to-Land" minimums. These are for use when the winds are favoring a different runway. If, for example, runway 4 was in use, we would only descend to 500ft MSL and then circle to land on runway 4 once it was in sight. "F" shows us our time to the Missed Approach Point (MAP) from the FAF. OK, now that we've briefed our plate, let's do this...

Today's weather is ceiling 480ft overcast, visibility 2 miles. We'll be doing the full procedure, starting at VRB. So, what we're going to do is take off from Vero Beach, climbing to 2000ft, and request the full VOR 11R approach. At that point, Center will say "9246F proceed direct Vero Beach, cleared full VOR 11R approach, contact tower 126.3 when procedure turn inbound". So, now we've tuned in VRB and turned the needle until it center TO the VOR. We're level at 2000ft and proceeding to the VOR. We see that our outbound course for the initial approach segment is 300 degrees FROM VRB, so as we pass over the VOR, we will turn the HSI/VOR needle to set the head pointing to 300 and turn to intercept the course. We're now actually on the approach, proceeding outbound. In the profile view, we see that we can also descend to 1500ft until the completion of the procedure turn. So, we'll start a descent to 1500ft (1).

Figure 1: On the procedure outbound the VOR. This is poisition "1" marked on the chart above and the map-view below.

Now, ATC didn't give us any limitations on our procedure turn. In the profile view at "C", we see it says "10 NM". This means that the procedure turn must be completed within 10 NM of the VOR. Where in that 10 NM radius it doesn't say, so we can start it right after we pass over the VOR if we like or we can extend it out if we were descending from a higher altitude. I'll go out about 3NM from the VOR before I start my turn. Now, procedure turns are a bit tricky for some, so follow closely. The purpose of this is to turn us around, heading back to the VOR and the airport, without getting us totally off course. You can see at "C" that the first turn is to a heading of 255 degrees. This is a heading, NOT a radial from a VOR. So, when I get to 3NM DME from VRB, I'll make a turn to 255 degrees and start my timer. We want to fly the procedure turn outbound for 1 minute. When 1 minute is up on our timer, we'll start a 180 degree turn to a heading of 075 degrees and then fly inbound (2). MAKE SURE to make standard rate turns (wings set on the turn index line on the turn coordinator) or else the procedure turn won't work out. At this point, we're inbound on the procedure turn, so it's time to call the tower and report where we are. The tower will then say "9246F roger, report the VOR". As we're flying inbound, I'll now set the HSI/VOR needle to our inbound course of 120 degrees.

Figure 2: Procedure turn inbound. Level at 1500, rolling out on a 075 heading. 2 Note position "2" on the chart and the map-view.

As we near our course, the needle will start to center and we'll start a turn to intercept our course. Once we're established inbound (on the inbound course), we may descend to 1000ft MSL and continue inbound to the VOR. Once we pass over the VOR (3), things get busy. It's the FAF, so let's drop the gear. As you can see on the plan view, the final approach course is 115 degrees FROM, so we need to turn the needle from 120 to 115. This is VERY important and easy to forget. In this approach, you won't hit anything. There is a similar approach in Concord, CA where, if you don't make the course change, you'll fly right into some tall antennas. Also, we need to start our descent down our MDA of 380ft MSL. As you can see, we've got 3.5 DME until the MAP, so we've got until then to get to our MDA, but the sooner the better since that will give us more time to look outside for the runway. We also need to start our timer. We'll be doing the approach at 90kts, so looking at "F", we can see that it should take us 2:20 to reach the MAP.

Figure 3: Passing VRB inbound, we start descent from 1,000 to the MDA. Track the 115 radial and level off at the MDA until runway is in sight. Note position "3" on the chart and the map-view.

We can determine the MAP with DME alone, but if the DME fails after passing the VOR, we have no way to determine the MAP if we hadn't started the timer. Also, it's important to look at "F" for each approach to see where the timer should be started. In this case, it tells us "VOR to MAP", so we start it over the VOR like I said. Finally, the tower asked us to report the VOR, so we would call them and they would say "9246F runway 11R cleared to land." Now we're done with communicating and configuring and all of our concentration is on flying. We going to level off NO LOWER than 380ft MSL and proceed along course until reaching the MAP, looking up every few seconds for the runway. Hopefully we would get the runway in sight before reaching the MAP. If not, we would immediately begin the missed approach upon reaching the MAP, calling the tower to let them know we're going missed. In this case however, we've got the runway just in sight, so we'll continue the approach and make a normal landing.

Figure 4: At MDA, runway in sight, we continue the descent and land. Note position "4" on the chart and the map-view.

See how easy that was? Next time, NDB approaches. These will take a little more instrument savvy, so brush up on your ADF use. Have fun!!

Article ID : 251