Nav/DP Question

[Vector4fun]

I'm a controller trying to figure out a problem which seems to crop up with CRJs from time to time. Please refer to the CENTEX 2 departure, http://www.airnav.com/depart?http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0501/00556CENTEX.PDF

Now, take the Navasota transition for example. Normal ops used to be a vector of somewhere between 60-70 degrees to intercept the outbound 088R. Then some of the Boeing drivers told me it was a bit easier for them to go direct a fix on the departure than intercept the radial on a heading. Just simply a matter of a few less buttons to push. No big deal to me, so some of us started using direct HOOKK. Works well for both of us, and gets you established on the transition before leaving our airspace, and out of the way of the BITER arrivals.

Now, what happens with CRJs from time to time, is the crew advises they don't "see" HOOKK or JAYJO on the FMS. Is that "normal", or operator error, or something else? (I'm not trying to flame anyone here, just trying to understand the problem.) Issue #2 is that, especially with CRJs it seems, a vector of, say 060 to intercept the 088R will sometimes result in a left turn of app 010 deg direct CWK. This is BAD because it puts the aircraft in the face of the BLEWE arrivals, or some other traffic.

So my question is, shouldn't the fixes HOOKK and JAYJO be displayed on the FMS if the departure was programmed correctly? Or are there "modes" where they might not be? I have been told that the FMS will try to turn the aircraft towards CWK if not managed properly when on a vector to intercept the radial.

I'm also curious if you guys have to look up the initial altitude and dep freq and set that up manually, or if either of those is automatically set for you when you load the departure?

Thanks in advance for any insightful replies. The problems are not frequent, but when they do crop up, seem to happen with CRJs much more than any other type.

 

[91100 100 set]

Well, I don't know anything about the CRJ avionics/autopilot, butwithall the RNAVs/FMS systems I've used, it is far easier to go directto afix than fly a head to intercept a course. I have seen afewautopilots that have a tendency to make a slight turn in thewrongdirection if you hit the LNAV button immediately after enteringdirectsomewhere in the FMS. It's almost like the FMS is still tryingtofigure out the angles and is feeding the autopilot bad info, butthisis usually not more than 10 degrees and it turns back in thecorrectdirection in less then 15 seconds. It can be eliminatedbyturning in the general direction of the fix with the heading bugwhilethe FMS figures it all out and once you're within 5 or 10 degreesof the correct heading then hitting LNAV. A little extra work, and somefolks might be lazy andjust hit direct on the FMS and LNAV on theautopilot and let theautopilot wander around until it settles out.

Regarding the fixes not showing up, I don't know. I have selectedadeparture and the FMS figures it starts at such and suchintersection,50 or 100 miles away, while there are fixes on the sameradial or coursemuch closer to the departure airport that ATC likes touse. In thesecases, you must refer to the paper chart and enterit manually. Again alittle extra work, and some folks might not wantto refer to the paperchart to figure out where the fix is. Againkinda lazy, but we are allguilty of that occasionally.

I'm not sure if this is what you were talking about, but it might bealittle insight for you. BTW, I took a double-take at the NOSchart(What the hell is this thing?). I haven't looked at one ofthose inyears!

 

[HMR]

Operator Error (just a good guess).

 

[328dude]

If you select the right departure, it should draw out the departure for you if your database is up to date. If the Cpatain is flying in this scenario on white needles and selects NAV, the A/C will probably default to the first fix on the departure and could cause a turn in the wrong direction.

If they don't see Hookk on the departure, they need to whip out the paper format and type it in if they don't have it out already.

Just looking at the departure, it's not to difficult and can't seem to find a reason why the FMS wouldn't fly it. More than likely, human programming error.

 

[SLOTH]

I would have to take a look at how the SID is presented in the FMS, but I would dare a guess that it is an operator error. And as far as I'm concerned, there is no reason to not have the Jepp plate out to ensure no foul-ups just as 328dude mentioned!

Sloth

 

[trip]

On the CRJ when you load cwk2 tnv transition hookk and jayjo should be in the flight plan, if not it might be a database problem that should be fixed (this happens but not often). When you give us a heading to join what probably happens is HDG is selected on the flight control panel with NAV armed to capture the transition radial, but CWK is still the active waypoint (naving to) and when NAV is selected to join the transition it captures and starts a turn toward to CWK. The pilots see this and say #@*& ! Then they go back to HDG mode, move CWK behind them on the flight plan and arm NAV again! Did this make any sense?
Altitudes and Freq. is read of the paper and put in by hand.

I once had a clearence out of AUS (westbound for SLC) fly HDG join a radial of of some vor to join a airway? Never could put that in the box, just went out green needles!

 

[328dude]

How about CWK088/+17


That el fix it.

Like Trip said, when in dought, "fly old school, fly the green"

Vector, if you come across this again, just tell them to fly green needles and figure the rest out later. Atleast you won't have to worry about turns into your arrival's.

 

[PastMmo]

vector4fun,

issue 1 - my guess is that the crew is not programming in the DP. if the DP is not in the fms, then the legs page shows cwk then tnv. so, it would appear to you that they are flying the departure (088r), but they are not. this would explain not seeing the fixes hookk and jayjo in the fms. most of the time the flight plans do not list the DP's on them, so they could be just referencing the flight release and not listening to the actual cleareance when programming the fms.

issue 2 - i agree w/ what trip said. if the runway has not cycled in the fms, then it wants to fly or intercept a radial between the departure runway and cwk. this would explain the intial turn to approx. 010deg when the pilot selects 'nav'. this is independent of whether or not the DP is programmed correctly. if the runway has cycled, then cwk is the from waypoint, and 088R is the route. whether or not the runway has cycled in the fms depends on a/c position and departure runway.

 

[TonyC]

Based on what trip said, it sounds like they use a process almost identical to the MD-11 that I explained in your previous thread. There's no excuse why they shouldn't be able to comply with Heading 060 to join the 088R outbound, with or without FMS. With the FMS, it's 2 keystrokes more than proceeding direct to HOOKK or JAYJO.

Tell 'em to stop their whinin' and earn their paychecks.

If they don't know where HOOKK is, send 'em to the CWK 088 at 17DME fix. That'll show 'em!





Where do those CRJ guys get their "training"?!?!?

 

[Sc00ter]

Vector4Fun, how long have you been at AUS? Has xpdr 0274 brought you guys tacos in a while???

scoot

 

[701EV]

Vectors4fun,

By looking at the CWK2 DP it should not be a problem, as long as they put in the TVN transition. I did it last month a couple of times and we never seemed to have a problem with it. Hook and Jayjo should be in the FMS. It appears to me that it could be operator error.

I'm not sure why that heading is taking them direct to CWK? Now I have been givin vectors by ATC to fly a heading to intercept a raidial and if I flew that heading I would never join the radial.

If it's the guys going to ATL or DFW(DFW not for much longer) give our ATC liaison a call. I will PM his name to you.

Hope that helps

701EV

 

[Vector4fun]

I once had a clearence out of AUS (westbound for SLC) fly HDG join a radial of of some vor to join a airway? Never could put that in the box, just went out green needles!

Yeah, that should be very infrequent now that we have our DPs. Used to have to read the PDR for 90% of the departures for like 3 years after ABIA opened. Couldn't get a DP published because ...

Let's see how these PDRs work out before we publish them.

Ooops, now we can't do anything for a year because everybody is focused on Y2K.

The Plans and Procedures office at ZHU (where this stuff is routed) is covered up

The Airspace office kicked the whole package back because there's a new format and form to use for submitting these

etc.

etc.

We actually had to go outside the reg chain of command to get some freindly pressure to bear. None of the standard routings has really changed, just got them published.

And thanks for the insight too.

 

[Vector4fun]

Vector4Fun, how long have you been at AUS? Has xpdr 0274 brought you guys tacos in a while???

scoot

Almost 5 years, and no, not on MY shifts!!!

 

[Vector4fun]

Thanks to all the rest that responded. I'll just take a swag that occasionally somebody plugs in CWK direct TNV rather than CWK2.TNV or however you guys enter it. I honestly haven't even been in an RJ cockpit, since FAMS went away. The last "demo" I got in the cockpit was on the RNAV in an L1011 about a dozen years ago.


You guys watch out that the "runway has cycled", and I'll issue an extra vector now and again if I need to, and we'll call it even.

 

[SLOTH]

V4F,

You are definitely patient with the "ones" who are not complying with the SID. My question would be if they actually were issued the transition. If they were, then finding hookk or any other fix would be a non-issue. Thanks for trying to get clarification and above else, thanks for the good job that all of you do withing the ATC system!

Sloth

 

[Vector4fun]

Another Incident Today

Sorry to dredge up this old post, but we had another incident today with a CRJ that very nearly got somebody sent to the Principal's Office for a paddling.

Again, refer to the CENTEX TWO Departure from KAUS, available here:

http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0505/00556CENTEX.PDF


Notice the Navasota (TNV) transition is the CWK 088 deg radial. Also note the relative location of Industry VOR. (IDU) Our BITER THREE arrival begins over IDU and tracks WNW on the IDU 281R over BITER to BASTO, which is just about 20 miles east of KAUS.

In today's incident, a CRJ departed South, and was given a vector of 050 Deg to intercept the TNV transition. Such a vector would intercept the CWK 088R in the vicinity of HOOKK, which is a good ten miles North of BASTO and the BITER arrival. The CRJ was climbing to 120, (12,000'). There was a Supervisor working the sector at the time, and it was at this very moment that I plugged in to relieve him. It was not too busy, with about 8 aircraft on freq at that moment.

While I was receiving the position relief briefing, the Supe took a handoff on an MD80 on the BITER arrival, and the center took the handoff on the departing CRJ. The Supe then switched the climbing CRJ to center freq just before completing the briefing, and before I sat down. When I sat down, the MD80 had not yet checked on freq. As I was adjusting my scope, tab lists and alt filter settings, etc. to my taste; Center called regarding the MD80, who was just then descending out of 160 for 100. Wanted to know if I wanted the MD turned to the Southwest, away from the CRJ. I glanced up from the keyboard for a moment and thought it not necessary, but told the center guy he was welcome to turn the MD 10-20 deg left if he wanted. They should miss by at least 7 miles laterally.

A few seconds later, as I'm finishing my adjustments, the MD80 checks in, and it's then that I notice the CRJ is no longer on anything like a 050 heading, but is turning eastward directly at the MD80. At this moment, the CRJ is leaving 105 climbing to 120, and the MD80 is decending out of 135 for 100. They are nose to nose about 7 miles apart. I immediately turned the MD about 40 deg left and told him to maintain 130. At exactly the same time, I can hear the center controller on the landline saying he was leveling the CRJ. The MD80 couldn't quite stop at 130, but got level at 128, and the CRJ leveled at about 113. They passed about 2 miles apart at those altitudes. A bit more than 1000', but only by a few seconds reaction time. I'm sure it set off all the alarms at Houston Center.


I didn't bring this up in my original post some 6 moths ago, but I've seen this happen about twice a year. We don't normally torture a "confession" out of a crew on frequency, but I believe what is happening is that somehow the crew has programmed the FMS to fly the 088 "radial" off the airport rather than the CWK VOR. I say this, because if you drew a line on that bearing from the airport to the track in question, it matches exactly.

My point in bringing this matter up with you Ladies and Gentlemen tonight is NOT to point fingers or blame here, but to hopefully prevent a similar occurance. Lord knows I don't know how to program an FMS, and have been known to have my own, simple KNS-80 in the wrong mode several times. Perhaps somebody here can "fill in the blanks" and explain the technicalities of how it might happen, and it serves as a reminder to double check your FO or Capt next month. If we had lost separation today, we'd have had to send a package to FSDO tomorrow, fingering that CRJ crew. We would have not had a choice in the matter either.

 

[TonyC]

... I believe what is happening is that somehow the crew has programmed the FMS to fly the 088 "radial" off the airport rather than the CWK VOR.

I would say it is far more likely they programmed nothing, and tried to wing it from the paper copy.

I think it would have been worth a phone call to hear what they were doing.

Did either of them mention a TCAS alert?


I think I might have said it before, but it bears repeating. With an FMS, there's no excuse for messing up that departure procedure.







.

 

[SSDD]

Vector,

I know you don't want to point fingers, but this sounds like operator error. If these problems are with the same airline, it may be an operations problem, you'd be doing them a favor by bringing this up to their chief pilot. Perhaps they could modify their training to cover these scenarios. If possible, I wouldn't bring up any specific flights, but I'd sure point out the different situations. If the guy/gal is not an a$$hole they'd appreciate it.

Thanks for keeping an eye on us.

 

[Vector4fun]

I really don't think the problem is a single company. The only "theme" to the problem is that these things just seem to happen with CRJs more than any other type; though I can recall at least 1 B737 and 1 ERJ doing something similar. We have around 6 or 7 different Operators of CRJs. The other thing I've noticed is we don't seem to see it with the "steam gage" cockpits.


Seems to me we actually had MORE problems with folks turning out a "radial" from the airport, rather than the VOR, before we had the DPs published. The routes were exactly the same, but we had to read them in full. i.e.

"Cleared via the CWK 088 radial, 52 DME fix, direct TNV, direct LFK..."


So the DPs have helped, but not cured the problem. It's not a case of the aircraft turning direct the first VOR either. In yesterdays incident, the CRJ would have been heading about 075 for TNV, but he was tracking at least 15 deg right of that. So is it somewhat common with some crews to "eyeball" the DP with just the paper in hand?

Understand, I've never been in an RJ cockpit, and my last FAM was back in early 1999. (hint-hint)

 

[TonyC]

So is it somewhat common with some crews to "eyeball" the DP with just the paper in hand?

It's certainly not proper, and I would hope it's not common. However, if a crew failed to load the Departure Procedure into some FMS's prior to takeoff, they would have no other alternative but to rely on the paper copy and the old VOR navigation techniques.

For instance, if the crew didn't intend to fly the Departure Procedure, and thus intentionally did not load it, but then subsequently received a clearance to some point on the Departure Procedure, that could put them behind the proverbial power curve. It would mean a lot more work on their shoulders, and a higher probability of error.


Just a guess...


Call the crew next time and ask 'em. If they can't fly a simple DP like that, they can stand to sweat a friendly phone call.



.