![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I had an interesting little experience last night.
We were inbound to MMK (Meriden CT) for a practice GPS-36, talking to Bradley Approach. MMK is right on the edge between Bradley and NY Approach's airspace, and radio coverage tends to be spotty there. Conditions were night, IFR, but VMC with good visibility. Anyway, we were on a 190 vector (i.e. on downwind, away from the airport, and away from Bradley's airspace) when we lost contact with Bradley. A Delta flight relayed a frequency change to us, but there was no joy on that frequency either. We could just barely hear Bradley, but not enough to make out what they were saying. Anyway, GPS is wonderful. We just punched in "Nearest ARTCC", and tried Boston Center on the frequency that popped up. Nothing we couldn't have done by flipping through charts and the AFD, but so much easier! They heard us loud and clear, and when we explained what happened, the controller quickly got us a frequency for NY Approach which worked just fine. The odd thing is that NY Approach then continued to handle us on the approach. The NY controller vectored us back on to the FAC, told us to report the FAF to him, and told us to contact Bradley (on the original frequency) on the missed (the missed takes you deeper into Bradley airspace, with better radio coverage). I can only assume that since the NY controller knew the details of the approach and was able to give us vectors to it, this sort of stuff must have happened before. We flew the approach, went missed, and got back in touch with Bradley. The Bradley controller acted like nothing strange had happened at all. Nothing too exciting, but a good learning experience for the two students I had with me. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Roy Smith writes:
I had an interesting little experience last night. We were inbound to MMK (Meriden CT) for a practice GPS-36, talking to Bradley Approach. MMK is right on the edge between Bradley and NY Approach's airspace, and radio coverage tends to be spotty there. Conditions were night, IFR, but VMC with good visibility. Anyway, we were on a 190 vector (i.e. on downwind, away from the airport, and away from Bradley's airspace) when we lost contact with Bradley. A Delta flight relayed a frequency change to us, but there was no joy on that frequency either. We could just barely hear Bradley, but not enough to make out what they were saying. Anyway, GPS is wonderful. We just punched in "Nearest ARTCC", and tried Boston Center on the frequency that popped up. Nothing we couldn't have done by flipping through charts and the AFD, but so much easier! They heard us loud and clear, and when we explained what happened, the controller quickly got us a frequency for NY Approach which worked just fine. The odd thing is that NY Approach then continued to handle us on the approach. The NY controller vectored us back on to the FAC, told us to report the FAF to him, and told us to contact Bradley (on the original frequency) on the missed (the missed takes you deeper into Bradley airspace, with better radio coverage). I can only assume that since the NY controller knew the details of the approach and was able to give us vectors to it, this sort of stuff must have happened before. We flew the approach, went missed, and got back in touch with Bradley. The Bradley controller acted like nothing strange had happened at all. Nothing too exciting, but a good learning experience for the two students I had with me. Sounds like a good enough experience to make it part of the syllabus if you can rely on the unreliability. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Roy Smith wrote: Anyway, GPS is wonderful. We just punched in "Nearest ARTCC", and tried Boston Center on the frequency that popped up. Nothing we couldn't have done by flipping through charts and the AFD, but so much easier! They heard us loud and clear, and when we explained what happened, the controller quickly got us a frequency for NY Approach which worked just fine. Once someone figures out how to use all that invaluable data, it becomes more than just a great navigation device. I am sure you will place emphasis on all those NRST goodies to your students. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Roy Smith wrote: I've already added "OK, can you give us an initial vector while we get the box set up?" to my ATC vocabulary :-) The devices work better on a trip than in a local training environment where you are trying to do multiple approaches. On a trip, you usually have a routing, then are given an IAP, and that transition is fairly simple once the particular device is mastered; especially a well designed device such as the CNX-80 or the Garmin 530. Trouble comes, though, when trying to be adept at both such devices. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Another possibility for the lost comm is 120.65, which is Bradley
Clearance. The RCO is right on the field at Meriden (as I recall having gotten IFR clearances on the ground there). They might have at least been able to pass on the NY approach frequency for you. If you ever get IFR clearances out of Meriden and are heading southeast, you can expect your clearance to intially send you off toward Groton. I guess in addition to the bad radio coverage the radar coverage is also lousy at low altitudes around Meriden because ATC seems to want you heading east, away from NY airspace, and clearly in radar contact before they will amend the clearance and vector you southeast. Roy Smith wrote in message ... I had an interesting little experience last night. We were inbound to MMK (Meriden CT) for a practice GPS-36, talking to Bradley Approach. MMK is right on the edge between Bradley and NY Approach's airspace, and radio coverage tends to be spotty there. Conditions were night, IFR, but VMC with good visibility. Anyway, we were on a 190 vector (i.e. on downwind, away from the airport, and away from Bradley's airspace) when we lost contact with Bradley. A Delta flight relayed a frequency change to us, but there was no joy on that frequency either. We could just barely hear Bradley, but not enough to make out what they were saying. Anyway, GPS is wonderful. We just punched in "Nearest ARTCC", and tried Boston Center on the frequency that popped up. Nothing we couldn't have done by flipping through charts and the AFD, but so much easier! They heard us loud and clear, and when we explained what happened, the controller quickly got us a frequency for NY Approach which worked just fine. The odd thing is that NY Approach then continued to handle us on the approach. The NY controller vectored us back on to the FAC, told us to report the FAF to him, and told us to contact Bradley (on the original frequency) on the missed (the missed takes you deeper into Bradley airspace, with better radio coverage). I can only assume that since the NY controller knew the details of the approach and was able to give us vectors to it, this sort of stuff must have happened before. We flew the approach, went missed, and got back in touch with Bradley. The Bradley controller acted like nothing strange had happened at all. Nothing too exciting, but a good learning experience for the two students I had with me. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Retractable Comm Antenna | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 11 | September 6th 04 06:59 PM |
Lost comms after radar vector | Mike Ciholas | Instrument Flight Rules | 119 | January 31st 04 11:39 PM |
Lost comm altitude? | Roy Smith | Instrument Flight Rules | 12 | January 11th 04 12:29 AM |
FS: Soft Comm ATC-4Y 4 place portable intercom | Jaysen Underhill | Instrument Flight Rules | 0 | December 11th 03 09:41 PM |
Lost comm - Arrival | Michael 182 | Instrument Flight Rules | 3 | July 28th 03 12:04 AM |