OnCourse Software

PF3 ATC has just ploughed me in to the side of a mountain!

Not my fault this time. Visibility was bad and I obeyed the approach instructions to the letter.

Log, I hope, attached.

John

No time for reading the log or a longer comment, the short version is: PF3 does not know anything about mountains.
So for the cruise you need to take this into account when planning your waypoint altitudes (you can adjust the automatically generated altitudes before starting the flight), and maybe not use vectoring for approach, but enable the STAR feature to fly any published approach without interference from PF3. This does not have to be a STAR, it could be an ILS transition or anything else.

And like in real life, the pilot has the last call

You should either activate the STAR option when flying into an airport in mountaineous terrain or - if vectored - request a clearance for final approach at pilot's discretion as soon as you notice the vectoring is unsafe.
It is your responsibility as the pilot to maintain situational awareness. You have to know where the mountain are.

RALF9636 wrote: *

Sat Apr 08, 2017 5:24 pm

You should either activate the STAR option when flying into an airport in mountaineous terrain or - if vectored - request a clearance for final approach at pilot's discretion as soon as you notice the vectoring is unsafe.
It is your responsibility as the pilot to maintain situational awareness. You have to know where the mountain are.

Seconded both comments. Only real ATC are able to vector you around terrain. But they rarely do because of Radar reflection etc. So it is your responsibility as PIC to ensure that you don't CFIT. An example is flying into Tenerife from the North. The last wypt of the relevant STAR is North of the Island so if you were flying into Los Rodeos you would have to follow the fixes that guide you around the island to line up with the ILS etc. When I fly that with PF3 I load a fpl that finishes with the last wypt of the STAR, PF3 then says "own navigation" and I then fly the extra wypts that I have added into my INS. So it is best not to go for vectoring if there is high terrain (higher than your FAF) but instead to fly the STAR and navigate yourself to the ILS intercept. You would be expected to do the same in real life. Try the same flight in zero visibility. One word of warning do not spend time with your head buried in your FMCs. The moment you feel you have lost situational awareness get out of there quickly. In these situations you must know where you are now exactly and where you will be exactly. The time it takes to fiddle with the FMC is enough time to get lost and severely scratch the paintwork.

Hi John,

As Thomas explained, PF3 only knows the ground elevation immediately below your aircraft and doesn't know anything about mountains even if directly in front of you!

Hi John,

Well the chaps have already covered it, but the important thing is to consult the charts for published procedures when you are flying in mountainous areas. Click here for approach plates for KJAC which will help you plan and fly your approach. And when you are done with this, you can try Mexico City!

Dan77 wrote: *

Sat Apr 08, 2017 8:19 pm

Hi John,

Well the chaps have already covered it, but the important thing is to consult the charts for published procedures when you are flying in mountainous areas. Click here for approach plates for KJAC which will help you plan and fly your approach. And when you are done with this, you can try Mexico City!

Another tip to remember all heights are in fact altitudes i.e. QNH values unless specifically anotated as height or elevation. Also from what you said you didn't appear to have a GPWS. You should watch this video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FF2Fhi-TT0o

Dan77 wrote: *

Sat Apr 08, 2017 8:19 pm

Hi John,

Well the chaps have already covered it, but the important thing is to consult the charts for published procedures when you are flying in mountainous areas. Click here for approach plates for KJAC which will help you plan and fly your approach. And when you are done with this, you can try Mexico City!

Even better Paro!

Yes, ok, ok. You lot've made your point. My fault as usual. I should have checked the charts before flying and I didn't. Frankly, I don't think in this case they would a damn bit of difference.

First of all, I couldn't see the side of the mountain until it was too late. And the other thing was that Approach instructed me to come down from the cruise at 16000' to the 9000'.

What was I to do? I was getting pretty near the airport (alt. 6451') at that time (10 miles or so) and they were bringing me down in preparation for the ILS landing.

It's all very well to say that ATS only takes into account course directions but that's not strictly true is it? They instruct you as to the altitude for the whole flight and have to take into account the altitude of the airport, otherwise they couldn't give the instructions to get you down to the right height for eventual landing. Personally, I think the vectoring was wrong and they should have got me over the sides of the valley from further out at say, 12000' and then brought me down along the valley.

Furthemore, if I hadn't obeyed ATC, they would have nagged and nagged and then withdrawn their services as has happened to me before!

John (disgruntled )

JohnY wrote: *

Sun Apr 09, 2017 10:47 am

Yes, ok, ok. You lot've made your point. My fault as usual. I should have checked the charts before flying and I didn't. Frankly, I don't think in this case they would a damn bit of difference.

First of all, I couldn't see the side of the mountain until it was too late. And the other thing was that Approach instructed me to come down from the cruise at 16000' to the 9000'.

What was I to do? I was getting pretty near the airport (alt. 6451') at that time (10 miles or so) and they were bringing me down in preparation for the ILS landing.

It's all very well to say that ATS only takes into account course directions but that's not strictly true is it? They instruct you as to the altitude for the whole flight and have to take into account the altitude of the airport, otherwise they couldn't give the instructions to get you down to the right height for eventual landing. Personally, I think the vectoring was wrong and they should have got me over the sides of the valley from further out at say, 12000' and then brought me down along the valley.

Furthemore, if I hadn't obeyed ATC, they would have nagged and nagged and then withdrawn their services as has happened to me before!

John (disgruntled )

As far as I know, KJAC is known in reality as a dangerous approach (relief and often bad weather). The STAR approch is strongly recommended.
Regards,
Richard