Visual Separation between departures
11-16-2008, 09:05 PM
#21
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: leaning to the left
Posts: 4,184
I may be wrong here...But, it seems that the tower controller tells you to maintain visual contact with the departing A/C in front of you, when he gives you your "reduced separation" T/O clearance. By accepting the T/O clearance, they're expecting you to at least make an attempt of continuing that visual contact/separation. If you don't want to do that, then don't accept the T/O clearance.
Isn't that what the problem was here? He accepted the reduced separation for takeoff...But, then surprised them with the refusal, once airborne.
Isn't that what the problem was here? He accepted the reduced separation for takeoff...But, then surprised them with the refusal, once airborne.
11-16-2008, 09:15 PM
#22
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,068
Well, all I can say is there are plenty of anal-retentive aviators at our airline.
11-16-2008, 11:21 PM
#24
Ok, No more sleeping Dog
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: MD-11, F/O
Posts: 889
Why is this thread even in place? Upon executing an IFR clearance you are ATC's responsibility from T/O roll until landing........ period. in terms of separation , (unless the Capt accepts otherwise, vis-a-vie a visual approach). So how is MEM Tower mixing the two? A SID is a SID even if it's radar vectors. 
11-17-2008, 06:06 AM
#25
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2008
Position: Heavily Involved
Posts: 473
Just read some of the ridiculous safety reports if you want a glimpse into the world of the anal-retentive here. I am not saying that an AR pilot here is unsafe, I am saying that of the many AR pilots we have, they would be least likely to comply with a request from ATC to maintain visual on departure.
11-17-2008, 06:11 AM
#26
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2006
Posts: 999
How about this? Instead of both aircraft using the same heading for departure, give them different headings. First aircraft-runway heading, second aircraft-runway heading plus 30 degrees, third aircraft-runway heading plus 60 degrees, fourth aircraft-runway heading....
11-17-2008, 06:25 AM
#27
Organizational Learning
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Position: Directly behind the combiner
Posts: 4,948
I'll gladly be counted in the former group.
But, we're not really talking about labels here, as labels aren't terribly useful to the discussion. We're talking about a procedure, and its relative merits and shortcomings. In some circumstances, it is a safe and useful procedure. In some circumstances, it is less safe. Given the choice of something that saves a few seconds versus something that is safer, I'll always opt for the safer route, even if it means you'll give me a dirty look. I've endured worse.
.
11-17-2008, 06:50 AM
#28
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Position: Austin Tower
Posts: 175
Delivery is everything, and the delivery of "unable" by the Heavy was a little hard -- but he certainly made his point.
I found it interesting that the Tower Supervisor conveyed his expectation that the pilot should notify ATC prior to the issuance of Visual Separation -- that he would/could not accept Visual Separation.
There have been several instances in my career where I've been informed by a pilot that he was refusing to accept Visual Separation, and I've had to move on to Plan B. These were generally not a problem, as long as had not painted myself into a corner.
Personally, I believe issuing the Visual Separation before takeoff clearance is preferable -- at least this would give the crew the opportunity to say "unable" and allow ATC to switch to Plan B before the aircraft gets airborne.
MEM_ATC
I found it interesting that the Tower Supervisor conveyed his expectation that the pilot should notify ATC prior to the issuance of Visual Separation -- that he would/could not accept Visual Separation.
There have been several instances in my career where I've been informed by a pilot that he was refusing to accept Visual Separation, and I've had to move on to Plan B. These were generally not a problem, as long as had not painted myself into a corner.
Personally, I believe issuing the Visual Separation before takeoff clearance is preferable -- at least this would give the crew the opportunity to say "unable" and allow ATC to switch to Plan B before the aircraft gets airborne.
MEM_ATC
Yeah, sounds like heavy just needed to respond to the Local's question by simply saying, "Yes, but we're unable."
It's the first refusal of this type that I've ever heard.
Call your colleagues in LAS about answers to your 4 questions, as visual separation is common practice there. They clear guys for takeoff while the preceeding departure is still on his takeoff roll.
I think flight crews are very willing to help his friendly ATCer get out of a potential bind. Just listen to the responses you get when you query a flight about his speed or climb/descent rates.
"...Mach .79, whaddya need?"
"2000 fpm, whaddya need?"
They don't seem to realize that you're asking out of curiosity and not necessarily because you "need' anything (apologies for the slight thread creep.).
It's the first refusal of this type that I've ever heard.
Call your colleagues in LAS about answers to your 4 questions, as visual separation is common practice there. They clear guys for takeoff while the preceeding departure is still on his takeoff roll.
I think flight crews are very willing to help his friendly ATCer get out of a potential bind. Just listen to the responses you get when you query a flight about his speed or climb/descent rates.
"...Mach .79, whaddya need?"
"2000 fpm, whaddya need?"
They don't seem to realize that you're asking out of curiosity and not necessarily because you "need' anything (apologies for the slight thread creep.).
11-17-2008, 06:58 AM
#29
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Position: Austin Tower
Posts: 175
Tony,
This has always been my impression -- that pilots were supposed to fly the airplane, and controllers were supposed to separate the aircraft. The longer I watch things change within the FAA, it seems as if these roles are getting mixed together.
There have been previous discussions on this forum about Visual Separation with regards to Visual Approaches, and many of the comments were the same -- you guys want to fly the aircraft, and you want ATC to separate you from any surrounding aircraft.
Well... I wonder too! :-)
Take care,
MEM_ATC
During takeoff roll, I've got more important things to watch than an airplane that I'll probably be overtaking. Especially with the newer takeoff profiles we're using (early acceleration), I would be disinclined to accept responsibility for spacing unless the conditions were optimal.
There have been previous discussions on this forum about Visual Separation with regards to Visual Approaches, and many of the comments were the same -- you guys want to fly the aircraft, and you want ATC to separate you from any surrounding aircraft.
I wonder who could have been operating 727s and DC-10s. 
Take care,
MEM_ATC
11-17-2008, 07:02 AM
#30
...Whatever It Is!
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Posts: 4,680
Yeah, like golf...trees are 90% air. Just go for it.
Seriously, though...Without the visual/request option in VMC. I believe ATC would be required to radar separate us, as if we didn't have a window to look through, or like the WX was at mins. But, it is a request. And, if Tony isn't comfortable with it, that's his call. The rest of us can just sit there and whine a few more minutes in the Conga line.
Seriously, though...Without the visual/request option in VMC. I believe ATC would be required to radar separate us, as if we didn't have a window to look through, or like the WX was at mins. But, it is a request. And, if Tony isn't comfortable with it, that's his call. The rest of us can just sit there and whine a few more minutes in the Conga line.
I agree with the spirit of the request to maintain visual seperation, but I support the Capt's right to refuse. This particular Capt just scores low in the Style Category.
