Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The problem is that many many times TRACON & JFK tower are ignoring wind conditions for the sake of "operational efficiency" We have also documented many cases in which pilots are questioning runway selections due to wind conditions. In fact recently a pilot was hear arguing with ATC regarding landing at JFK 22L despite adverse wind conditions. The pilot remarked " I'd like to land into the wind for once"
I be interested in reading what you consider is a fair percentage of arrival air traffic that one set of communities should be forced to accept........ considering that there are 8 different landing options at JFK.
The noise abatement procedure at JFK is (or used to be) that they would try to rotate the runways in use every 8 hours, IF weather and operational conditions permit. In other words if they are running delays (or on the verge of running delays), the winds are strong, visibility is low, ice/snow is on the runways, runways or major taxiways are closed, approach aids are out of service, thunderstorms in the area, etc. they will probably NOT rotate the runways.
So can anyone answer when we're going to get planes that take off/land vertically rather than thru flight paths/long takeoffs? That right there would solve this problem.
This would not only solve the noise issues. If these aircraft could operate from heliports from the downtown areas of major cities and even just be used for short haul flights (e.g. in the Northeast Corridor) it would not only benefit a lot of travelers but also free up a lot of runway capacity (and thus reduce delays, fuel usage, and pollution). The airports would be reserved for long haul flights (where tilt rotors would not be practical).
i see from watchin live airport for LGA that they are rotating the flight patterns a bit more than they used to.
I seem to get the planes but if they are flying to a different runway they fly further away from my home.
it seems when it it runway 4, that they fly directly over brooklyn in a straight line to LGA, thats when it is a hell.
other than that, i am noticing the rotation more and more, and that makes me feel better.
i still think the planes are flying to low, and i dont care what something mandates about the angles.
point is, they were not 3000 feet 10 years ago, yet they managed on landings.
I you live near the final approach course for runway 4 at LGA and south of the LIE, then you will encounter more than 25% of the LGA arrivals (LGA has 4 runways: 4, 22, 13, and 31). The reason is that they commonly use the "Expressway Visual" for runway 31, which requires aircraft to basically follow the runway 4 approach path until they get to a point just south of the LIE, and then they turn right and follow the LIE for a modified downwind to runway 31. The reason that they try not to land runway 31 with a long straight-in final (Localizer 31 Approach) is that this approach takes away a lot of airspace from JFK, and thus limits what JFK can do with its traffic. If the clouds and/or visibility are too low to run the Expressway Visual and the winds are strong out of the northwest, then they have no choice but to run the Localizer 31 Approach. Finally, the runway 4 arrivals at LGA will generally be lower over Brooklyn than the Expressway Visual arrivals (the runway 4 arrivals will cross a point just south of the LIE at about 1400' and the Expressway Visual 31 arrivals will cross the same point at or above 2500').
Pito_Chueco, Question. Why does NY TRACON use uncharted visuals into JFK 22L. When they're using the VOR/DME approach or the ISL approach, about 15 or so miles out they're clearing the pilots for visual approach. This puts aircraft over area's that never had aircraft before...usually the areas between the ILS & VOR into 22L . Why does ATC depend on these uncharted visuals so much? Also when using these visuals why can't ATC keep the pilots at the same altitude as required with the chartered approach that they were originally on?
Pito_Chueco, Question. Why does NY TRACON use uncharted visuals into JFK 22L. When they're using the VOR/DME approach or the ISL approach, about 15 or so miles out they're clearing the pilots for visual approach. This puts aircraft over area's that never had aircraft before...usually the areas between the ILS & VOR into 22L . Why does ATC depend on these uncharted visuals so much? Also when using these visuals why can't ATC keep the pilots at the same altitude as required with the chartered approach that they were originally on?
Approach control can normally run more traffic by using "uncharted" visual approaches. When using an instrument approach there are minimum requirements (aircraft have to intercept the final at least "X" miles out and there are longitudinal separation minimums that vary with the type of aircraft (e.g. more separation is required behind heavy jets (jumbo jets)). When the weather permits using visual approaches, the approach controller can "crank" aircraft in closer to the airport and run less than the required minimum longitudinal separation (if the pilot reports the preceding aircraft in sight). This is especially crucial in the beginning of an arrival rush. For example, the controller will not have to take an arrival from the south all of the way to north of abeam Belmont Racetrack before turning it back towards the airport (on base leg) if it can be cleared for a visual approach to runway 22L. The approach controller is expected to run the minimum legal separation when it is busy, otherwise it will be a domino effect and delays will back up through the system. If the approach controller can "cheat" by using visuals it will help to keep him/her ahead of the situation and help the aircraft to save time and fuel (via more direct routing). This is all akin to what happens on a busy highway. If there is a bunch of cars and they are trapped behind vehicles that are blocking all of the lanes and traveling at the speed limit (or below), then eventually you will probably have a traffic jam. On the other hand if the lead cars are keeping their speed up and not blocking the passing lanes, then it is more likely that traffic will keep moving.
I also want to point out that JFK uses the VOR/DME approach to 22L (instead of the ILS) so that LGA will not lose some airspace and they can run more traffic (depending on the runway configuration). This is similar to the situation that I mentioned in the previous post about why LGA uses the Expressway Visual to 31. The major airports in the NYC metro area are very close together and there is very little airspace. So when one airport changes a runway or even an approach, it creates a domino effect and often forces the neighboring airport(s) to change runways and/or approaches. Some published approaches are very rarely used (e.g. JFK ILS 13L) for this reason. And this domino effect is also why controllers at the towers cannot unilaterally determine which runways and approaches to use without first coordinating with NY Approach Control (in Westbury), since they are responsible for the entire metro area and they make the final decision.
This would not only solve the noise issues. If these aircraft could operate from heliports from the downtown areas of major cities and even just be used for short haul flights (e.g. in the Northeast Corridor) it would not only benefit a lot of travelers but also free up a lot of runway capacity (and thus reduce delays, fuel usage, and pollution). The airports would be reserved for long haul flights (where tilt rotors would not be practical).
What about blimps! Zeppelin's might be coming back with a bang!
Approach control can normally run more traffic by using "uncharted" visual approaches. When using an instrument approach there are minimum requirements (aircraft have to intercept the final at least "X" miles out and there are longitudinal separation minimums that vary with the type of aircraft (e.g. more separation is required behind heavy jets (jumbo jets)). When the weather permits using visual approaches, the approach controller can "crank" aircraft in closer to the airport and run less than the required minimum longitudinal separation (if the pilot reports the preceding aircraft in sight). This is especially crucial in the beginning of an arrival rush. For example, the controller will not have to take an arrival from the south all of the way to north of abeam Belmont Racetrack before turning it back towards the airport (on base leg) if it can be cleared for a visual approach to runway 22L. The approach controller is expected to run the minimum legal separation when it is busy, otherwise it will be a domino effect and delays will back up through the system. If the approach controller can "cheat" by using visuals it will help to keep him/her ahead of the situation and help the aircraft to save time and fuel (via more direct routing). This is all akin to what happens on a busy highway. If there is a bunch of cars and they are trapped behind vehicles that are blocking all of the lanes and traveling at the speed limit (or below), then eventually you will probably have a traffic jam. On the other hand if the lead cars are keeping their speed up and not blocking the passing lanes, then it is more likely that traffic will keep moving.
I also want to point out that JFK uses the VOR/DME approach to 22L (instead of the ILS) so that LGA will not lose some airspace and they can run more traffic (depending on the runway configuration). This is similar to the situation that I mentioned in the previous post about why LGA uses the Expressway Visual to 31. The major airports in the NYC metro area are very close together and there is very little airspace. So when one airport changes a runway or even an approach, it creates a domino effect and often forces the neighboring airport(s) to change runways and/or approaches. Some published approaches are very rarely used (e.g. JFK ILS 13L) for this reason. And this domino effect is also why controllers at the towers cannot unilaterally determine which runways and approaches to use without first coordinating with NY Approach Control (in Westbury), since they are responsible for the entire metro area and they make the final decision.
Great information, but I still don't understand why they can't maintain the same altitude as the chartered approach. For example on the VOR into 22L at "CAPIT" aircraft are supposed to be at 2500' or higher but on the visual which is about 1/2 mile or so north of CAPIT ATC has them at 1800'. That 700' produces significantly more noise.
Also during non peak arrival periods ATC still uses visuals rather then the charted procedure. How come?
In addition the FAA made a recent change at LGA by using the TNNIS climb for 13 departures. This allows them to use the Belmont airspace and now they've been using 22L significantly more. They're using the 22L ILS but again going to a visual and putting the aircraft about 1 mile south of the actual ILS path near Albertson. How come?
Great information, but I still don't understand why they can't maintain the same altitude as the chartered approach. For example on the VOR into 22L at "CAPIT" aircraft are supposed to be at 2500' or higher but on the visual which is about 1/2 mile or so north of CAPIT ATC has them at 1800'. That 700' produces significantly more noise.
Also during non peak arrival periods ATC still uses visuals rather then the charted procedure. How come?
In addition the FAA made a recent change at LGA by using the TNNIS climb for 13 departures. This allows them to use the Belmont airspace and now they've been using 22L significantly more. They're using the 22L ILS but again going to a visual and putting the aircraft about 1 mile south of the actual ILS path near Albertson. How come?
I have been retired for a few years and I am not up to date on the latest procedures like the TNNIS Climb. Also I never worked at NY Approach Control, but I will try to answer your questions with an "educated guess."
The published minimum crossing altitude at CAPIT is 2500'. If an aircraft is inbound from the ENE (via the Deer Park VOR) and outside of CAPIT and the controller is able to clear the aircraft for the VOR/DME 22L Approach, the controller will say "aircraft123 is "X" miles from CAPIT, maintain 2500' until established, cleared VOR/DME 22L Approach." If the controller was clearing the aircraft for the approach with reference to RUSHY then the altitude restriction would be 1400', etc. These minimum published altitudes are designed to protect the aircraft from obstacles and/or underlying airspace (e.g. FRG Airport in the vicinity of Deer Park VOR). Fwiw the same controller normally works both the JFK VOR/DME 22L arrivals and the FRG IFR traffic, so they can just coordinate with themselves. When using uncharted visual approaches, the normal procedure is to descend the aircraft to the minimum vectoring altitude (e.g. 1800'). This allows the aircraft to make the shortest approach possible, and if there are clouds slightly above the MVA (minimum vectoring altitude) it will allow the pilot to see the airport and/or preceding traffic (at least one of these requirements must be met for an aircraft to be cleared for an uncharted visual) as soon as possible, and then the controller can clear him for the approach and go on to other priorities. It is common for ATC to advertise "ILS" or whatever else instrument approach and end up running visuals. In most cases it is mutually beneficial to both the pilots and controllers to run visuals (as I tried to explain in the previous post).
The JFK VOR/DME 22L Approach is predicated on JFK VOR being operational. When the JFK VOR is out of service (and the Canarsie VOR is in service) and the weather conditions permit, then the Belmont Visual can be used as an alternative. Arrivals from the ENE (e.g. over Calverton) basically follow the flight path of the VOR/DME and Belmont approaches anyway, so they would not necessarily save a lot of miles by being cleared for an uncharted visual. However, the controller will still clear these aircraft for visuals if it means reducing the longitudinal separation that would be required (or some other operational benefit). On the other hand, arrivals from the south (e.g. CAMRN) greatly benefit from uncharted visuals to runway 22L, because they can save a lot of flying miles (plus time, fuel, and money).
With all of the above being said, there are cases when it is more advantageous for the controller to just put the aircraft on the published approaches. If the weather is marginal the controller will not have to worry about the pilot getting the airport (or preceding traffic) in sight (this works best when the traffic is not so heavy and the controller has to run visuals just to survive). If the controller thinks that the pilot is not familiar with the local area and will struggle to get the airport in sight, it is usually better to put them on the published approach. JFK Airport is somewhat unique in that a large percentage of the pilots do not speak English as a first language and/or they are not necessarily familiar with the area (they may only fly to JFK once every several months or so). With these pilots it is usually better to just clear them for the published approaches. There are things that you can do with pilots that are based locally and are familiar with the system (e.g. Jetblue, American, Delta, etc.) that you don't dare try to do with some of the foreigners. This doesn't mean that the foreigners don't know how to fly, it just means that they can't be expected to be as familiar with the local nuances of the operation. The same situation applies all over the world.
As far as the Belmont airspace is concerned, LGA is unable to use the Whitestone Climbs off of 13 when JFK is using the ILS 22L, and this is why JFK will often use the VOR/DME 22L (or visuals) down to the weather minimums before switching to the ILS 22L (again I have been gone for a while, and I don't know if the Whitestone Climbs even still exist. It may be the new TNNIS Climb).
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
