Simultaneous Independent & Dependent Parallel ILS Approaches

Aidan Stevens

  • VATSIM Staff
  • 52
    • View Profile
Simultaneous Independent & Dependent Parallel ILS Approaches
« on: December 16, 2018, 09:59:29 PM »
Just a discussion a few of us in Vancouver were having this evening while looking over separation requirements for parallel ILS approaches, do you consider any simultaneous ILS approaches as dependent or independent on VATSIM? For example, at CYVR, we meet all requirements for simultaneous independent ILS approaches, except for the fact that we never have an NTZ Monitor Controller, nor do we have the NTZ depicted on our scopes.

The majority of us came to the conclusion that this would require us to treat all simultaneous ILS approaches as dependent, however, I'm curious to hear others opinions on this subject :)

Travis Chan

  • VATCAN Staff
  • 144
    • View Profile
Re: Simultaneous Independent & Dependent Parallel ILS Approaches
« Reply #1 on: December 17, 2018, 08:59:22 AM »
In Toronto we run SIPIA with the responsibility of monitoring the NTZ falling on the arrival controller. We can only run SIPIA on the 23/24R and 05/06L configurations as the other runways don’t provide the proper separation requirements to run SIPIA.

Our sector files do have the NTZ shown so we can identify when an aircraft has violated that airspace.

Hope that helps!
Travis Chan (1402756)
Deputy Division Director
travis.chan@vatcan.ca


Richie Queally

  • CZVR Staff
  • 114
    • View Profile
    • Vancouver FIR
Re: Simultaneous Independent & Dependent Parallel ILS Approaches
« Reply #2 on: December 17, 2018, 03:36:43 PM »
Where did you find the coordinates for the NTZ Travis?
Richie Queally
VATéir C1

Owen Kane

  • CZEG Staff
  • 216
    • View Profile
Re: Simultaneous Independent & Dependent Parallel ILS Approaches
« Reply #3 on: December 18, 2018, 06:54:14 AM »
In the CZEG FIR - Calgary uses simultaneous parallel operations. The NTZ is identified on our sector files for runways 17/35 L and R. It is the responsibility of the approach controller to maintain proper separation (1000 Ft Vertical & 3 Miles Lateral) and to ensure the NTZ is not encroached upon.

Exceptions perhaps - the new ICAO RNAV RNP Y (RNP-AR) approaches allows simultaneous parallel approaches without minimum separation until the aircraft is established on final - reference here - http://blog.navcanada.ca/world-first-nav-canada-implements-new-icao-separation-standard-at-yyc/

For those interested here is a nice blurb about Simultaneous Approaches to Parallel Runways - https://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/Simultaneous_Approaches_to_Parallel_Runways




Brad Crockett

  • CZVR Staff
  • 105
    • View Profile
Re: Simultaneous Independent & Dependent Parallel ILS Approaches
« Reply #4 on: December 18, 2018, 11:50:34 PM »
Interesting read. Thanks, Owen!

Rob Nabieszko

  • VATCAN Staff
  • 185
    • View Profile
Re: Simultaneous Independent & Dependent Parallel ILS Approaches
« Reply #5 on: December 19, 2018, 02:33:30 PM »
The dimensions required of the NTZ are located in the MANOPS, Diagram 581.1 B 4.

To summarize, the NTZ starts 1,500 feet from the centreline of each approach, and must be a minimum of 2,000 feet wide. (This implies the minimum separation between the runways must be 5,000 feet.)

You will need to define your own NTZ in your sector file to meet those dimensions (or a close approximation). The NTZ should start at the FAF and continue back along the approach probably about 10 or so miles.

And I tend to agree that, though we don't normally staff the monitor position, given the generally low traffic levels on VATSIM, the normal arrival controllers can monitor aircraft progress with regard to the NTZ.

I imagine the EoR approaches are being treated the same as simultaneous ILS approaches: That is, the 3 mile/1000' separation requirement is waived IF both aircraft are fully established on the approach track. The only difference being that RNP-AR allows curved approaches.

RNP-AR seems to be a revolution happening in slow-motion. The possibilities are amazing. Pity there is not a better cost-benefit for the airlines. Until the majority of airlines adopt RNP-AR, most of the approaches will languish, essentially unused because everyone shoots for the lowest common denominator: ye trusty olde ILS.

Rob
Rob Nabieszko | VATCAN3
Director of Training, VATCAN
rnczyzcontrol@gmail.com