Sign in to follow this  
Guest Nathan Palmer

"Taxi into position and hold" instruction

Recommended Posts

Hi all,I wonder if there is something wrong with my FS2004. If there is departing traffic before me, I'm told to taxi into position and hold, but NOT after landing traffic as well, as would be logical. Can somebody check how this works in their versions? The reason is that I'm using an MS-issued press gold version, and was wondering if the box-version works this way too, as I have bought the box-version too and will be installing it instead if it has been changed to work the way I described, although I strongly doubt it.Greetings,Ilari

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Mmmmm...I'm no expert nor do I understand your question entirely. Do you mean after you land or you mean while other planes are landing?In my FS2004 if there is someone on the runway ready to take off they tell me to hold short of the runway. Once that plane begins to make its way down the runway for take off I'm told to get into position and hold short.After the plane makes its turn heading out of the runway I'm giving clearance.If there is traffic landing on the runway, I'm told to hold short of the runway. I'm not given any clearance to enter the runway until all aircraft on the final pattern leg have landed. Once the last one has landing I'm told to get in position and hold short.After the last airplane has cleared the runway, I'm given permission to take off.I haven't had a problem with ground traffic yet...well except once which was my fault :D, I was taxing off the runway and the controller told me to hold short for incoming traffic, I didn't hear him and stopped too late.After, I found myself nose to nose with another airplane. We didn't crash, but we were stuck there me in the 747 and him in the 727. ATC never gave any of us any clearance for anything. Neither of us could turn, and these planes can't go back obviously. So I just did a "pushback" from the taxi way and turned the next available taxi way and then they cleared me.Good thing it wasn't for real :D I wouldn't get off my the airplane to meet the FAA officials :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it works right for the sim. Heres my reasoning as to saying so...THeres no hand off between APP and TWR and TWR doesnt know how to instruct a longer leg on arrivals like Extend downwind etc. So since AI takes forever to clear and IFR handoff arrivals are always cleared to land right after they contact TWR. So if you got a position an hold after an AI landing and it took forever to clear meanwhile an IFR AI gets handed off inside the OM and is cleared to land this could be a problem.Maybe next version we will get some more instructions like:Cleared for take off no delay.Expect one (or more) departures prior to landingetcSo ATC does have some smarts in preventing conjestion by knowing that AI takes forever to clear the active.NP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing wrong with your FS9.ATC knows exactly what is happening with aircraft taking off hence the 'taxi to position and hold' instruction.When landing ATC clears to land and the next instruction is to contact ground after clearing the runway - therefore there is a time when ATC does not know where the AI is (well it does - but only in the coding).Of course the instruction for you could be 'taxi into position and hold following aircraft on approach' bit it doesn't work that way - now.Notice AI doesn't taxi to position behind landing aircraft either. maybe the future - maybe Radar Contact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Andy,Just some comments on your message:>When landing ATC clears to land and the next instruction is to>contact ground after clearing the runway - therefore there is>a time when ATC does not know where the AI is (well it does ->but only in the coding).The tower controller instructs the landing aircraft to exit the runway and either gives a specific turn instruction (left next taxiway) or at pilot's discression (when able turn left). The landing aircraft is still communicating with the tower controller who also has other aircraft awaiting landing or takeoff clearance. Only after the aircraft is clear of the runway is he/she instructed to contact ground/>Of course the instruction for you could be 'taxi into position>and hold following aircraft on approach' bit it doesn't work>that way - now.ATC will NEVER clear an aircraft to taxi into position and hold following arriving aircraft. Only after the arrival has crossed the threshold will a tower controller clear an aircraft into position and hold. If not, the departing plane might creep onto the runway early "thinking" he was clear of the arrival.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi again,Nice to know it's supposed to be that way in this version -- that's what I'd thought all along. The ATC and AI are definitely still in need of significant improvement. Must say though, it's way better now than it was in good ol' FS2002. Can't wait for FS2006 or whatever it's going to be called. There's something you need to know.. The Microsoft FS team takes their job with unparalleled pride, enthusiasm and seriousness -- this I know from personal experience beta testing FS2004. That's why I don't understand why some just keep whining. It's an evolution -- not necessarily a revolution every time (although some might say that when ATC/AI were first introduced -- it transforms FS in my opinion)Ilari

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a thought, if I were cleared into position after landing traffic and there was an arrival approaching the rwy, couldn't it just be told to go around if it got too close?Ilari

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi guys,"ATC will NEVER clear an aircraft to taxi into position and hold following arriving aircraft. Only after the arrival has crossed the threshold will a tower controller clear an aircraft into position and hold. If not, the departing plane might creep onto the runway early "thinking" he was clear of the arrival."From my personal experience I have to disagree here. Standard phraseology in this case is to repeat the word "behind", as in:PH-SVM, behind the 737 on final line up behind.However, my RW flying is limited to Europe, so it may be different in the US?Leo Bakker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think they'll do that in the US. In my experience they always wait for landing traffic to pass my intersection before issuing a position & hold clearance, and they have never issued such a clearance after landing traffic is on final. I've never heard them issue a clearance to anybody else to "position & hold after traffic on final". That's a very risky thing to do. Runway incursions are bad enough as it stands.They're happy to let me sit on the pad for 20 minutes waiting for all the landing traffic rather than risk slipping me in between landings without plenty of leeway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've never heard ATC instruct a plane to "position and hold afer ac on final or behind ac on final. Only after an ac has landed will the next plane in line for take off be asked to position and hold. Upon entering a pattern they will say cleared to land #4 behind the Cessna on long downwind or somehing like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well you guys are obviouslyin the USA! Here in Europe it is common practice on single runway ops for a departing aircraft to be given the instruction."Speedbird xxx, after the landing United 777, taxi into position and hold runway xx".Also, unlike the USA regulations, tower will NEVER clear a following aircraft to land until the preceding aircraft had cleared the runway.When the following aircraft calls the tower on finals if there is one ahead, he will be given the instruction "Speedbird xxx roger, continue approach, number 2" If he's very close behind he may not receive landing clearance until quite late in which case the hill be told to expect a late landing clearance.It has always baffled me how in the USA you can be cleared to land when there is landing traffic ahead of you. Different strokes I guess.RegardsTimCPL/EHAMhttp://www.spottedantelope.com/bwomack/ima...aam-sim_sig.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Tim,>It has always baffled me how in the USA you can be cleared to>land when there is landing traffic ahead of you. Shouldn't be baffling at all - how else would I be able to let two landing aircraft occupy the runway simultaneously. Depending on the aircraft type, the runway separation requirement is as little as 3000'- it would be tough to use that rule without issuing multiple landing clearances. I'm baffled that European controllers would be willing to put their tickets on the line by issuing a subjective "position and hold" clearance to pilots that may not necessarily know the difference between a Cessna and a Cherokee. Anyhow, you're right - there are significant procedural differences between the USA and Europe.Regards,Marc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Marc>Shouldn't be baffling at all - how else would I be able to let>two landing aircraft occupy the runway simultaneously.>Depending on the aircraft type, the runway separation>requirement is as little as 3000'- it would be tough to use>that rule without issuing multiple landing clearances. I'm>baffled that European controllers would be willing to put>their tickets on the line by issuing a subjective "position>and hold" clearance to pilots that may not necessarily know>the difference between a Cessna and a Cherokee. Anyhow, you're>right - there are significant procedural differences between>the USA and Europe.I guess its a terminology thing. In Europe the argument is you cannot be "cleared" to land unless the runway really is clear. And as far as pilots not knowing the difference between aircraft types, that is really not an issue, for a start unlike the US, you will not find many cases of small aircraft sharing runways with large jets at major airports. They simply couldn't afford the landing fees. There are exceptions to the rule of course, notably my home base Schiphol, where small aircraft have their own dedicated runway (22/04) that runs conveniently close to the GA apron. In the case of smaller aircraft landing on a single runway, the atc instruction would be ammended to "after the landing traffic on short finals has passed, line up and wait behind runway xx" Yes indeed, many differences between the two countries. Wasn't it Winston Churchill who said about the US and England, "Two countries separated by a common language"!RegardsTimhttp://www.spottedantelope.com/bwomack/ima...aam-sim_sig.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally, from recent experience observing a Finnair flight into KJFK, I think the U.S system works somewhat better in this regard by avoiding confusions that just might lead to runway incursions. The U.S controllers also seem to be a bit more observant as to proper phraseology. Land-and-hold-short-operations, as Marc described, are just one example of what has to be done to accommodate their traffic volumes -- although I must say it felt strange to be cleared to land following a heavy B767 and -- if memory serves me right -- we touched down while they were still on the rwy!Ilari

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Ilari>> although I must say it felt strange to be>cleared to land following a heavy B767 and -- if memory serves>me right -- we touched down while they were still on the rwy!>>Yes thats my point, Obviously in the US "clear to land" doesnt mean the runway is clear it means you are clear to land providing the aircraft ahead doesn't have a problem. I have always found that a bit ambigious I'm afraid. If I am cleared to land or take off I want to be absolutely sure that the runway is mine. I don't want any confusions such as happened many years ago in thick fog at Tenerife.Just my thoughts on the matter. Doesn't make me right and the US process wrong. Just a difference of opinion. It soesn't stop me flying in the USA I am just much more aware of whats going on and it sure keeps me on my toes.BestTimhttp://www.spottedantelope.com/bwomack/ima...aam-sim_sig.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A KLM B747 collided with a Pan American Boeing 747 on the runway while attempting to takeoff in thick fog. The KLM aircraft was instructed to back-taxi on runway 30, turn at the end, and wait for departure. The Pan American crew was instructed to follow KLM, but turn left off the runway on a taxiway before reaching the end of the runway. As the KLM aircraft turned to depart on runway 12, the Captain immediately powered up for takeoff. The First Officer said that they didn't have ATC clearance yet. The Captain, in his haste responded with 'I know that, you call for it.' As the First Officer was copying the clearance, which told the crew what route to fly, but did not give permission to take off, the Captain again initiated takeoff. The Pan Am 747 was still inching its way through the thick fog looking for their assigned runway turnoff, saw the shaking lights of the KLM aircraft at near takeoff speed through the fog, and applied full power in an attempt to clear the runway. The KLM 747 struck the Pan American plane just behind the cockpit just after rotation. 574 people died. Many from the Pan Am aircraft survived.Tragic.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, in theory I suppose... but if you proceeded to take off and he is flying his go-around procedure, you're going to potentially end up VERY close to one another.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Truly tragic.. Lesson #1: Obey ATC!Yes, in an ideal world. In this instance there was a language difficulty. The controller was Spanish, the pilots, Dutch and American. Added to that it was very foggy and due to a bomb scare at Las Palmas a lot of aircraft were diverted to Tenerife. Aircraft were parked all over the place, the KLM crew were in a hurry because they were running out of flight hours.You can read the CVR transcript of the accident here http://www.planecrashinfo.com/cvr770327.htmI think it's still the worst accident for loss of life in aviation history.Timhttp://www.spottedantelope.com/bwomack/ima...aam-sim_sig.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the US this is called "Anticipating Separation". It's used all the time to assure the efficient flow of traffic.From FAA Order 7110.65, Air Trafic Control:3-10-6. ANTICIPATING SEPARATION Landing clearance to succeeding aircraft in a landing sequence need not be withheld if you observe the positions of the aircraft and determine that prescribed runway separation will exist when the aircraft cross the landing threshold. Issue traffic information to the succeeding aircraft if not previously reported and appropriate traffic holding in position or departing prior to their arrival. EXAMPLE-"American Two Forty-Five cleared to land, number two following United Boeing Seven-Thirty-Seven two mile final, traffic will depart prior to your arrival.""American Two Forty-Five cleared to land, number two following United Boeing Seven-Thirty-Seven two mile final, traffic will be an MD 88 holding in position.""American Two Forty-Five cleared to land, following United Boeing Seven-Thirty-Seven two mile final, traffic will depart prior to your arrival." Mike Bromley

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just curious, but why are you not using a box version of FS9? How does one get a press gold version? You must work for reviewer or something. I would think the gold version would be the same as the box.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was a beta tester for the game by means of the MS press program and thus got the press gold copy for free (free-lance FS journalist). Just was curious to know if thhe inconsistensy I described had been fixed in the final boxed version, as sometimes not even the press-issued gold code and the box-version are not identical

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi again guys,Just wanted to clarify my earlier post... mainly because many real-world pilots mistakenly believe that they can only land on a vacant runway. It's NOT true! In the U.S., it is entirely possible to have more than one aircraft rolling down the SAME runway at the SAME time. For example, the runway at my airport is 9001' feet long. The landing runway separation requirement for a small single-engine airplane is 3000'. Therefore, it would be legal to have 3 landing Cessna 172s occupying that runway at the same time (as long as they're separated by 3000'). I guess, theoretically, it would be possible to have 4... but NOT very likely. In most cases, jets do require a clear runway to land - but there are even exceptions to this rule. Here in KMGM, we often have up to 4 landing jets rolling down the runway at the same time - can anyone guess on how we pull that off?See Ya,Marc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this