PAR approaches?

[insanebikerboy]

I was told by some pretty reliable folks that we simply couldn't spare the weight.

Which is pretty unbelievable in my opinion. Weight and balance is calculated in the F & H by using 200 pounds per aircrewman, is it similar in the R? I ask that because there's slop built in with those weights. I've flown with crews where we are all over the 200 assumption, so if it's similar in the R then for them to say that 20-ish pounds is too much is really mind-boggling to me.

 

[FLYTPAY]

not approving GPS for primary nav. I know combat flying isn't the same as what the airline guys do, but to get from Point A to Point B INCONUS, well . . .

Imagine how nice life would be with a Garmin GNS-430 or 530! The NASA S-3B's have them!

http://www.nasa.gov/centers/glenn/images/content/209011main_S-3%20arrival_hi_res.jpg

 

[HuggyU2]

Plug the GPS coordinates in for the Touchdown zone,.... Make sure you have an operating RADALT!

We do this at our Detachments, as a backup. But, RADALT??.... what's that????? Oh, that's something they put on jets that weren't designed 53 years ago!

 

[squeeze]

In 10 years or so, the FAA is going to start decommissioning VORTACs and the DoN is gonna look mighty stupid with our PARs, TACANs, and not approving GPS for primary nav. I know combat flying isn't the same as what the airline guys do, but to get from Point A to Point B INCONUS, well . . .

No kidding. The rumor in the Harrier community is that they are working to get our GPS FAA-certified. The only issue with that is that since it is a tactical system, it doesn't have any real stored point database that is easily accessible should they steer you to a specific fix you weren't planning on. A minor point, but something that could be annoying.

As far as the approach piece goes, at least none of y'all know the thrill of having the All-Weather Landing System (AWLS) that we have in the Harrier. What a POS. It's designed as a field-expedient approach system. They can setup a box beside a road and it will give you a glideslop and DME based off some info you enter into the system. It is also supposed to work behind the boat, but I haven't had any luck with it. Oh, and it's only good to 400-1. With only a (legal) TACAN and PAR plan, flying around weather sucks and severely limits divert options. The fact that we didn't shitcan the AWLS and replace it with an ILS years ago has to be one of my major gripes with our otherwise awesome avi suite. The AF sure got that one right.

 

[S.O.B.]

Which is pretty unbelievable in my opinion. Weight and balance is calculated in the F & H by using 200 pounds per aircrewman, is it similar in the R? I ask that because there's slop built in with those weights. I've flown with crews where we are all over the 200 assumption, so if it's similar in the R then for them to say that 20-ish pounds is too much is really mind-boggling to me.

I agree; I didn’t say it wasn’t retarded. I know of a guy who landed in a field because of the Romeo's navigational shortcomings.

The weight thing really doesn't make sense but how else can you explain the absence of an ILS in a aircraft manufactured in 2007?

 

[FLYTPAY]

The weight thing really doesn't make sense but how else can you explain the absence of an ILS in a aircraft manufactured in 2007?

They spent the money on some G-d out rims and sweet leather seats.......real answer....someone dropped the ball with a mission needs statement years ago.

 

[SemperGumbi]

The weight thing really doesn't make sense but how else can you explain the absence of an ILS in a aircraft manufactured in 2007?

In a military procurement package? I can think of about 100 reasons off the top of my head.

 

[S.O.B.]

They spent the money on some G-d out rims and sweet leather seats.......real answer....someone dropped the ball with a mission needs statement years ago.

True; but it's not like things don't get changed during DT and IT. I'm sure the first JO to notice it was missing questioned it.

 

[SDNalgene]

It's designed as a field-expedient approach system. They can setup a box beside a road and it will give you a glideslop and DME based off some info you enter into the system.

So what do you do if/when you go missed? Are you just hoping the guys on the ground looked in both directions to make sure you wouldn't hit anything coming or going when they picked where to set up the box?

 

[a_m]

As far as the approach piece goes, at least none of y'all know the thrill of having the All-Weather Landing System (AWLS) that we have in the Harrier. What a POS. It's designed as a field-expedient approach system. They can setup a box beside a road and it will give you a glideslop and DME based off some info you enter into the system. It is also supposed to work behind the boat, but I haven't had any luck with it. Oh, and it's only good to 400-1.

At that point, can you try to do a self-contained approach?

 

[squeeze]

So what do you do if/when you go missed? Are you just hoping the guys on the ground looked in both directions to make sure you wouldn't hit anything coming or going when they picked where to set up the box?

I think it was originally designed so when the Soviet hordes pushed through the Fulda Gap after destroying our airfields, we could recover with some modicum of precision to austere landing sights. Common sense would dictate not putting it right in front of a mountain.

As far as reality, well... I've never actually used the thing in the jet aside from trying it at the boat (with no success). Yuma doesn't even have an AWLS installed that I'm aware of, and the PRCP got rid of theirs a while ago. I've shot a grand total of 1 or 2 AWLS approaches ever... in the sim in the RAG when it was an intro item.

HarrierDude may be able to speak to it a bit more. 1) He's old, so he may have used it when it came out and 2) He may actually have a system or two in his current position.

 

[SDNalgene]

I apologize if you read my post as too harsh.

Eh, no worries man, it wasn't too harsh, just the typical Joboy overly salty comment. Kinda like this one.

If they fuck up, they go home, feel bad and tuck their kids in. We die.

You are right, but just a little over the top.

I am positive I have fucked up and pissed off ATC on MORE than one occasion and even more than that, my IP has saved me from being a smoking hole countless times, as with any other student pilot.

Me too.

I don't mean to sound "salty" by ANY means.

I know you don't mean to; you just can't help yourself. It's okay.

As for the "money" controller who put you out on all your headings properly, did he select jets?

No, he didn't select jets, but he does control them, which is more than I can say for myself, just ask my fam onwing....

 

[SkywardET]

Thank you everyone for your feedback! I will soon be a PAR technician and I was just hoping to glean some insight from the other side of the radar antennae.

 

[Harrier Dude]

HarrierDude may be able to speak to it a bit more. 1) He's old, so he may have used it when it came out and 2) He may actually have a system or two in his current position.

1) Fuck you. I have tried to use it in the fleet, but it didn't work then either. In this case I highly suspect operator error.

2) As luck would have it, I am currently looking into the feasibility of providing these highly valuable services to 513 next month. I asked our EAF guys where our AWLS boxes were and who runs them and got the LCpl salute. No impact, no idea. Investigation continues.

I'm still not sure why they didn't work on the boat. The boat swears that their end is 4.0, which I am skeptical about at best. It's not like the boat hasn't lied to me before.

Then again, we had a lot of AWLS 2 BIT codes. Our Avi chief, who used to teach the AWLS course at the schoolhouse and knows everything, said that H2.0 might not support it. Also, even if it did, there are no parts to fix the AWLS recievers in the jets. The system just basically died from neglect.

I know it works in the sim with H2.0/4.0. Roid swears he was just using it last cruise on the boat in his jets, so they may not have a software problem after all. We shall see.

I say take out the AWLS box and replace it with a VHF ILS. A minor software upgrade could convert the AWLS signal from the MUX bus to ILS and utilize the same display and functions.

It should be a quick, cheap, easy, and highly effective fix.

Which is why it'll never happen. Ever. Believe it.

 

[bert]

I agree; I didn’t say it wasn’t retarded. I know of a guy who landed in a field because of the Romeo's navigational shortcomings.

The weight thing really doesn't make sense but how else can you explain the absence of an ILS in a aircraft manufactured in 2007?

To the first part - I would have to strongly suspect operator error. I will be the first to say the common cockpit could and should be a hell of a lot better, but with 2 EGI's displaying outputs on 3 stations a Romeo crew should never not know where they are barring a serious compound electrical system malfunction or some sort of crew-based error.

To the second, $$ was the reason, not weight (though there would also be integration issues with the box and antenna).