Comm Failure while IMC going into Pearson

[squawk 7600]

This is the scenario:

you are cleared as filed (preferred route) from CYUL to CYYZ and somewhere just east of YSO you experience a total two way comm failure in IMC, and your cell phone is dead. The active runways are 23 or 24R, and prior to the failure, you were told to expect the ILS 23. Aside from squawking 7600, what would you do? Fly the Wasie Two Arrival or any other arrival for that matter, vector yourself onto the localizer for 23 since there is no procedure turn, or go elsewhere since Toronto is very busy and you are scared.

I think Pearson is a tricky airport when it comes to comm failure procedures. Could be very intimidating for any experienced pilot based on the lack of a procedure turn and the amount of traffic that operates in and out of there.

I myself would fly the Wasie Two Arrival until intercepting the Loc for 23 then continue for the straight in ILS. If I chose to do this, would Toronto get in an uproar and start vectoring other traffic all over the place because they have on idea what I am doing?

Any ATC guys care to help with this one?

[Snowgoose]

From what I've heard ATC expects you to use your best judgement. Me, I would fly to my clearance limit, most likely the YYZ VOR and hold until my ETE as per my flight plan and then conduct a full procedure ILS onto 23. I don't think I would fly the arrival.

[. .]

i definately wouldn't hold at the yyz vor. I could see that doing more harm than good. Perhaps a hold as published on one of the transitions into yyz.

How can you make a full procedure ILS where one doesn't exist? I'd dare say you'd be far better off intercepting the localizer for a runway that wouldn't have you fly across the approach path of other runways that would be in use.

[ESCAT]

For anyone curious, this is what I found in the AIM. It offers a little advice, but ultimatley "Pilots are expected to exercise good judgement".

TC AIM - RAC 6.3.2.2 (Page 219)

"Some instrument procedures do not include a procedure turn but include the statement “RADAR OR RNAV REQUIRED” as part of the procedure. The initial approach segment of these instrument procedures is being provided by ATC radar vectors. Without ATC radar vectoring, the instrument procedure may not have a published initial approach segment. Should an aircraft communications failure occur while the aircraft is being vectored on one of these approaches, separately or as part of a STAR, the pilot is expected to comply with the communications failure procedure by selecting the transponder to Mode A/3 Code 7600 immediately. Pilots should always be aware of the traffic situation. For example, ATC may have indicated that your aircraft was second for an approach to Runway 06L; under these circumstances, the flight should be continued along the route that normally would have been expected under radar vectoring. In some cases of communications failure, pilots may need to dead reckon, or DR, a route to the final approach course. It is important to other aircraft and ATC for the aircraft experiencing a communications failure to continue the flight along a route that would permit the aircraft to conduct a straight-in approach and landing without unexpected manœuvring. Pilots are expected to exercise good judgment in these cases. Unexpected manœuvres, such as turns away from the final approach course, may cause traffic disruptions and conflicts."

I would probably fly the arrival, and dead reckon a heading to intcpt the LOC for a straight-in approach, sticking as closely to what I would have expected from ATC, all the time hoping i'm still radar identified.

[que pasa]

Long time lurker, first time poster..

I agree with Snowgoose for the most part on this one. I'd say that as another IFR pilot smashing through the white skies, I'd hope that everyone around me would follow proper procedures (within reason). And by this I mean follow lost comm procedures to the best of your ability.. regardless of what airport you're going to, the busiest one or the one that hasn't seen an aircraft in 2 years. The very fact that ATC will anticpate you to follow proper IFR lost comm procedures could turn much more chaotic if you decide to just all of a sudden head over to YHM thus possibly throwing them for a loop.

But of course there are exceptions, perhaps you get to a point where you are VMC and identify an airport below that you could land at VFR.. things like this.

But for the most part, I'd hope that everyone would follow the guidelines that are in place for lost comm in IMC keeping it safer for all, sure it's gonna cause one hell of a snarl up in YYZ, but massive delays are better in my opinion that an IFR aircraft chosing his own way to go about things and possibly causing an incident or even worse and accident resulting in fatalites.

So what I'm just trying to say is, follow the procedures that are in place for a reason! Go to your clearance limit at cruise altitude, hold until your ETA then shuttle down and set yourself up for the approach.. they WILL be anticipating this! At least that's my understanding.

Q-P?

[PoC]

Q P is correct. As far as someone deciding to go to YHM, for the life of me I can't understand how someone would think it would make it easier for everybody. Now the controller(s) has to sterilize YYZ, YHM and everything in the area until they figure out what in hell you are doing as it seems you have decided not to follow your last clearance. Unless there is some mitigating factor i.e convective activity or whatever and then you can exercise your emergency authority otherwise just make life simple and do what is expected.

Sorry it's late and I am cranky....but like WTF?

[Flying Low]

Without a doubt, if you are in IFR conditions, follow your clearance including the destination airport. This is the ONLY thing ATC can reasonably anticipate you doing.

I would be interested in hearing from the ATC types about the airspace you guys/gals are required to protect for a comm failure aircraft and does it change if the aircraft is still on radar.

If I am still getting an interegation light on my transponder I would not stay at my cruise altitude but, instead, plan my decent to start at a point where I can do a constant decent to landing. This gets me out of the system as quickly as possible. Although this is not according to the book, it was brought up by a DFTE on one of my IFR renewal rides several years ago and makes sense.

Also for the ATC persons...is there enough airspace protected to do this decent if we are not on your radar?

[. ._]

That sounds like a good IFR test question.

[Twizzler]

The first question is "What is my clearance limit?"

I have never had a clearance limit that was not the AIRPORT, (unless I have been told to hold, then you leave the hold fix at the EFC)

"...you are cleared to the Toronto AIRPORT via..."

Second, flying into YYZ, you will never (maybe not never, but I cannot remember actually being "cleared the SIMCOE 2 arrival") be cleared an arrival, why, because it is in your flight plan, and you are EXPECTED to fly the arrival, including the restictions.

Thirdly, move this to Vancouver (or Paris, or London...) where you can expect to be cleared via a specific arrival:
if you are IMC, and unless you have been told to hold (with an EFC), you should conform yourself to the expected arrival and land. ie. follow the STAR to join final, follow the ILS.

ATC will move traffic out of your area either way. At minimum they will have you on primary radar, so they can see you!

Moral...get on the ground asap via the expected route. This will result in the least disruption in traffic flow.

[anyways]

Asked my neighbour once about a similar situation - he's a tower manager. His take on it was that a comm failure in IMC is in fact an emergency, therefore you have the latitude to do what you need to do to complete the flight safely. Of course, this means exercising good judgement (as per the AIM).

IMHO, crossing through other approaches on an ILS won't matter at all, as they will be expecting you and will protect the airspace at the airport for your ETA plus 30 mins.

Just a thought...

Annnnyyywaayyysssss

[neechi]

I had a similar question on a ride recently. Like "anyways" said, comm failures can constitute an emergency. One thing i learned was that B4 squawking 7600, squawk 7700. Apparently 7600 doesn't "set off any alarm bells" squawking 7700 for 30 seconds then 7600 when in busy airspace makes is well known that you have a com failure and you can be assured that they will know about it, then do what you have to do as per rac whatever.

[zzjayca]

I had a similar question on a ride recently. Like "anyways" said, comm failures can constitute an emergency. One thing i learned was that B4 squawking 7600, squawk 7700. Apparently 7600 doesn't "set off any alarm bells" squawking 7700 for 30 seconds then 7600 when in busy airspace makes is well known that you have a com failure and you can be assured that they will know about it, then do what you have to do as per rac whatever.

All special condition codes set off the same "alarm bells" as well as a change in the target symbol and colour on the radar. This includes 7500, 7600 and 7700.

If you have a comm failure, squawk 7600. Only squawk 7700 if you have an in flight emergency.

[Positive_Rate]

Pull out your cell phone !!

[flyboy1234]

You will find the answer to your question in the CFS. I cant remember what page, so you will just have to hunt for it,(LOL, although there is a lot of very useful info in that book that gets overlooked). ESCAT is right about having to dead reckon yourself to the final app course fix for the straight in( I would DR to the IF in this case) for the straight in for 23 or 24R. One thing I would NEVER do is head to the YYZ VOR and do a full procedure?? There are other fixes at which one would hold in order to wait for EAT or ETA, one would be FLINE and 'hold as published' etc. Pearson is by far the busiest airport in Canada, so special considerations must be made in dealing with emergencies. It is not for inexperienced pilots. Hope this helps.

[CP]

I use mine regularily in the cockpit. Never had a problem.

[Bede]

Sorry, but what are the chances of a complete comm failure. Everyone going into YYZ has at least 2 radios, so the more likely scenario is an electrical failure in which case 7600 will do no good, and you have far more problems than doing your comm procedures.

Having said that, just fly to the airport, give yourself vectors and land. Let ATC figure the rest out. They'll move people out of the way.

Twizzler:

For some reason, going into North Bay, ATC gives you stupid stuff like, "cleared to the North Bay VOR", which is on the field. Why they don't say the airport is eyond me.

[Rockie]

you are cleared as filed (preferred route) from CYUL to CYYZ and somewhere just east of YSO you experience a total two way comm failure in IMC, and your cell phone is dead. The active runways are 23 or 24R, and prior to the failure, you were told to expect the ILS 23.

You would hopefully have filed an arrival, or at least by the time you're approaching YSO you would have been cleared for one. If either is the case you fly the arrival and intercept the ILS for 23 following the charted altitudes (after squawking 7600 of course) and land.

If you haven't filed or been cleared an arrival, squawk 7600 and fly the arrival that makes the most sense following the charted altitudes and land on the runway that makes the most sense. Or in this case runway 23 since that's what you've been told to expect. If ATC says for you to expect something, in a comm fail situation that's what they expect you to do.

In a place like YYZ doing this is not only correct but expected, and doing otherwise will cause HUGE problems because then ATC has no idea what to expect and will have to clear massive amounts of airspace for you.

Going somewhere else like your alternate, holding at the VOR or final fix until your EAT, or doing something other than what makes the most expeditious sense will not gain you friends in Toronto RAPCON. I'm sure they will agree that you should come straight in and land while they clear other planes out of the way for you. That way you're out of their hair as quickly as possible.

[squawk 7600]

It does make perfect sense that if you are cleared to CYYZ, and told to expect 23, than transition from the STAR to intercept the Localizer for 23. I would not in any way go "elsewhere". I was just making a generalization as to what some peole may want to do, like going to their alternate. And even if the weather was marginal VFR, meaning I was in and out of cloud, I would likely still continue to Pearson because east of YSO, I am only minutes away from destination, as stated in the Comm procedures in the CFS. I may have to explain myself to Transport, but in my opinion I would still be following proper precedures and using common sense.

The only thing with flying the arrival procedure at Pearson, is you are not cleared for an arrival procedure. Airports like Windsor and Dorval you are. Is there any reason why this is not included in the clearance when going to Pearson? Would this not help elliminate uncertainty if and when a comm failure occurs going into pearson. If a comm failure occurs going into Windsor, I would know exactly what to do becuase the HADAR 2 ARRIVAL is always included in the clearance.

[que pasa]

You would hopefully have filed an arrival, or at least by the time you're approaching YSO you would have been cleared for one. If either is the case you fly the arrival and intercept the ILS for 23 following the charted altitudes (after squawking 7600 of course) and land.

yup, this makes perfect sense.

If you haven't filed or been cleared an arrival, squawk 7600 and fly the arrival that makes the most sense following the charted altitudes and land on the runway that makes the most sense. Or in this case runway 23 since that's what you've been told to expect. If ATC says for you to expect something, in a comm fail situation that's what they expect you to do.

In a place like YYZ doing this is not only correct but expected, and doing otherwise will cause HUGE problems because then ATC has no idea what to expect and will have to clear massive amounts of airspace for you.

Going somewhere else like your alternate, holding at the VOR or final fix until your EAT, or doing something other than what makes the most expeditious sense will not gain you friends in Toronto RAPCON. I'm sure they will agree that you should come straight in and land while they clear other planes out of the way for you. That way you're out of their hair as quickly as possible.

but here I must comment.. to be honest, if you're trucking around in a lost comm situation the delays are already there, the airspace is cleared.. we're expected to operate the aircraft as safely as possible and I wouldn't let the idea of losing friends at RAPCON differ me from following published lost comm procedures.. sure it makes sense to set yourself up on an arrival and DR yourself onto the ILS.. but looking just at the rules it states (and I'm not saying it's efficeint at all!) to go to the clearance limit (yyz vor perhaps) and hold until your ETA then shuttle down and vector yourself for the runway. Do I agree with this, not 100% by anymeans, I believe the procedures for this could be made more clear and ammendeded for situations just like this... BUT, if someone wants to get pissy with me because I shut down an airport for an extra 10 mins because I followed the procedures that are currently in place, well they can petition with me and others to have the procedures ammended, after I'm safely on the ground.

my 2 cents.

Q-P?

[squawk 7600]

Snowgoose (other than the full procedure) and QP are both correct, according to the procedures, because most likely YYZ is the clearance limit. The tough part about this is how do you shuttle yourself into the approach. ATC would have no clue where you are going, or which runway for that matter. Atleast if you plan to use the Wasie or Simcoe arrival, you can hold at YSO until ETA, then transition yourself onto the LOC for 23 using the STAR. Makes the most sense, would be an easy transition, ATC would probably understand what you are doing, and would elliminate excessive turns and altitude changes. I know this really isn't proper procedure but makes more sense than going to the YYZ VOR and holding than deciding how to get to the ILS.

Perhaps Navcanada and Transport should devise new comm failure procedures that are published in the CAP, just like they have for comm failure on a SID. That way everyone would be on the exact same page, instead of interperating the rules (that can be somewhat ambiguis) from the back pages of the CFS.

That way ATC would know EXACTLY what you are doing (or atleast what you are supposed to do) and make it much safer and more efficient.

But maybe I am missing something...perhaps this has already been mentioned in previous years but would add too many pages to the CAP? I have no idea.

[confuzed]

Sorry, but what are the chances of a complete comm failure. Everyone going into YYZ has at least 2 radios, so the more likely scenario is an electrical failure in which case 7600 will do no good, and you have far more problems than doing your comm procedures.

Hey Bede, don't you remember when your last company first got NEX and it was notorious for comm failures for the first little while. I had heard that the crew had a double comm failure going into Minneapolis one day.

For those saying to fly the arrival, what about those that are not RNAV equipped or if they are haven't filed the STAR in their flight plan (obviously that would be my choice though, even if I haven't filed it)?

The dead reckoning makes the most sense to me, just try to arrive around your ETA. ATC will be clearing the way for you so you'd think that they would be vectoring other aircraft around you. Just a thought.

[mduffy]

This exact scenario (except from LINNG) happened recently. Complete COM failuere in an aircraft with a cell phone that didn't pick up a signal early enough to factor into the planning of the approach... The crew elected to fly the STAR (although it was not included in the flight plan), intercept the LOC - fly it in. In coversation with ATC afterwards, this was exactly what they wanted to see. They also said that an aircraft holding over the VOR would be a much less desirable situation for them - although not technically incorrect - not very appropriate to the YYZ environment.

If you fly into YYZ a couple of times per day this will seem reasonable - if you don't, I'm sure it would make you uncomfortable.

[Cat Driver]

We always carry a hand held portable VHF with us when flying long ferry flights...and several portable GPS's and a satellite phone.

Of course we are operating with the disadvantage of having to be self reliant and we have an aversion to finding problems we forgot to plan for.

Cat

[groundtoflightdeck]

I have never had a clearance limit that was not the AIRPORT, (unless I have been told to hold, then you leave the hold fix at the EFC)

I have been cleared to a VOR R-349 60 DME Maintain 7000. With no EFC. It can happen.

So to keep the discussion progressive, what would you do in a similar situation with a complete electric failure? This is the kind of thing that sells hand help GPSs

[Cat Driver]

" This is the kind of thing that sells hand help GPSs "

Yup, and Sat Phones.