Operating Near Hazardous Terrain

[smhusain_1]

A pilot's sense of situational awareness is never more challenged than when operating over and within hazardous terrain, especially at night. The annals of aviation safety are replete even today when operations are supported by the highest levels of technology ever with descriptions of pilots flying perfectly good airplanes into the ground because they lost their orientation in the terrain within which they were operating. Maintaining the big picture is always important but never more so than when flying in remote mountainous areas or arriving at or departing from airfields adjacent to high terrain. Add night ops to these scenarios, and you have a witch's brew of hazards that demand constant and accurate situational awareness lest you and your passengers flirt with the possibility of becoming a controlled flight into terrain (CFIT) statistic.

Staying safely above the hard stuff even (and especially) if you have to make an emergency descent for any reason begins with understanding minimum enroute altitudes (MEAs), minimum obstacle clearance altitudes (MOCAs) and minimum off route altitudes (MORAs and Grid MORAs), the latter depicting the minimum safe altitude within a 60-nm grid square, all part of preflight planning and a thorough understanding of chart notations and the nature of the area's terrain.

And what if the operator has an emergency a cabin depressurization, foe example and has to descend? What are you going to do when everything goes to worms you're down to emergency power and you've lost a lot of your electronics? If you have to do an emergency descent and have to always know where you are? Most checklists require the operator to descend to 15,000 feet in the event of a depressurization, onboard fire or other failure. But what if you're over the Andes? So it's important obviously to have that information at hand and be able to understand the relevant chart. You need to know your MEAs. This is most critical in a terminal area where there is high terrain. You must know minimum altitude to which you can descend. You cannot rely solely on the controller to tell you that. You need to back up the controller.

Pilots accustomed to operating in seamless radar environments with attentive air traffic controllers in North America or Europe should be aware that those circumstances are not at all universal. So, in some regions the aircraft could be cleared to descend to a certain altitude on an approach, but one that's lower than the MEA for the Approach segment the aircraft is tracking. It's up to the crew to take notice. The best advice is that when you are in remote areas where comm and radar are poor, don't accept direct routings. You are better off to stay on the airways to the appropriate transition on an approach and fly the procedure because you have more information as to the MEAs for each segment and where and when you can descend. You will see the MES change on the airway depiction; you can look at the chart and know the crossing altitude and fixes. In other words the controller might have cleared you to a lower altitude, but reading the chart you know you must maintain the MEA for the airway or approach segment you're on until the transition fix for the lower (cleared ) altitude. In some parts of the world it is your responsibility to maintain your safe altitude. The controller may tell you to descend and maintain an altitude, but it is your responsibility to know to know the MEA and not let the controller lead you into an EGPWS warning.

Study the route before you go there. Have alternatives at every point, know your drift-down, and make sure you have enough altitude if you have to make an emergency descent. If you have a minimum altitude, there's no mystery about how to plan the flight to protect yourself in case of emergency. There are no secrets here.

Adapted from: Operating Near Hazardous Terrain by David Esler, B & CA July 2014

[smhusain_1]

PIA's Karachi (Islamabad) to Beijing flight over the Karakorums may not meet the strict criteria required in case of an emergency descent at night due any reason. The terrain is too high in the vicinity of Gilgit. Although no such problem has occurred so far, it doesn't mean it cannot happen. Clearing a flight on a route has to to take in the worst case scenario, and the exercise conducted in its clearance may not have been adequate. I think we should try and make this a day crossing only, both ways on that particular patch of the route. Personally I have not been comfortable descending into Islamabad from 120 miles away coming from Beijing at night despite the VOR/DME we had, or the INS.

[H Khan]

I have heard the approach to Ankara's Esenboga airport was little tricky during the night especially during the winter times, this again in 60's and 70's while PIA operated B-707

I have heard when the flight went to Beijing ifrom ISB it took twenty minutes for the B-707 to attain flight level of 25,000 feets over ISB before it went over the Karakarums. After take-off the aircraft went into a circular ascension until it reached FL 25,000. During the flight to Beijing certain airports in western and central China were activated for ATC proposes or in case of of tech landing during the 60's and early 70's.

[TAILWIND]

PIA's Karachi (Islamabad) to Beijing flight over the Karakorums may not meet the strict criteria required in case of an emergency descent at night due any reason. The terrain is too high in the vicinity of Gilgit. Although no such problem has occurred so far, it doesn't mean it cannot happen. Clearing a flight on a route has to to take in the worst case scenario, and the exercise conducted in its clearance may not have been adequate. I think we should try and make this a day crossing only, both ways on that particular patch of the route. Personally I have not been comfortable descending into Islamabad from 120 miles away coming from Beijing at night despite the VOR/DME we had, or the INS.

Now this route (G206, G325) is congested with traffic from middle east to china. Fewdays back I could spot (on FR24) three 380s one after the other over Gilgit.

[imiakhtar]

PIA's Karachi (Islamabad) to Beijing flight over the Karakorums may not meet the strict criteria required in case of an emergency descent at night due any reason.

As mentioned, the G325 airway to the PURPA intersection is used by carriers throughout the region.

There is nothing unsafe about it. Should you ever fly the route, ask the pilots if they will show you the escape routes should needs arise (depressurisation, engine failure drift down options etc).
Someone posted the airways maps with grid altitudes on airliners.net recently. I'll try and find a link to them.

Personally I have not been comfortable descending into Islamabad from 120 miles away coming from Beijing at night despite the VOR/DME we had, or the INS.

Perhaps a few more hours practicing instrument flying would have helped?

[smhusain_1]

PIA's Karachi (Islamabad) to Beijing flight over the Karakorums may not meet the strict criteria required in case of an emergency descent at night due any reason. The terrain is too high in the vicinity of Gilgit. Although no such problem has occurred so far, it doesn't mean it cannot happen. Clearing a flight on a route has to to take in the worst case scenario, and the exercise conducted in its clearance may not have been adequate. I think we should try and make this a day crossing only, both ways on that particular patch of the route. Personally I have not been comfortable descending into Islamabad from 120 miles away coming from Beijing at night despite the VOR/DME we had, or the INS.

Now this route (G206, G325) is congested with traffic from middle east to china. Fewdays back I could spot (on FR24) three 380s one after the other over Gilgit.

An exercise was conducted in the simulator on this for route clearance by PIA since we pioneered. There were two en route positions established on the Pakistan side till the border for emergency action in case of an engine failure. In the first case, the aircraft would drift down towards the terrain in Pakistan and the other called for the same procedure towards China. In case of emergency descent, we are carrying passengers so the oxygen limitations with regard to supply and duration was critical for crew and souls on board. I do not know if a rapid emergency descent can be accomplished owing to terrain in 4 minutes down to 14,000 feet for passengers to breathe.

PIA was operating this route to Beijing since 1971 (?) but earlier to Shanghai from the east. Henry Kissinger you may remember was flown by PIA to Beijing on sector Rawalpindi-Beijing in 71, resulting in the famous Nixon visit and the US/China accord. What I have tried to convey through my submission was the unease felt at times at night in clouds when the descent was started on return to Islamabad. There was the VOR and DME only and the VOR had just stabilized at that distance with theDME hunting. There was no GPS or INS in those days. I flew on this route from 74-85, and from 1980 in command. The freighter 707s in PIA had INS but were not used on this sector.

[Rifaat A Hussain]

I was flying the A310s about 4years back and do remember some of the Contingency procedures that PIA had developed to fly on the Pakistan to Beijing sectors. The foremost requirement was to carry passenger oxygen for 22minutes instead of standard 14minutes. The terrain was a factor twice on this route. Once while flying over gilgit and the next near Urumqi.
For both scenarios, there were procedures planned with enroute alternate airports. Just after crossing into Chinese airspace till about KCA the enroute alternate airport was KHG/Kashi. Urumqi, although having high terrain around it, was the next alternate. The contingency route to ZWWW/Urumqi was in the FMC database, and in case of an emergency, could be easily loaded to the active flight plan.
After passing Urumqi, the terrain wasn't a factor anymore and we would carry enough fuel to proceed to Beijing even at FL100 all the way, in case of pressurisation failure.
If my memory serves me right, we even had a weight limitation on takeoff ex Islamabad to cater for the drift down in case of an engine failure around GT/Gilgit.
I have tried to recall as much as I could from memory, so any omission or error is regretted.

[smhusain_1]

Thank you for the feedback.

I was flying the A310s about 4years back and do remember some of the Contingency procedures that PIA had developed to fly on the Pakistan to Beijing sectors. The foremost requirement was to carry passenger oxygen for 22minutes instead of standard 14minutes. The terrain was a factor twice on this route. Once while flying over gilgit and the next near Urumqi.
For both scenarios, there were procedures planned with enroute alternate airports. Just after crossing into Chinese airspace till about KCA the enroute alternate airport was KHG/Kashi. Urumqi, although having high terrain around it, was the next alternate. The contingency route to ZWWW/Urumqi was in the FMC database, and in case of an emergency, could be easily loaded to the active flight plan.
After passing Urumqi, the terrain wasn't a factor anymore and we would carry enough fuel to proceed to Beijing even at FL100 all the way, in case of pressurisation failure.
If my memory serves me right, we even had a weight limitation on takeoff ex Islamabad to cater for the drift down in case of an engine failure around GT/Gilgit.
I have tried to recall as much as I could from memory, so any omission or error is regretted.

[Abbas Ali]

Can PIA Airbus A310 land at Skardu Airport in an emergency situation?

I've seen videos of PAF Ilyushin Il-78 operating flights to/from Skardu Airport.

Abbas

[smhusain_1]

I have only operated to Ankara once taking a relief freighter flight after a major earthquake there. For that I had to fulfill a requirement and watch a video presentation of the terrain around the city and the approach in the Route Section of the Flight Operations Department. All I remember was we did an instrument let down after reporting over the IAF. It was in daylight. Our regular operation was to Istanbul.

The requirement for a flight departing Islamabad for Beijing on a 707 was to have sufficient height to clear the Margallas adequately. For that a left climbing turn from 300 degrees magnetic to 005 (?) was done after takeoff from Runway 30 and then the course set on the northerly heading after its completion. Regarding ATC communication, this was standard with Urumchi on HF before entering their airspace (20 minutes), and followed by a SELCAL check. It was the job of the navigator to keep you on course by giving heading changes in case of any deviation from the corridor. For this they relied on the weather radar with a downward tilt of the antenna for mapping the terrain. Later on we acquired the Doppler navigation system for which the track to be flown had to be set. It gave the ground-speed and the drift angle. The INS followed on some 707s but the navigators were still carried.

I have heard the approach to Ankara's Esenboga airport was little tricky during the night especially during the winter times, this again in 60's and 70's while PIA operated B-707

I have heard when the flight went to Beijing ifrom ISB it took twenty minutes for the B-707 to attain flight level of 25,000 feets over ISB before it went over the Karakarums. After take-off the aircraft went into a circular ascension until it reached FL 25,000. During the flight to Beijing certain airports in western and central China were activated for ATC proposes or in case of of tech landing during the 60's and early 70's.