Divergence

Sort by date Sort by votes
If he's on the visual he's not flying a hard heading anymore, he's manuvering on his own, turning base/final. so what are you basing your 15 degrees on? I mean obviously there's situations where it's apparent you have it but there's no hard number there and no guarantee he doesn't widen out a bit, makes a course correction makes a big sweeping turn to final etc.

I don't currently work radar so take that worth a grain of salt. I am very interested to see what the answer to this is.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I hang my hat on the "headings or courses diverge by 15deg or more..." Does someone on a visual approach have a heading... Nope... Does he have a course... I'd say so... Whatever direction he is flying at that exact moment... So while you can't provide 15 degrees in a positive form of separation... If you wanna bet the farm that someone's current course buys you 15 degrees, you're a-ok in my book...
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
The situation was, the first aircraft was on a right base leg cleared on the the visual approach, the second aircraft was in trail on a right downwind. Three miles was lost between the two. The argument was made that the first aircraft was past the seconds course so they had divergence, the other side of the argument was the plane on the visual could turn a sharp base to final (turn right to the numbers) and it could get pretty tight between the two.

I don't think divergence can be applied because you can't ensure separation but that's just me
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
IMO if the right base ac was thru the point of conflict of the right downwind ac before you lost 3, you're good... Now what comes into play is the base ac turning final... assuming you haven't regained your 3 miles, let's say you're landing rwy 18... let's say the right downwind ac is on a 360 heading/course, the base ac is heading/course 090, once the base ac turns final and passes the 135 heading/course, it is now opposite courses with the downwind ac, so the downwind ac would have to be past/abeam the base ac turning final before the base/final ac would break a 135 course/heading... And also assuming you haven't regained 3miles...
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
exactly, in this situation the aircraft made a square base and 3 miles was regained. but like in your example the first aircraft turning initially to a 090 base turn, could if he wanted to bring it all the way around to a 170 or 160 heading towards the field. then you would certainly have nothing..
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Stinger said:
I say yes (mostly.)
But I want to know more about the situation that brings up the question because I might change my mind.
Click to expand...
Jordan said:
IMO if the right base ac was thru the point of conflict of the right downwind ac before you lost 3, you're good... Now what comes into play is the base ac turning final... assuming you haven't regained your 3 miles, let's say you're landing rwy 18... let's say the right downwind ac is on a 360 heading/course, the base ac is heading/course 090, once the base ac turns final and passes the 135 heading/course, it is now opposite courses with the downwind ac, so the downwind ac would have to be past/abeam the base ac turning final before the base/final ac would break a 135 course/heading... And also assuming you haven't regained 3miles...
Click to expand...
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Book says assigned heading or track doesn't it? The track divergence is displayed on the falcon replays. I guess I'm surprised this is an issue. I'd say this is definitely using divergence separation. And I'll feel fairly stupid if that's wrong. It'd also mean I have a whole bunch of losses that just got completely ignored.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
5-5-7 In accordance with the following
criteria, all other approved separation may be discontinued and passing or diverging separation applied when:

"aircraft are on same or crossing
'courses'/assigned radar vectors and one aircraft has crossed the projected course of the other aircraft"
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Jordan said:
I hang my hat on the "headings or courses diverge by 15deg or more..." Does someone on a visual approach have a heading... Nope... Does he have a course... I'd say so... Whatever direction he is flying at that exact moment... So while you can't provide 15 degrees in a positive form of separation... If you wanna bet the farm that someone's current course buys you 15 degrees, you're a-ok in my book...
Click to expand...

Agree
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
that1guy said:
The situation was, the first aircraft was on a right base leg cleared on the the visual approach, the second aircraft was in trail on a right downwind. Three miles was lost between the two. The argument was made that the first aircraft was past the seconds course so they had divergence, the other side of the argument was the plane on the visual could turn a sharp base to final (turn right to the numbers) and it could get pretty tight between the two.

I don't think divergence can be applied because you can't ensure separation but that's just me
Click to expand...

Yeah that's legal. Sure the lead plane could make a hairpin turn and you'd have a flyback issue, but unless it actually happens you haven't lost separation.

DankVectorz said:
Just keep your downwind at least 3 miles from centerline and you'll never have to worry. Or just make sure the second guy has the first guy in sight.
Click to expand...

Or put the first guy on tower and have tower provide visual.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I agree with courses but also believe when in doubt use headings. Had a briefing here from a situation ( I know this isn’t on the topic of a visual approach as discussed above but still divergence related ) the eastern region quality control group says that use of a fix for initial separation does not qualify for divergence. So if runway heading is 280 and XXX VOR is 300, the first aircraft must be given a hard heading of 15 or more vs. proceed direct XXX. Idk if that helps just found it interesting that the East QCG determined that.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
bravoindia said:
I agree with courses but also believe when in doubt use headings. Had a briefing here from a situation ( I know this isn’t on the topic of a visual approach as discussed above but still divergence related ) the eastern region quality control group says that use of a fix for initial separation does not qualify for divergence. So if runway heading is 280 and XXX VOR is 300, the first aircraft must be given a hard heading of 15 or more vs. proceed direct XXX. Idk if that helps just found it interesting that the East QCG determined that.
Click to expand...
Do you have any other details on that? At what point would direct be acceptable?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote

Similar threads

Sassyquatch
  • Question
5-5-7 passing or diverging
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
SquawkHijack
SquawkHijack
T
  • Solved
Visual separation on an Instrument approach
2
Replies
27
Views
3K
slater
slater
K
  • Solved
RNAV SID Divergence
Replies
2
Views
610
Dues For Booze
D
A
  • Question
Descent below MVA
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
Move78
M
C
  • Solved
Wake turbulence with pattern traffic
2 3 4
Replies
69
Views
12K
sizziano
S
Back
Top Bottom