Houston Oceanic

[Aggrey Ellis 964561]

Well I was on KIAH-MZBZ a few days ago and at the beginning of the flight I talked to some friendly COA 738 pilots. I asked them about Houston Oceanic and they said that it was all radar and they didnt need to use oceanic reporting procedures.These COA pilots are based in Houston and fly the gulf often so I would think they know what they are talking about.I read this article and it seems that the Gulf is completely covered by various ground stations. On VATSIM I dont see Houston Oceanic online often except maybe during an event. If somebody wants to staff Houston one will probably go for the Center Position and if it is filled then they will help out on approach for the Houston. If Houston Oceanic and Domestic are consolidated then we can increase the coverage of the gulf before being handed off to UNICOM. There is no approach or departure traffic to handle and its basically really just radar identification and separation down there. I dont see why Houston Domestic cant handle the extra traffic. If you have an event you can bring on the extra controller for the area but its too boring for a controller to run Houston Oceanic alone, especially if there are no Oceanic procedures needed. I checked your SOP on the ZHU website and it instructs controllers not to vector in Oceanic Airspace but the area is now radar covered. This consolidation would be great, and I understand from a friend I have at ZHU that you have considered this but I really think you should reconsider because its kind of a waste of a position with radar coverage.Just my thoughts though

[Matthew Temple 880167]

Aggery,

 

Don't hold me to the fire on this one but....

 

When I was the Chief in ZHU, we opened up Oceanic sometime about a year ago. I had decided at the time that it would be radar procedures for ease on both ends.

 

I believe the real way of doing it, again don't hold me to it to it, is purely non-radar. I beleive the current ATM is taking it back that direction. He has been busy working on other projects within the ARTCC, but a craftily placed email to justin.mcelvaney at zhuartcc.com will probably get you a better answer than what I can provide.

[Kyle Gibson 937127]

We're back to the old way again (non-radar). No one controls it becasue no one flies those gulf flights it seems.

[Aggrey Ellis 964561]

We're back to the old way again (non-radar). No one controls it becasue no one flies those gulf flights it seems.

 

I love the gulf flights but usually the ATC stops once leaving ZHU Domestic. Maybe once in a while Merida is online and MHTG is getting better.Its radar in real life now though above FL180. I saw it on the charts and the pilots claimed New York and San Francisco were the only non radar environments left in the US.

[Kyle Gibson 937127]

About Houston Oceanic, I'm working on training course to get guys certified and stuff. Maybe we can do an event from KIAH-MMUN or something someday.

[Aggrey Ellis 964561]

About Houston Oceanic, I'm working on training course to get guys certified and stuff. Maybe we can do an event from KIAH-MMUN or something someday.

Why would it require special certification?

[Kyle Gibson 937127]

Because people aren't familiar with nonradar procedures other than tower. We'd need to go over the basics. Does that make sense?

[Aggrey Ellis 964561]

Because people aren't familiar with nonradar procedures other than tower. We'd need to go over the basics. Does that make sense?

Houston Oceanic is radar above FL180.

[Kyle Gibson 937127]

Really? Where did you find that info.?

[Kyle Gibson 937127]

I looked through real-world procedures and this is what I found:

 

"The OCNW sector is designed to control traffic flow employing nonradar separation rules set forth in Chapter 8 of the 7110.65."

"The OCNE sector is designed to control traffic flow employing nonradar separation rules set forth in Chapter 8 of the 7110.65." (We have two main oceanic sectors: east and west)

 

No where in the entire docomeent did I find something about radar from FL180 up or on the FAA's site. I think that'd be pretty important information to include at both of those places.

 

Thanks for you interest,

[Aggrey Ellis 964561]

Try reading the current enroute chart. The COA pilots were a credible source as well.

[David Reimer 913748]

Try reading the current enroute chart. The COA pilots were a credible source as well.

 

You still did not provide a link...

[Kyle Gibson 937127]

I can't provide my link, but I am going with it for now. Thanks for your interest. HOUSTON OCEANIC is nonradar for now.

[Tom Seeley]

d. Position Reports. When flying an oceanic route in the Gulf of Mexico, position reports must be made over all designated reporting points. A position report must also be made upon crossing the FIR boundary. Unless otherwise required, reporting points should be located at intervals of 5 or 10 degrees latitude (if flying north/south) or longitude (if flying east/west) either north or south of the equator or east or west of the 180 degree meridian. Aircraft transversing 10 degrees of latitude or longitude in 1 hour, 20 minutes should normally report at 10 degree intervals. Slower aircraft should report at 5 degree intervals. In the absence of designated reporting points, position reports shall be made as instructed by ATC. Position reports are vital to air traffic safety and control. Inability to comply is a violation of the FAR and ICAO requirements.

Just one additional note: The presence of a chart notation such as "Gulf of Mexico High Control FL 180-FL 600" does not indicate the presence of radar. It merely indicates that the area is controlled, and by whom. There is additional guidance in AC 91-70 which may be helpful in understanding operations in the OCA, and in 7110.83, "Oceanic Air Traffic Control Handbook".

[Kyle Gibson 937127]

Thanks!

[Aggrey Ellis 964561]

Try reading the current enroute chart. The COA pilots were a credible source as well.

 

You still did not provide a link...

 

 

I didnt know I could link to a person David?

[Aggrey Ellis 964561]

Interesting article

They are placing ADS-B Receivers in the Gulf on Oil Platforms and in buoys offshore aswell.

 

Wikipedia article about ADS-B states

Gulf of Mexico – In the Gulf of Mexico, where ATC radar coverage is incomplete, the FAA is locating ADS-B (1090 MHz) receivers on oil rigs to relay information received from aircraft equipped with ADS-B extended squitters back to the Houston Center to expand and improve surveillance coverage.

 

This PDF has detailed information on ADS-B in the Gulf Of Mexico on pages 10-17.

[Max Tribolet 897448]

Interesting article

They are placing ADS-B Receivers in the Gulf on Oil Platforms and in buoys offshore aswell.

 

Wikipedia article about ADS-B states

Gulf of Mexico – In the Gulf of Mexico, where ATC radar coverage is incomplete, the FAA is locating ADS-B (1090 MHz) receivers on oil rigs to relay information received from aircraft equipped with ADS-B extended squitters back to the Houston Center to expand and improve surveillance coverage.

 

This PDF has detailed information on ADS-B in the Gulf Of Mexico on pages 10-17.

 

 

That's interesting. There was a really good article awhile back in Forbes that explained the potential of ADS-B in skies around the world.

 

Article Here

[Kyle Gibson 937127]

Gulf of Mexico – In the Gulf of Mexico, where ATC radar coverage is incomplete, the FAA is locating ADS-B (1090 MHz) receivers on oil rigs to relay information received from aircraft equipped with ADS-B extended squitters back to the Houston Center to expand and improve surveillance coverage.

 

I don't believe it's referring to Houston Oceanic in this quote. Remember that Houston Center controls some airspace in the Gulf.

 

http://www.faa.gov/programs/oep/Archive/V4/solution%20sets/er5/ER-5v4final.pdf

 

I found this docomeent. I'm not a genius when it comes to finding stuff like this, but by the way it's worded, I think they mean that they would like to implement surveillance, but have yet to. I think what it's saying is there's so much traffic in the Gulf that they think it would be a lot more efficient to have surveillance, so that the old non-radar separation doesn't have to be used anymore.

[Francisco Obregon 1004310]

Gulf of Mexico – In the Gulf of Mexico, where ATC radar coverage is incomplete, the FAA is locating ADS-B (1090 MHz) receivers on oil rigs to relay information received from aircraft equipped with ADS-B extended squitters back to the Houston Center to expand and improve surveillance coverage.

 

I don't believe it's referring to Houston Oceanic in this quote. Remember that Houston Center controls some airspace in the Gulf.

 

http://www.faa.gov/programs/oep/Archive/V4/solution%20sets/er5/ER-5v4final.pdf

 

I found this docomeent. I'm not a genius when it comes to finding stuff like this, but by the way it's worded, I think they mean that they would like to implement surveillance, but have yet to. I think what it's saying is there's so much traffic in the Gulf that they think it would be a lot more efficient to have surveillance, so that the old non-radar separation doesn't have to be used anymore.

 

Well I hope you read it, so you can teach me

[Aggrey Ellis 964561]

Gulf of Mexico – In the Gulf of Mexico, where ATC radar coverage is incomplete, the FAA is locating ADS-B (1090 MHz) receivers on oil rigs to relay information received from aircraft equipped with ADS-B extended squitters back to the Houston Center to expand and improve surveillance coverage.

 

I don't believe it's referring to Houston Oceanic in this quote. Remember that Houston Center controls some airspace in the Gulf.

 

http://www.faa.gov/programs/oep/Archive/V4/solution%20sets/er5/ER-5v4final.pdf

I found this docomeent. I'm not a genius when it comes to finding stuff like this, but by the way it's worded, I think they mean that they would like to implement surveillance, but have yet to. I think what it's saying is there's so much traffic in the Gulf that they think it would be a lot more efficient to have surveillance, so that the old non-radar separation doesn't have to be used anymore.

 

In the docomeent I quoted it said the Houston Center as a place rather than saying it as meaning specifically the Houston Center position.

 

In the PDF I linked to there is a coverage map on page 14 which shows the coverage provided by ADS-B in the gulf. I am for sure that all of the Houston Oceanic Area is covered by VHF Voice.

 

This has more detailed information about the ADS-B coverage available in the Gulf Of Mexico.It is above certain flight levels though.

[Kyle Gibson 937127]

I'm asking to look stupid but does VHF have anything to do with radar? And the confusing thing is that if there was radar in use by the FAA for aicraft separation, why would it be only for certain altitiudes?

[Tom Seeley]

From what I'm seeing, ADS is planned for GOM commencing in the year 2010:

http://www.icao.int/icao/en/ro/nacc/meetings/2006/20ECARDCA/20ECARDCAip18.pdf

 

The article quoted earlier above is seven years old.

 

NASA and the FAA have in fact installed some ADS-B stations, but these are not operational except for evaluation purposes. :

NASA, along with the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) Safe Flight 21 Program Office are conducting evaluations to determine ADS-B, as well as wide area multilateration, performance over US controlled high altitude airspace in the Gulf of Mexico. The multilateration coverage area provides surveillance for aircraft at FL240 and above.

And I can [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ure you there are areas of the GOM where no VHF ATC comms are available. ARINC provides VHF relay (VERN) out to 400 nm, but only above FL180. Aircraft must use HF frequencies only in these areas. I know, I've conducted flights in that region.

 

There's a very concise, although highly technical publication available online which explains much of this situation:

http://gltrs.grc.nasa.gov/reports/2005/TM-2005-213631.pdf

[Aggrey Ellis 964561]

From what I'm seeing, ADS is planned for GOM commencing in the year 2010:

http://www.icao.int/icao/en/ro/nacc/meetings/2006/20ECARDCA/20ECARDCAip18.pdf

 

The article quoted earlier above is seven years old.

 

NASA and the FAA have in fact installed some ADS-B stations, but these are not operational except for evaluation purposes. :

NASA, along with the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) Safe Flight 21 Program Office are conducting evaluations to determine ADS-B, as well as wide area multilateration, performance over US controlled high altitude airspace in the Gulf of Mexico. The multilateration coverage area provides surveillance for aircraft at FL240 and above.

And I can [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ure you there are areas of the GOM where no VHF ATC comms are available. ARINC provides VHF relay (VERN) out to 400 nm, but only above FL180. Aircraft must use HF frequencies only in these areas. I know, I've conducted flights in that region.

 

There's a very concise, although highly technical publication available online which explains much of this situation:

http://gltrs.grc.nasa.gov/reports/2005/TM-2005-213631.pdf

 

Thanks for cleaaring up the ADS-B issue up Tom. I wasnt aware of my oversight in that area. I do no the difference between VHF and Radar and I was aware of VHF VERN Coverge by ARINC. Just curious whether automatic position reporting is done over VHF Datalink in the GOM or whether it is just for voice.I will find out for sure Saturday on my return home.