San Fransisco Radio clearance procedures?

[Cameron Negrete]

Hi all,

 

I was recent flying into ZAK airspace from lax and i saw ZAK_E was online so i asked departure if we needed to get oceanic clearance before entering, aka the same procedure for the NAT's. He said no and i trusted him because he is a ZAK controller. Of course when i get close i get contact me's and turned out that i do need clearance to enter oceanic. Now i remember that lovely old LOA for oceanic at ZLA and i also looked at the SOP for oceanic also and it confused me. The way both it should be done is that CTR or the radar controller must provide the seperation when entering the airspace and that the pilots don't need to physically call a "ZAK_DEL" because center provides the seperation needed. In addition the ZAK LOA states the following

Use of Oceanic Clearances for aircraft entering the ZAK airspace is limited to usage during published events and/or periods of high traffic when requested by the ZAK Oceanic Controller to efficiently manage traffic flow.

 

now i understand perfectly that in this instance that a oceanic clearance may be needed to ensure seperation when you have no radar controller online, but on the same hand ZAK isn't an insanely busy airspace 90% of the time and as such no need for clearance should be needed cause i had no one behind me. Guess im just looking for clarifiction on what the prop procedure should be and what to expect.

[Christopher Mauro]

Basically, what should happen is LAX_GND calls LAX_CTR requesting the OC

Then LAX_CTR should call up ZAK_FSS and give him the OC

If ZAK approves, LAX_CTR tells LAX_GND and they get on w/ the aircraft

 

That is the way I was taught and the way I teach my students at ZAK

[Cameron Negrete]

Basically, what should happen is LAX_GND calls LAX_CTR requesting the OC

Then LAX_CTR should call up ZAK_FSS and give him the OC

If ZAK approves, LAX_CTR tells LAX_GND and they get on w/ the aircraft

 

That is the way I was taught and the way I teach my students at ZAK

http://www.laartcc.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=13094&p=97005&hilit=zak#p97005

 

specifically this part

This means that we should coordinate a standard non-radar handoff instead of getting an oceanic clearance on the ground, unless ZAK otherwise requests. A standard non-radar handoff for this purpose includes the callsign, the TCP or Route, the time the aircraft will reach the TCP, and the altitude the aircraft will cross it. This handoff should be complete no later 5 minutes prior to reaching the TCP. It's our responsibility to ensure proper oceanic separation(mach number rule, 10 minutes for both jets, 15 minutes otherwise, or 1000 feet vertical).

 

Phraseology for the handoff is, "Radar Services Terminated. Squawk 2000. Report Position to San Francisco Radio on (frequency)."

[Christopher Mauro]

Correct

[Tyler Goeggel 1071085]

Basically, what should happen is LAX_GND calls LAX_CTR requesting the OC

Then LAX_CTR should call up ZAK_FSS and give him the OC

If ZAK approves, LAX_CTR tells LAX_GND and they get on w/ the aircraft

 

That is the way I was taught and the way I teach my students at ZAK

http://www.laartcc.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=13094&p=97005&hilit=zak#p97005

 

specifically this part

This means that we should coordinate a standard non-radar handoff instead of getting an oceanic clearance on the ground, unless ZAK otherwise requests. A standard non-radar handoff for this purpose includes the callsign, the TCP or Route, the time the aircraft will reach the TCP, and the altitude the aircraft will cross it. This handoff should be complete no later 5 minutes prior to reaching the TCP. It's our responsibility to ensure proper oceanic separation(mach number rule, 10 minutes for both jets, 15 minutes otherwise, or 1000 feet vertical).

 

Phraseology for the handoff is, "Radar Services Terminated. Squawk 2000. Report Position to San Francisco Radio on (frequency)."

 

Based on what I've read, all that is saying is it makes ZLA responsible for separation. Nothing says ground needs to get an Oceanic clearance in ZLA - I know other places do, but not all ARTCC's participate in this.

 

http://www.laartcc.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=13094

[Mike Cassel 849958]

As the author of that post in the ZLA Forums, I'll try and shed some light on this.

 

My understanding of the current LOA was that a number of facilities objected to the wording in the previous LOA that required Oceanic Clearances to be obtained on the ground. As anyone familiar with this process knows, guesstimating a time for an aircraft to reach a fix from their gate is a tricky process, and frequently inaccurate at best. In addition, with normal VATSIM traffic levels, the need for the process is minimal at best; even in real life, my understanding is that Oceanic Clearances as described in the old LOA are essentially an anachronism in the Oakland FIR, rarely used as the old LOA required.

 

VATUSA agreed, and put that clause above the Oceanic Clearance section of the Oakland SOP, essentially vitiating the requirement to get an ground oceanic clearance except in an unusual circomestance. The current procedure is that Coastal Facilities do not need to obtain an Oceanic Clearance on the ground, but instead merely need to make sure to give Oceanic Control properly sequenced aircraft on proper routes. Of course coastal facilities still need to coordinate a Transfer of Control to ZAK, but the requirement to obtain a clearance many minutes in advance is not usually in effect.

 

Of course this is a simplification of reality, but all things on VATSIM are. Given regular oceanic traffic levels, this procedure is easier on land-based controllers, and makes things simpler for oceanic controllers as well.