I was reading the notams (getting ready for a flight, not for fun) and there was a notam for Minneapolis that most of their instrument approach equipment is OTS and they would be using PRM (precision runway monitoring) approaches. What is PRM? Is this the same as a PAR? I could not find specific reference to it in AIM.
Paulie,
PRM is not the same as PAR. PAR (Precision Approach Radar) is a vertical profile radar used in ATC-guided precision approaches (a precision version of an ASR approach).
PRM is Precision Runway Monitoring. There are only a few major airports in the country that are currently using PRM. It is basically a system that allows two aircraft to fly parallel ILS approaches with reduced separation between the aircraft (the aircraft can fly the approaches side-by-side, without being staggered laterally like is normally required by ATC separation criteria). Each aircraft is put on a discrete ATC frequency, much like on an ASR or PAR approach, to prevent vital transmissions from being blocked (“stepped-on” by other aircraft or controllers).
You must be authorized to fly PRM approaches by attending an FAA approved training program. Most airlines incorporate this training into their pilot groundschools. If you are not an airline pilot but want PRM training, you can arrange it through your local FSDO. Additionally, each airport using PRM has specific requirements each pilot/crew & aircraft must meet for its use. At Minneapolis (the example you mentioned), there are 5 requirements:
- When PRM is in use and broadcast as such on ATIS, the pilot(s) must notify ARTCC if they DO NOT meet the requirements to participate in PRM approaches.
- Dual VHF Comms are required to be monitored concurrently.
- TCAS systems must be set to TA mode (Traffic Alert only), rather than RA mode (Resolution Alert)…not a factor for TCAD (Skywatch) systems, which have no RA mode.
- ATC directed “break-outs” must be HAND FLOWN (an ATC directed missed approach, prior to the published MAP).
- Specific phraseology must be used by ATC and the pilots (as outlined in their training and applicable publications).
Refer to KMSP Approach Plate 11-0 (Jepp) for this info. KMSP has 4 ILS’s that qualify for PRM operations.
So, normally, General Aviaiton operators are not going to be authorized to participate in PRM Approaches. However, it is the responsibility of the PIC to inform ARTCC that they cannot accept a PRM approach. If all the active approaches at a given airport are currently using PRM (as in your example), you may not be able to land there if shooting an actual approach (other than a visual or contact approach) would be required.
Clear as mud, right?
Fly Safe,
~Matt McDaniel
Progressive Aviation Services
Thanks Matt. This explains why I didn’t find it in the FAR/AIM book.
In reply to:
TCAS systems must be set to TA mode (Traffic Alert only), rather than RA mode (Resolution Alert)…not a factor for TCAD (Skywatch) systems, which have no RA mode.
Matt,
The FAA recently changed the policy for using TCAS equipment during PRM. Previous guidance required pilots to select TA-only mode when conducting an ILS-PRM approach.
The FAA conducted a study determining TCAS equipment can be used in PRM as approved for other flight operations. Aircrews are no longer required to select TA only mode when conducting PRM approaches. The FAA determined TCAS operated in accordance with guidance (the same as with other operations in the NAS) are less likely to come into to conflict with another aircraft on the parallel course; should PRM controller separation standards fail. Aircrews must understand the ATC instruction is the primary means of separation. In the unlikely event a controller instruction is received simultaneous to a TCAS alert, pilots should always take the air traffic instruction to turn. If reaction to a TCAS alert causes the aircrew to deviate from an assigned clearance, they should inform ATC as soon as practical of their intentions.
In reply to:
So, normally, General Aviaiton operators are not going to be authorized to participate in PRM Approaches.
Matt,
While I don’t know how many people do it, according to this FAA web page, all a part 91 operator has to do is read over the updated PRM sections in the AIM in order to fly a PRM approach. (unless flying a transport category aircraft).
Although I personally would not accept a PRM approach, and would tell the controller that I’m not qualified, since I’m not familiar with the techniques from first hand experience, I did look over the new AIM section a little while ago and it didn’t seem all that hard – basically you have to monitor 2 COM frequencies during the approach (but only ever TX on the primary one). There is some discussion of what a “break out” is, and when the controller might call for one, and what to do when that happens.
So - I think actually that a lot of GA pilots may qualify for PRM approaches, or at least they can if they want to, pretty easily.
Steve
In reply to:
While I don’t know how many people do it, according to this FAA web page, all a part 91 operator has to do is read over the updated PRM sections in the AIM in order to fly a PRM approach. (unless flying a transport category aircraft).
AND
The FAA recently changed the policy for using TCAS equipment during PRM. Previous guidance required pilots to select TA-only mode when conducting an ILS-PRM approach.
Right you are on both counts, gentlemen. Turns out I was looking at an outdated version of the specific PRM approach plate we were using in that example. One thing that is still true is that each PRM approach is still subject to its own particulars and critera, in terms of rules, equipment & pilot requirements. Every PRM approach plate is accompanied by an adjacent information page that outlines the specifics for THAT PRM approach. Most have fairly similar requirements, but each may have unique features & rules as well.
Having gone through PRM training in the past (both groundschool and simulator) and done actual PRM approaches, I would HIGHLY recommend that anyone who plans to do them takes the time to do more preparation than just reading the section in the AIM. All local FSDOs have a couple of excellent videos on the subject and procedures that are well worth watching. While shooting the actual approach is no more difficult than a PAR approach, the margin for error is quiet small. Therefore, a great deal of preparation and caution is merited. Not only for your own safety, but for the safety of the other aircraft participating in the concurrent PRM approach.
Fly Safe,
~Matt McDaniel
Progressive Aviation Services
So you’re saying I should get rid of my 1983 copy of AIM from my student days?
Just kiddin’, I found it. Thanks for pointing me in the right direction.