Direct MTR when approaching EDDF

[810809 (Andreas Fuchs)]

@1326167

because the phraseology will never just be “expect vectors” (at least it should not be if used correctly). It will be “expect vectors [for something]”.

Seriously? That’s what I wrote. Of course it will not be only “expect vectors”, but as you wrote. I assumed that we are far enough into the topic that we do not need to mention every dot and comma. But coming back to my point: if you get sent to a navigational point that is not on a STAR and not on an IAP and you get told “expect vectors (for some approach)”, you will still have no clue of what you are expected to do after the aforementioned navigational point.

I would never try to educate ATCOs or other pilots (outside my cockpit) when I am at work. That’s not upon us, it makes us look like clowns.
That’s my observation and opinion after 34+ years of flying

Let’s leave it at this, we have different styles of operating aircraft and that’s fine.

See you on VATSIM!

[1627359]

@810809

and you get told “expect vectors (for some approach)”

Which, if we spin it further, you would already know without ATC telling you because you would have gotten that information from the ATIS already

[1326167 (Andrew Crowley)]

@1627359

Which, if we spin it further, you would already know without ATC telling you because you would have gotten that information from the ATIS already

How many airline airports do you operate into that only do approaches to one runway at a time? They’re out there, but wouldn’t be the norm. Approach will tell you on initial contact, but if you haven’t been handed over yet…

@810809

Seriously? That’s what I wrote. Of course it will not be only “expect vectors”, but as you wrote. I assumed that we are far enough into the topic that we do not need to mention every dot and comma. But coming back to my point: if you get sent to a navigational point that is not on a STAR and not on an IAP and you get told “expect vectors (for some approach)”, you will still have no clue of what you are expected to do after the aforementioned navigational point

This i don’t understand. What do you mean, I won’t know what I’m going to do if I’ve been told what to expect? The controller and I both know which approach I’m going to fly, or where I’m going to return to the STAR to fly to completion and then fly an approach. This discussion is kind of strange. A guy who just got his instrument rating typically knows that in the event of lost comms, he’s going to proceed as cleared or as told to expect. I would not have thought it would be that contentious.

I never said I would “educate” the controller (though if they’re doing something wrong, an ASAP would get it done through the proper channels.). I just said I would ask. It’s literally just that simple. Once asked, any controller would realize they were supposed to tell me and probably just forgot because we’re all human, and would be more likely to tell the next flight. It takes 5 seconds and helps everyone. Seems pretty straightforward. Comparable to, say, a controller asking for a second read back of a runway crossing clearance to include call sign, if the pilot forgot the first time. It’s not a big deal, no one is mad… It’s just as easy to do things right though, isn’t it?

[1627359]

@1326167

How many airline airports do you operate into that only do approaches to one runway at a time? They’re out there, but wouldn’t be the norm. Approach will tell you on initial contact, but if you haven’t been handed over yet…

Most airports in this part of the world don’t even have more than a single runway (in Germany, it’s actually significantly more common for small uncontrolled GA airports to have multiple runways than it is for the larger controlled ones), and those that do oftentimes use only one of their runways for arrivals. In the specific case of Frankfurt, ACC will have a predicted RWY assignment in AMAN (IRL, not on VATSIM), but even then you can’t be sure because Frankfurt in particular is very infamous for switching runway assignments on very short notice (abeam the airport or even later, more so IRL than on VATSIM), so unless your aircraft type is not allowed on the Northern runway or you are a GA/cargo flight going to the Southern aprons, you can’t be 100% sure of your runway assignment until you get your base turn.

@1326167

What do you mean, I won’t know what I’m going to do if I’ve been told what to expect? The controller and I both know which approach I’m going to fly, or where I’m going to return to the STAR to fly to completion and then fly an approach. This discussion is kind of strange. A guy who just got his instrument rating typically knows that in the event of lost comms, he’s going to proceed as cleared or as told to expect. I would not have thought it would be that contentious.

What Andreas means is that if you get a “expect vectors for ILS 25L” or something like that, you will still not know what exactly you are supposed to end up flying. Will you continue on your current heading past MTR, get vectored into the downwind again, and join a 20NM final? Will you be turned base abeam the FAP (i.e. before reaching MTR) or is ATC maybe even planning to offer you a short approach? Or maybe something somewhere in between? Sure, you know that you can expect vectors, but you won’t know how exactly ATC plans to vector you.
In that regard, I think it’s also important to keep in mind that particularly in a TMA environment, decisions may often have to be made quite spontaneously and ATC might not yet know how exactly you will fit in the sequence when you get such a shortcut, so even if you asked ATC to lay down their plan in every detail, they may not be able to. And that applies even more so on VATSIM, where almost every controller is just a hobbyist.
Perhaps there’s also a difference between the US and Europe here? It’s not so uncommon here that aircraft get sent somewhere off their route (e.g., when there is a reroute in the air, controllers will usually just clear the aircraft direct to the first waypoint after their sector boundary and let the next sector know where they are cleared to and the next sector will do the same - rinse repeat until the aircraft is at the destination or eventually gets to rejoin the filed route) and of course you will also regularly get headings while enroute (IRL even more so than on VATSIM), be that for deconfliction or sequencing. In those cases you also won’t know when and how to return to your route until ATC gives you the respective clearance.

But as Andreas says: basically every aircraft that might get into a situation like that will have multiple radios on board and the likelihood of all of them failing and a complete com failure occurring is incredibly low.
And in the Frankfurt-specific case, as I said above, the DCT MTR shouldn’t be given anymore anyway as that shortcut has been replaced with DCT DF412, which is on the STAR and would give you an idea of what to do in the highly unlikely case of a complete com failure. But - and this is of course another shortcoming of VATSIM - unlike IRL not all controllers for a given sector group will always be completely up to date on the latest procedures, especially on VATSIM where people may control dozens of different sector groups somewhat regularly.

[1326167 (Andrew Crowley)]

Of course ATC isn’t going to spell out the plan mile by mile, so sure, judgement would have to be applied as to how EXACTLY I’m going to get my aircraft onto the approach. And obviously it’s situational - if an IAF is on the STAR and I’ve been told to expect to rejoin the STAR, I would do that and tie up the approach. If I’m expecting vectors onto the approach, I’ll have to decide where and how to join it - head for an IAF, do a course reversal or not, etc. There will usually be a choice that makes more sense than the others, and it will usually be obvious to both the pilot and controller. Even if it’s not obvious, at least both the pilot and controller have the broad idea of what is going to happen, vs the controller wondering whether you’ll rejoin the star or not, go direct something for a procedure turn or not, pick a different runway than what is in use, fly over the field, etc etc. It’s to everyone’s benefit that the pilot and controller are operating on as shared of a mental model as possible.

I really find this discussion bizarre. A pilot asked what he should do when he’s cleared somewhere off route and ambiguity exists as to what he should expect next. I simply told him he should ASK. This is just basic, day one of instrument ground school type stuff, in my world. I doubt I’ve ever met a single pilot who would not ask, vs simply tolerating ambiguity in the cockpit, because… What? They’re trying to save the controller a breath? I mean, let’s remember who is working for whom, here. Unnecessary ambiguity is simply a bad idea in an airplane.

As far as wanting to pick apart every possible reason about WHY this is established standardized procedure, telling a pilot what to expect next if he’s cleared off course - we’re going down a human factors road here, but it’s worth remembering that entire teams of smarter people than you and I have written these procedures, anticipating possible scenarios that haven’t even occurred to you or I. Ignoring standardization because you, as an individual pilot, think you’ve got it all figured out and know better… That’s really never a good idea, right? I hope we can agree on that at least.

We possibly could be seeing a cultural difference between European and US operations, but I doubt it’s much of a factor. If anything, from what I understand Europe makes more use of closed procedures than we do here. Almost every STAR here ends in a charted vector if you haven’t gotten one sooner. But if you fly it as charted, the chart tells you what to expect, and if you’re pulled off earlier, you’re told. Again, I really don’t think I know anyone who wouldn’t ask, otherwise. I’m no kind of outlier in this.

Don’t overcomplicate it. It’s good for so many reasons for a pilot to know what to expect next. It’s good for the controller too. If a controller isn’t sure what the pilot’s next plan is, you can bet he’ll ask. If a pilot is uncertain about something, he should also ask. Easy enough.

[1474242 (Marc Sieffert)]

Very interesting discussion between two real pilots! Thanks for this! You are probably both right
And based on this if an ATC asks me to direct a waypoint which is not on my route I will inform him that it is not on my route and that I will need vectors after this point (in case he does not mention this by himself). In case of the example before since MTR is also MEFTO and MEFTO is the final point of the Go Around route with a pre defined holding, in case I get no vectors after MTR (MEFTO) I will just hold on Mefto until I get vectors.
So in case you see a plane holding on MEFTO for ages… it will be me…