Hairiest route

cstorey · Post by **cstorey** » 14 Jan 2007, 09:46

Anyone who likes chill inducing approaches might like to try this toughest of all routes ( toughest approach I've found - makes Innsbruck seem like afternoon tea!) . It is a daily ( weather permitting) flight operated by PIA, nowadays by 737 but in the past by Viscounts I believe, from Islamabad to Skardu and return

The routing is

Islamabad OPRN
BATAL
SARPI
BAVRO
TANGO
BUNGI
DELDA
BALAL
SKARDU (OPSD) SD 247 k/cs

The level I suggest is FL 230. Cross Balal not below FL 160 at no more than 170KIAS and adopt a 10000' QNH RH circuit at Skardu (7600' amsl) for R/W 33 . You can devise your own approach, but I go round the rock where the Indus turns left, at about 9000' QNH on a heading of 090M and make right turns on to 135, 270 and when lined up 330

I tried it in the 1-11 and it's a challenge. the departure will be even more of a challenge in a Viscount which I shall try next. I do not know whether PIA ever used Tridents on this route

Tom Clayton · Post by **Tom Clayton** » 14 Jan 2007, 16:27

Sounds interesting. I fobbed up the plan in both FSNav and default GPS formats, along with a text file. Anyone that wants it can get if from my little corner of the web as OPRN-OPSD.zip.

http://home.earthlink.net/~tclayton2k/tom/flightplans/

ajb · Post by **ajb** » 17 Jan 2007, 20:04

I was fascinated by this one so I tried it the other day. For ease I used a Dash 8 ( :roll: ) and programmed the waypoints into the FMC. After T/O and settling down into the cruise I cheated and put the aircraft into LNAV mode for the remainder of the journey.

All went well so I decided I wanted to fly the route properly using a real aircraft like the 1-11 or Viscount. It then occurred to me that the intersections on the flight plan don't seem to align with any VORs nor do the tracks between them.

The terrain is difficult to say the least so my question is how do you accurately navigate between intersections that do not apparently have a relationship with nearby VORs or NDBs? Any inaccuracies on this route, especially in the descent, could end up with a CFT!! GPS is not an option.

Andy

Tom Clayton · Post by **Tom Clayton** » 17 Jan 2007, 22:20

ajb wrote:GPS is not an option.

That's the only way I'd be able to do it! I may be wrong, but I believe that many such intersections are more or less just arbitrary points on a map designed to give pilots a common reference point, and depend on technology for accuracy.

ianhind · Post by **ianhind** » 17 Jan 2007, 23:33

I hate to quote from Wikipaedia but here is an article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waypoint

My understanding is that intersections/waypoints existed originally as distances and radials from a VOR - look at some of SIDs. With GPS came the ability to be progammed with the longitude/latitude without needing reference to the original source of the data. Some of the flightplanners differentiate between waypoints and ISECs - I wonder if one of these is purely a GPS derived point that never had a VOR distance/radial derivation.

So there's my idea - real world pilots blow it away

Kevin Farnell · Post by **Kevin Farnell** » 17 Jan 2007, 23:47

I tried it the lazy way - B737-200 using default 737 panel (easy autopilot set up).
I had to cancel IFR, after ATC tried to fly me into mountains several times.
In the end, I opted for a visual approach, with full flap and gear from a considerable altitude. Landing was easy, but with no wind and good visibility.
Next, to try it in something which takes a little more skill.
Shame there's nothing to do when you get there, other than turn around and fly back.

Cheers

Kevin

ajb · Post by **ajb** » 18 Jan 2007, 06:44

Hmmm. It looks from your replies that GPS is the only option. I wonder how they did it in the days before GPS. I guess that the route didn't follow the intersections mentioned above. But if so, how did they avoid hitting the mountains and valley sides? Must have needed visual conditions! I think a bit of exploring is needed in the area - could bend a few aircraft in the process though :sad:

Kevin's point about ATC reminds me that my first IFR flight ended in ATC telling me to make a turn (for an approach to RWY 32) then climb flight level 310. I'd already struggled to FL230 in a Dash 8; no way could I have got it to FL310! And anyway, the airport is some 24,000 feet below that level. Runway 32 must have one hell of a glideslope!

Slainte,
Andy

cstorey · Post by **cstorey** » 18 Jan 2007, 10:26

This route was passed to me by a colleague who was an adviser at one time to the Pakistan Air Force. It is a essentially a visual only route and is tortuous for two reasons

1.The Kashmir dispute dictates that you cannot fly ( safely) direct from Batal to Tango

2.in the latter stages Bungi - Delda - Balal - OPSD the route is to enable a safe (??!!) descent to be made down the valleys. To emphasise the significance of this, I checked on Google Earth, and to either side of the R/W the ground rises to c.16,000 feet amsl ( a rise of about 9000') within about 4 NM of the R/W

Because it is a VFR - indeed VMC only - route it is frequently cancelled because of weather - hence the navigation is all with Mk 1 eyeball

hope this helps

Chris

ajb · Post by **ajb** » 18 Jan 2007, 18:28

That's very interesting Chris. I wonder what the routing is these days as I see that a regular 737 service exists in the PIA timetable. Clearly they must avoid the Kashmir region for obvious reasons.

Regards
Andy

cstorey · Post by **cstorey** » 19 Jan 2007, 19:01

Andy - I believe that the routing is the one presently used

Chris