Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
MLS Approaches  
User currently offlineUal1636 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (14 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 2250 times:

Can someone please explain how MLS approaches work? Thanks.

4 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineMcomess From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 66 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (14 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 2152 times:

The MLS, or Microwave Landing System, was designed to eventually replace the ILS (Instrument Landing System) at large airports across the world. What it does is provide precision guidance (both lateral and verticle) to aircraft approaching a runway. It is VERY similar to the ILS which has widespread use across the world. Infact, one would not be incorrect to think of MLS as an upgraded, or expanded ILS. The key "selling points" for the MLS is the fact that it is much more accurate and precise than the original ILS. It has an operational frequency range from 5031 to 5091 MHz; 200 channels - more than enough for worldwide implementation. Its range is signifigantly greater than ILS, capable of lateral reception of +/- 60 degrees within 14 miles, and +/- 40 degrees outward towards 20 miles. Vertically, it is capable of reception at a 30 degree angle, all the way up to 20,000 feet, while still maintain a 3 degree glide path. All MLS would contain DME (Distance Measuring Equipment) to provide pilots with exact information as to how far out from the runway they really are. The Final high point of the MLS is what is called "Data Content" and "Auxiliary Data Content". When tuned to an operating MLS, pilots would be provided with the following information: Station ID, Ground Equipment and performance level, DME channel and status, 3-D location of MLS equipment, waypoint coordinates, runway conditions, and weather (RVR/Runway Visual Range, Cloud Ceiling, Altimeter setting, Wind, wake turbulence, wind shear). The MLS also has more sophisticated capabilities, such as curved and segmented approaches, selectable glidepath angles, and accurate 3-D positioning of aircraft in space. These will be implemented as aircraft begin to be better equipped with more advanced MLS instrumentation.

User currently offlineQB001 From Canada, joined Apr 2000, 2053 posts, RR: 4
Reply 2, posted (14 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 2120 times:

That is fine in theory. But in practice, it's another story. In a nutshell, MLS has been dumped. I do not recall the exact technical reason as to why, but MLS will not be implemented. On the ICAO website, I found this : "The current strategy for the application of non-visual aids to approach and landing was recommended at the Special Communications/Operations Divisional Meeting held at ICAO Headquarters in spring, 1995. Delegates to that meeting discussed future ICAO policy in all-weather operations and concluded that, for a variety of reasons, it had become impracticable to proceed with implementation of the global ILS/MLS transition plan. " The article goes on to say that the future of "non-visual aids to approach and landing" lies with satelites systems, such as GPS and a few others.


Never let the facts get in the way of a good theory.
User currently offlineMcomess From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 66 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (14 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 2112 times:

I agree and disagree. You are correct in saying that MLS was never, or atleast has not yet been, implemented as planned, mainly due to the new promises of satelite/GPS approaches. However, the ICAO/FAA has since drastically reduced funding for the development of WAAS/enhanced GPS/RNAV approaches. This leads me to believe that they might again consider the ILS, or its expanded version, the MLS for worldwide implementation. The ICAO was only garaunteeing that the ILS system would be in use through 1995, and then they were planning to go with coupled MLS/ILS systems, and then eventually go all MLS when the users (Pilots) upgraded their equipment. However, when GPS became available for aviation, the ICAO and FAA (probably the CAA too) saw these as a more capable and worthwhile replacement. So they had these two roads to go down, and they chose to go with GPS. Unfortunately, current development of GPS data to be used as a replacement to the ILS is "dead in the water". Perhaps they will chose to resume development of the other road, with MLS.

User currently offlineBuff From Australia, joined Mar 2007, 0 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (14 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 2085 times:

There was a great lobby within Canadian civil aviation in the eighties to enhance the LORAN chain system as the equipment to access the signal was the cheapest available, especially to the private owners. The government resisted due to its research and pending approval of MLS. In fact, the Cdn government decided that the next century's replacement for the ILS would be the MLS. They funded a research project that lasted over ten years, and helped in the development of a small company in Cape Breton that would ultimately benefit/profit from MLS onboard and ground-based equipment (primarily ground based).

And then along came GPS. Within 6 months of the Tidal Wave that was GPS came the demise of not only the "long term" philosophy of the government, but of the R&D facilities in Nova Scotia.

MLS died a sudden and quick death in Canada about 7 years ago!

(Apologies for any timeline errors - I'm going from my faulty memory of events)

Best Regards,

Buff


Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic MLS Approaches
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Nose Down Vs Nose Up Approaches posted Thu Jan 18 2007 07:22:19 by Aaden
Do 747 Pilots Ever Hand Fly Visual Approaches Etc. posted Sat Jan 13 2007 12:51:35 by Ps76
DCA Approaches--- Landing To The South posted Tue Nov 21 2006 19:43:00 by Orfsurfer
JetBlue And RNAV/VOR Approaches posted Mon Oct 16 2006 19:00:18 by IAHFLYR
ILS Approaches In Large Jets posted Thu May 25 2006 02:14:34 by RamerinianAir
NDB/VOR Vs GPS Approaches posted Wed May 17 2006 00:23:10 by Julianuk
GPS/RNP Approaches posted Thu May 11 2006 09:01:33 by Zarniwoop
Nose High Vs. Nose Low Approaches posted Wed Mar 22 2006 03:57:47 by FlyingNanook
RNP(RNAV) Approaches posted Sat Jan 14 2006 16:47:42 by KJFK31L
St. Thomas, VI (STT) Approaches... posted Sat Nov 6 2004 04:44:11 by John

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format