Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
General None Reported / Taken
Procedure
Opposite direction procedures are not being properly briefed to both Tower Controllers and ZSE Controllers. Tower/ZSE Controllers need more clarification on how to handle requests for opposite direction operations and exactly what constitutes opposite direction and at what time is an aircraft to be considered in opposite direction status. Redmond was advertising Visuals Runway 22. Redmond Tower called for release on a CRJ2 off Runway 04 opposite direction and mentioned the Dash 8 who was inbound. I then questioned them about the fact that it would be an opposite direction departure and that Dash 8 was inbound; albeit the aircraft was still more than 10 minutes/55 miles away. The Tower told me they would have the pilot back taxi to Runway 22 for departure and call me back. I would have felt totally comfortable releasing that aircraft with a turn to the south away from the Dash 8 and not even bat an eye; but I think it would technically be opposite direction according to the FAA. Obviously the Tower was confused about what constitutes opposite direction by the fact they even asked for an opposite direction operation when they knew about the Dash 8 inbound. They were just trying to expedite the pilots but they need to be briefed on what constitutes opposite direction. Even though I am aware they were just trying to expedite the pilot; they ended up making the CRJ pilot back taxi to Runway 22 for a same direction departure and then called for release when he arrived there. On the other hand; Salem Tower handles their requests for opposite direction in a manner opposite (no pun intended) to the way Redmond Tower handles theirs. Salem Tower will not allow any opposite direction even if there are no other aircraft and the only aircraft involved is the one requesting an opposite direction operation. On the third hand; different supervisors handle requests for opposite direction approaches differently as well. Pilots are being inconvenienced and confused by our lack of standardization between controllers and facilities. Some times they may get that opposite direction approach and sometimes not. Talked to a DPE (Designated Pilot Examiner) who was dismayed and confused by the fact he has to see an examinee perform a variety of approaches usually including at least one or more opposite direction. He expressed great frustration with not being able to get those accomplished without having to transit to ANOTHER airport and then HOPE that the flow at that airport will allow the approach he needs. Finally; we need clarification and then standardization of the procedures for opposite direction request/operations. Airspace and Procedures is not providing controllers with standardized procedures or proper briefings on how to apply and deal the restrictions we have place upon us. Anyone can spew out the information and then let the floor figure out how to interpret that information but that is the job of Airspace and Procedures to do that so we have standardization. Provide Controllers with a briefing on opposite directions and be ready to answer questions about whether an approach to the airport is opposite direction or not if it is for example; the VOR-A to RDM and an ILS which are essentially opposite direction but one is to the airport and the other happens to be to the runway. What about circling approaches? What about approaches to Runway 10 and another approach to Runway 22 which are somewhat opposite direction. Airspace and Procedures needs to have a briefing and have answers to some of these questions or get the answers and follow up with another briefing at a later date. Airspace and Procedures needs to work with all the Towers to provide a standardized method to handle opposite direction requests which is unambiguous and cut and dry; at least until permanent procedures are in place.
ZSE Controller described an 'opposite direction' operation; voicing concern regarding the multiple interpretations of the procedure and the lack of briefings concerning the subject operation/s.