View Full Version : Question for AUH arrival controllers
22nd May 2012, 18:06
Hi guys and gals,
There was a change recently when on first contact we now have to tell you , call sign, aircraft type, rnav capability, atis, qnh, underwear colour etc. And of course there is always someone who wants to add the squawk code as well. What was wrong with the old way of just call sign and atis, (don't you know our aircraft type?) and if you ARE NOT rnav capable then tell you. There is already way too much talking as it is, this just makes it worse.
22nd May 2012, 20:55
when on first contact we now have to tell you , call sign, aircraft type, rnav capability, atis, qnh, underwear colour etc.
Lmaoooooooooo..... cant stop laughing!!!!!
22nd May 2012, 22:34
It's cos they sooo sheet
23rd May 2012, 04:46
Isn't the standard requirement to notify of LOSS of RNAV capability??? isn't it all listed on the flight plan??? Do they receive info from the filed flight plan?? (questions, not comments)?????
23rd May 2012, 12:03
Agree, way too much information, however we are required to get all the information from you, so better just to give it all to us, so we don't have to go back and ask you for it over again:)
As for runway, QNH, type of approach and ATIS information are all mandatory according to ICAO, so no chance of getting rid of that (I know a lot of controllers don't really care about getting those read back at both our and other airports, but that is what is mandatory.)
As for aircraft type, you will be surprised how often it is the 'wrong' aircraft coming, specially on the shorter flights around from around the region. For the time being we are only allowed 5NM spacing in our airspace, so the main reason for checking the type is so the electronic guidance system is correct for when you park at the gate. However, from end of June (or July, don't remember right now) we will get 3NM spacing in the airspace, and then it is quite important to know if you are in an A320 or an A340, so we can put the guy behind you the correct distance behind. But with the high runway occupancy time at OMAA even 5NM in trail is pushing it...
As for RNAV capability it is again an amazing amount of flights that are incorrectly filed, so it is nice to know (however again, on an inbound flight you are already cleared by ACC for a RNP1 or 5 star depending on your flightplan, so if you accepted that clearance I cannot really understand why you have to tell us which STAR you are on (ACC should have told us if you are cleared differently from your filed flightplan)).
23rd May 2012, 15:59
Thanks for the reply omaATC, at least I know now we are saying it for a reason.
Another question, most of the time the 250 kt Boxak restriction is cancelled by 124.4, but the previous (120.9?) tells us to slow down. Most of us know to ignore that until we talk to 124.4. Is there some solution to that?
23rd May 2012, 16:57
Funny you mention boxak, I asked once if it was in effect and got a 3 min bollocking/speech about knowing the contents of the AIP, and reading the chart from some SA accented voice, only to have the restriction cancelled when switched to approach, maybe that gentleman should familiarize himself with the local ATC procedures before he gives flying lessons over the radio....:mad:
23rd May 2012, 16:58
Another question, most of the time the 250 kt Boxak restriction is cancelled by 124.4, but the previous (120.9?) tells us to slow down. Most of us know to ignore that until we talk to 124.4. Is there some solution to that? Like minded thinkers, excellent. :ok:
Over and over
24th May 2012, 02:31
"familiarize himself with local procedures"
The STAR speed of 250kts is the procedure! If AUH approach (124.4) tell you to disregard the speed restriction, that is their decision. If the ACC gives a speed for sequencing, they are obliged to remind you to comply with the STAR. It is quite obvious when people ignore ATC instructions. The level of professionalism by (some) crew in this region astounds me - and not in a good way!
24th May 2012, 04:40
This event was actually before the published "stars", simply a published constraint at boxak....having operated 3 sectors into AUH the past two days, it became evident that when rwy 13 was in use approach canceled the constraint at BOXAK..it was a simple question I posed in an effort to optimize my descent profile...and yes, the "professionalism" of this ATC person was very evident on the radio...