Busy?

[Rowley Birkin, QC]

From an interested pilot... what kind of traffic levels define a particular time as being 'busy'? Quite often you hear frequencies being very clogged up but the controller's only talking to a few aircraft. Who are the busiest bods in the ATC world?

[professor yaffle]

busy is subjective
sometimes it can appear that the frequency may not seem busy but the amount of "behind the scenes " co-ordination is great but you guys don't hear that!!
also can depend on the complexity of the situation, ie could only be a few aircraft but complex or loads of aircraft but in comparison reletively simple.
busiest bods in the world? we all are!!!!

prof

[Proceed As Cleared]

Spot on, professor.

[FWA NATCA]

Most pilots don't realize that we transmit and recive on more than one frequency so you only hear one small portion of what is really going on.

For example where I work I utilize up to nine (9) frequencies. I have 2 primary VHF and 2 primary UHF's frequencies, 2 Satelite airport frequencies, and I monitor both VHF and UHF guard, then I have a backup frequency in case one of the primaries fails. If we split off a portion of my sector then I'm down to only 6 or 7 frequencies that I transmit or have to monitor.

Add to the above that I also have 6 direct coordination lines to adjoining approaches or centers, and several dial lines to FSS's and Flow controls at the Centers that I also have to monitor and coordinate on.

We may not always sound busy but we may be because of coordination being accomplished and or the traffic being worked on other frequencies, or training be given to a new controller.

Mike

[Findo]

Mike - if the USA ever gets round to doing proper safety analysis of your procedures you won't be doing that lot for long.

The more frequencies the less busy you have to be to make it in any way safe = you don't win the busy prize.

[Scott Voigt]

Findo;

The freqs aren't that bad most of the time since if you are busy you split off the sectors. However, on the midnight shifts you can't split due to lack of staff. That is one of the times it gets a bit bad... Of course, there are some days when you can't get enough folks in due to illness to split everything either... <sigh> Then you just try to put everyone on one freq a much as you can. The satellite airports that my brother in FWA speaks of is normally used over here so that you can talk to aircraft on the ground to give clearances...

One other thing though, we are pretty much expected over here to work a rather large share of traffic compared to what I have seen over in Europe... It's a cost thing mostly. We always try to get by on the least possible cost.

regards

[WX Man]

I heard the other day that some of the LATC & Maastricht sectors handle 85 a/c per hour at busy points. Is this right?

I'm still training at the moment, and on our Part Task Trainer exercises (like a mini ACC sim) the busiest exercises seem to give us 30 a/c in 40-45 mins. The proper sim isn't as busy (yet).

[Scott Voigt]

When we are humping along, we can do 30 aircraft in a 15 to 20 minute period easy...

regards

[surfingatco]

That's nothing! Where I work (for 1 day only on 7th July this year) the flow rate is 60 per 15 minutes on my half of the airfield and 45 per 15 mins on the other side.
Okay, I own up, I'm talking about the Silverstone Helicopter Operation for the British Grand Prix, but it is ATC, with each helicopter given a take-off and landing clearance. Movements for the 1 day can top 3000.
Scott - I suppose you're going to mention Oshkosh now. I've heard the tape -"Orbit downwind and let's get the final into this state!" Impressive!
Btw, in my day job (EGLL) we did a record 1360 movements a few days ago - so much for the downturn! (And this morning we peaked at 48 landers in 1 hour).

"Busy-ness" is relative anyway - I had a tape made of me doing GMC at 'LL a few years ago cos I remembered it as an extremely busy session. When I listened to it there were numerous gaps in the R/T. Then I remembered who my assistant (lighting operator)was! ;)

[ferris]

It is hard for people who are not controllers to understand busy (and for some who are, as well). The frequency can be busy, without you being busy (a lot of not complex traffic). The frequency can be quiet, and you can be flat out with coord, or with a few aircraft requiring a lot of watching/sequencing/not doing what they are supposed to. Complexity plays a huge part (lots of climbing/descending crossing). Or even what equipment you are working with (I have seen some amazingly complex, super busy non-radar towers doing their own procedural arrivals- put a radar in and you wouldn't look up from the newspaper;) ). Yet some terminal guys at THE biggest airports think they work hard because they talk to a constant stream of pre-sequenced same type a/c.
Almost everyone works near their maximum at some time- otherwise a manager shuffles the deck chairs until you do.

[Cryolosophorous]

You know when someone says something and you wish it was you? That was it! Nice one, Ferris. :D :D

[Delta Whiskey]

FWA NATCA - I'm coming at this a couple of days late, but I'm interested in the concept of as many freqs as you guard all being stand alone (or did I miss somethng?)
In New Zealand, when we combine sectors or otherwise have to handle traffic over a wide area, we use a facility we call re-transmit where all the relevant freqs are combined and are retransmitted.
For example if 126.0 was for "North" and 123.7 was for "South", and the transmitters were geographically apart by say 300 miles, then a pilot transmitting on 123.7 would be re- broadcast on 126.0 by the ground equipment so everyone on 123.7 hears him. The controller goes out on all freqs simultaneously, and to a pilot on any of the selected freqs it sounds like just one is in use.
It may slow up the number of transmissions you can pack into an hour, but you don't have the problems of of the fliers not being aware of what is going on and getting on your case for not replying to them.
Cheers
:)

[Delta Whiskey]

finger trouble - I meant
"....everyone on 126.0 hears him ....."
:rolleyes:

[120.4]

Delta Whiskey
We have a system like that over here, we call it "cross-coupling". Be ware! The technical nature of crosscouple systems can lead to suppression of transmissions if they occur at the same time.

A recent incident at Manchester was caused by this when two aircraft responded to the same instruction. The incorrect one, starting after and finishing before the correct one caused the system to supress it. As a result the use of crosscoupling has been suspended and that is likely to spread to the rest of the UK.

Point 4
:)

[NATS_PIZZ]

Other than coupling between VHF & UHF frequencies on AIR & GMC, Manchester does not have cross-coupling.

We are too poor to have such an advanced system, unlike our southern brothers.

[cossack]

We did a very brief trial on cross-coupling the Approach North and South frequencies, I should know, the incident that Point 4 refers to was me!
It is a design function of the Radio kit (Schmid) that we use, that involves micro-seconds and all sorts of tels type boffin stuff, that the aircraft who responded quite clearly on 118.57 to the call intended for the aircraft on 119.4, was not heard by either me or the other aircraft because it was never re-transmited.
This happened because his transmission started after and finished before the readback on 119.4, the system waited to re-transmit, then there was nothing to re-transmit so it did nothing! There was no squeal to alert me that there had been another transmission made. Both aircraft commenced their descent and good fortune meant there was no loss of separation.
We do still cross-couple multiple (3 x VHF and 2 x UHF) Tower frequencies during the quiet night periods. This cross-couple problem does still occur but all the traffic that is in the air or on a runway must be on 118.62.

[NATS_PIZZ]

OK. I'll rephrase my statement.

We are too poor to have such an advanced system - that works, unlike our southern brothers.

[All Systems Go]

The X-Coupling systems we use in Area and the big Terminal place in the UK are not that clever - they simply re-transmit what they get. They don't wait for anything. The problem of suppresion in our systems (not knowing anything of the details of Manchesters stuff I can't comment) shouldn't happen. It can, however, cos a strong RF signal from one A/C might dowse down a small RF signal from another on a different frequency, but the system is designed to let it all just pass through. I'm still very sceptical about the number of frequencies that can be X-Coupled at Swanwick. You can couple up to 12 together, and this can cause all kinds of problems in the way radios work and the systems we use to drive the radio equipment. But, people alot clevererererererer than me designed it and say it works. Who am I to argue? And why would they listen to a little person like me who actually has practical experience on the stuff? Ring any bells anyone?

[Scott Voigt]

The US has the ability to do the cross coupling in the centers, but we don't use the system as there is a cost to doing it... The terminals do not have this ability as far as I know... It all comes down to cost...

regards

[FWA NATCA]

Findo,

The over riding problem is that we lack the necessary number of Certified controllers to always split off sectors when traffic dictates so we are forced to work everything.

The majority of larger facilities have arrival and departue fixes, departure and arrival controllers, final controllers, a satelite airport controller, and monitors. At the typical ATC-7 facility (fromerly Level III approach control) you have none of the above.

What you do have is usually no more than two radar controllers working all the traffic in and out of your airspace, primary airport and satelite airport and over flights.

Last Friday we worked 768 operations (our average is in the 600 range), by large airport standards that isn't that much traffic, but you have to remember that they have up to 7 scopes staffed compared to just our two scopes. In case your wondering we do have 3 other radar scopes that can be used but we don't have the controllers to staff them.

If a safety aduit would help improve procedures or resolve staffing issues, then bring one on, but note, that during our last full facility evaluation we received a score of 98 out of 100, and also received National ATC-7 Facility of the year (2000).


Mike