'Point-Merge'.
Guest
Posts: n/a
SH650, for someone ostensibly based in the USA why such an interest and such strong feelings about UK ATC in general and the London area in particular?
Are you actually who/what you suggest you are, or an alter ego for someone else, or one of the sciolists we're all warned about at the bottom of the page?
I just don't get why a USA based pilot should have such strong feelings about one small area of European airspace?
Are you actually who/what you suggest you are, or an alter ego for someone else, or one of the sciolists we're all warned about at the bottom of the page?
I just don't get why a USA based pilot should have such strong feelings about one small area of European airspace?
I have fairly strong feelings about some of the CTRs around London too with my GA hat on, but fundamentally, the big problem with SE GA is their inability to comply with the glide clear rule within the London CTR. SVFR traffic (helicopters and light twins) is dealt with very well by Heathrow Special and Thames Radar.
On Point Merge, what is the London flavour going to do to CDAs?
On Point Merge, what is the London flavour going to do to CDAs?
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SH650, for someone ostensibly based in the USA why such an interest and such strong feelings about UK ATC in general and the London area in particular?
London airspace is beginning to be redesigned therefore the founding design principles must be correct or else it will be Class A down to the ground and Nimmer, anotherthing, HD, and several others here drinking plenty of champagne having run their successful secret agenda of eradicating GA.
Jwscud, the CTRs seem largely a non-issue compared with everything else in SE England. They actually allow (S)VFR flight. However we don't all fly less than 2000 ft.
Last edited by soaringhigh650; 27th Nov 2013 at 13:27.
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: The South
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some of the
as you so eloquently put it, happen to be very capable and professional controllers. I would suggest arranging a visit to Swanwick on a busy summer morning.
Back to the original point merge debate....I'm not sure what the main benefits are. I'm not sure how it fits into our fuel saving / carbon saving plans? It feels like it's being introduced because it's a fancy new system and therefore should be introduced. I'd love to be proven wrong. Before anyone says anything, I'm not a grumpy old fart adverse to change, I'm all for improvements to the service we provide. I know my watch colleagues will also go out of their way to facilitate directs or the removal of level capping on a daily basis.
the NAT$$$ trolls
Back to the original point merge debate....I'm not sure what the main benefits are. I'm not sure how it fits into our fuel saving / carbon saving plans? It feels like it's being introduced because it's a fancy new system and therefore should be introduced. I'd love to be proven wrong. Before anyone says anything, I'm not a grumpy old fart adverse to change, I'm all for improvements to the service we provide. I know my watch colleagues will also go out of their way to facilitate directs or the removal of level capping on a daily basis.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: southampton,hampshire,england
Posts: 866
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Point Merge results in increased fuel consumption..."fact". One location where it might work is an airport with little adjacent airport airspace complexity and vast amounts of sky available. Lots of data from Oslo...for a quick overview google Oslo pointmerge. Please take time to advise airlines not to go out and buy fast aeroplanes, it is a complete waste of money if speeding and sequencing start over a hundred miles out!
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Earth
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Point Merge can have benefits at some locations. As in a lot of cases it depends on factors like how busy the airport is, how effective ATC already are at achieving high runway utilisation, how much airspace is available etc. The problem is that PM is often seen as a new technique and therefore "sexy" by ATC and Airport managements who are under pressure to innovate and reduce environmental impacts. It is also being pushed hard by equipment manufacturers keen to sell their black boxes, i.e controller support tools, that are needed to implement PM.
The acid test will be real fuel burn numbers as opposed to projections. For me the critical issue for Gatwick with its high intensity single runway ops is, does the use of PM reduce runway utilisation?
The acid test will be real fuel burn numbers as opposed to projections. For me the critical issue for Gatwick with its high intensity single runway ops is, does the use of PM reduce runway utilisation?
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
happen to be very capable and professional controllers
soaring low!!!!!!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Vent all you like to the people here SH650, but they are not the policy makers. They apply the rules they are given, they don't make them. That you repeatedly fail to understand this is unfortunate.
Anyway, keep banging away if it makes you feel better and is somehow cathartic, but don't expect anything to happen because of it bar you alienating just about everyone here.
Anyway, keep banging away if it makes you feel better and is somehow cathartic, but don't expect anything to happen because of it bar you alienating just about everyone here.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: LHR/EGLL
Age: 45
Posts: 4,392
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes. So capable and professional that they can't mix IFR and VFR traffic where VFR does not affect IFR....
Which is it?
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gonzo - No I am not lambasting ATC in Class D.
Warped Factor - OKAY I get your point. This Class A issue will be referred to those who make up the RULE$ to see if they would even LI$TEN.
Or whether it'll fall onto DEAF EAR$ again for another 50 years.
Warped Factor - OKAY I get your point. This Class A issue will be referred to those who make up the RULE$ to see if they would even LI$TEN.
Or whether it'll fall onto DEAF EAR$ again for another 50 years.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: LHR/EGLL
Age: 45
Posts: 4,392
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So which controllers are you talking about here then....?
Yes. So capable and professional that they can't mix IFR and VFR traffic where VFR does not affect IFR
You must be talking about controllers who have the option of permitting IFR and VFR to mix, but choose not to. I'm sure you're not referring to controllers who work airspace where VFR flight is not permitted, as that would be a rather spurious argument.
Yes. So capable and professional that they can't mix IFR and VFR traffic where VFR does not affect IFR
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hants
Posts: 2,295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nimmer, anotherthing, HD, and several others here drinking plenty of champagne having run their successful secret agenda of eradicating GA
As for our secret agenda, NAT$ controller$ do a pretty good job in the main, working to the rules that NAT$ are bound by as part of the licence they have which is stipulated by the CAA.
However SH; I'm sure the facts of how UK airspace is governed and controlled is of no interest to you as you seem to have a beef with the controller$ themselves...