Request vs Require.
ga_trojan
Last time I looked QF wasn’t a foreign airline. The truth of the matter is that CX and other foreign carriers weren’t allowed to use 16L/34R up until last year. That is a fact. If you have any doubt, go and ask ASA. They were the ones that somehow thought domestic A330’s were different from international.
Horse sh*t. You clearly have a short haul domestic mentality. Some of those Asian carriers you ignorantly berate have just flown 10 hours through the night two crew. Last time I came into Sydney which was very recently I had 30m spare on 34R with medium auto brake. There was no way in hell I was going to accept 34R. And don’t get me started on the A330 brakes and there tendency to get hot especially with medium auto brake.
You must live in a different universe to most of us but I haven’t found a single B737/A320 that needs more landing distance than a “heavy” given the same environmental conditions and MLW.
parabellum
Very simply all our newer aircraft aren't fitted with ADF's and as such because of the lack of recency and the lack of aircraft capable of doing them and airports we fly to that actually have NDB approaches the company has removed them as an approved approach.
I find that a little hard to believe given that I have seen QF and foreign B744 arrive and depart on 16L/34R.
It remains though that some Asian airlines in particular flatly refuse to land on 16L/34R which is basically giving themselves a competitive advantage even though their aircraft is more than able to handle it.
Except the braking action in your 'heavy' is actually better than my light twin
parabellum
I may be a bit out of date but why not?
Re. domestics requiring a longer runway and being questioned. When the previous however many 737s/A320s have accepted the shorter runway and you don't it strikes us as rather odd and we begin to wonder if you have a problem. Fine if you don't want to tell us but it helps our planning if we know the reason so we can plan around it accordingly if necessary.
Not that I'm complaining - I don't think I've ever had ATC query it when we've required a different runway to the one they want to give us.
And it is a bit embarrassing when you hear:
XYZ: "XYZ require 16R"
ATC: "XYZ, understood, expect a 12 minute delay for 16R"
XYZ: "Oh in that case, we'll take 16L then"
Towerboy:Careful with the spray of invective, old boy. You might hit one of us.
I have nothing but the utmost respect (really) for the job you guys do. And the way that you usually do it. I have an unhappy ignorance of the methods, procedures and realities of your job. Apparently that is mutual.
Some of things that get posted here are couched in the time honoured tradition of understatement. Other things are just ego parades. That does not change the fact that sometimes we need all the pavement, sometimes we just would rather have it. Other times? Meh. You'll just have to take our word for it.
I have nothing but the utmost respect (really) for the job you guys do. And the way that you usually do it. I have an unhappy ignorance of the methods, procedures and realities of your job. Apparently that is mutual.
Some of things that get posted here are couched in the time honoured tradition of understatement. Other things are just ego parades. That does not change the fact that sometimes we need all the pavement, sometimes we just would rather have it. Other times? Meh. You'll just have to take our word for it.
Last edited by Australopithecus; 21st Jan 2015 at 12:16.
Jeeeeezus towerboy, blow a gasket!! As a controller if I'm feeling less than fabulous I'll leave a bit of extra space and keep it as simple as I can. I have absolutely no problem with someone at the pointy end of several hundred pax doing exactly the same. Far better than the alternative.
itsnotthatbloodyhard, a wry "it's been a long day" or "minor brake issues" would suffice. You might get a follow up "confirm normal approach and landing?" with the brakes or asking which taxiway you can take, but you'll get the runway. It's handy for us to know so we don't try to jam one up too close behind as you dawdle past the rapid exit
itsnotthatbloodyhard, a wry "it's been a long day" or "minor brake issues" would suffice. You might get a follow up "confirm normal approach and landing?" with the brakes or asking which taxiway you can take, but you'll get the runway. It's handy for us to know so we don't try to jam one up too close behind as you dawdle past the rapid exit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Surrounding the localizer
Posts: 2,200
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
1 Post
"Request Rwy 34 due performance" seems to work every time, and as has been said, if I'm offered a shorter alternative, I will assess the pros and cons of that alternative.
Specifically, I'm loathe after an all night trip to expose myself, my crew and my passengers to any increased risk. When the time comes for me to show superior airmanship and use a shorter runway in less than ideal and optimal circumstances it will be when I have no other option.
It's a team effort, but it's my decision, political and internal policy decisions have absolutely no place in my thought process, so unless it's notamed as closed I'll ask politely and if I don't get a positive response I will advise of my intentions.
This is not a discussion about egos or otherwise, it's merely a symptom of having to operate in a less than perfect environment and maintaining a sufficient safety margin. Regrettably it seems that this gets lost at times on both sides of the mic.
I can also confirm that Australia, and australian ATC attitudes are viewed with something less than enthusiasm where I work, yes the weather is generally good, but people prefer the traffic of LHR, JFK, LAX and FRA etc rather than SYD or MEL purely because of the negative perception created over the years....sad but true.
Specifically, I'm loathe after an all night trip to expose myself, my crew and my passengers to any increased risk. When the time comes for me to show superior airmanship and use a shorter runway in less than ideal and optimal circumstances it will be when I have no other option.
It's a team effort, but it's my decision, political and internal policy decisions have absolutely no place in my thought process, so unless it's notamed as closed I'll ask politely and if I don't get a positive response I will advise of my intentions.
This is not a discussion about egos or otherwise, it's merely a symptom of having to operate in a less than perfect environment and maintaining a sufficient safety margin. Regrettably it seems that this gets lost at times on both sides of the mic.
I can also confirm that Australia, and australian ATC attitudes are viewed with something less than enthusiasm where I work, yes the weather is generally good, but people prefer the traffic of LHR, JFK, LAX and FRA etc rather than SYD or MEL purely because of the negative perception created over the years....sad but true.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Surrounding the localizer
Posts: 2,200
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
1 Post
And yet....
Just tried to aggregate all the heavy jet runway overrun statistics at Australian International airports and came up with.... ?
Just tried to aggregate all the heavy jet runway overrun statistics at Australian International airports and came up with.... ?
Except the braking action in your 'heavy' is actually better than my light twin so maybe we should start requiring 16R and 34 in YMML all the time.
Do the simple physics, which needs more distance ? (1/2*m*v^2)
I find that a little hard to believe given that I have seen QF and foreign B744 arrive and depart on 16L/34R.
Just like international carriers are not allowed to be cleared visual approaches (pilot must request it), or use many of the alternates QF/VA use.
If you want to hold for 16R and fit in thats fine, but you should not be cutting in on some other guy who now gets sent over to 16L just because youre not comfortable landing on a 2000m+ runway.
I have de-iced many times when our procedures says well shall, and locals happily take off at -15 degC with dry snow falling off the airframe. I don't make the local rules, I drive the train like the fat controller says I should.
I may be a bit out of date but why not?
By the way...other guys have commented on making 300 metres go away quickly. I am left wondering how they keep their margin of error so tight. they must fly Boeings?
After an 8 hour night shift I do the f#cking job that I am paid good money for! Yes I am tired, yes I have a wife and children, and yes I take pride in doing the job that I am capable of. I don't come up with poor me bul!**** .If you want to require orbits on 1 mile final 16R YSSY then do it, I don't give a sh!t. The delays you cause because you are so full of yourselves is something to be discussed amongst yourselves!
A 3 minute delay is a 3 minute delay for every aircraft thereafter, compounded (if you know what 'compounded' means?)
If you have a hair appointment then do what you will! It's time to start looking big picture style. "I get the runway I want"... Your mirror must be massive, don't complain when some other "pilot" says the same thing, and delays you!
A 3 minute delay is a 3 minute delay for every aircraft thereafter, compounded (if you know what 'compounded' means?)
If you have a hair appointment then do what you will! It's time to start looking big picture style. "I get the runway I want"... Your mirror must be massive, don't complain when some other "pilot" says the same thing, and delays you!
Correct me if I am wrong, MEL has seen multiple heavy landings due to environmental conditions in the past years ? I seem to recall one which closed both runways as debris was located on the intersection.
Just tried to aggregate all the heavy jet runway overrun statistics at Australian International airports and came up with.... ?
I believe CX according to LOSA has the highest operational threat index out of any participating airline worldwide.
Beer baron:---
I think you numbers with regards to factoring need looking at, you've obviously used a much higher factor.. ( 1169 m to get 1951 m you've used a factor of nearly 70% !!! )
Our mob use 15% on top of the figure and my numbers included that amount only. Also I used a typical landing weight of 175 T, dry runway, medium autobrake, no reverse and nil wind. So the answer would have been close to actual achieved with only 300m excess ( yes I know there is that safety factor )
As I said, I make my operational decision on the day considering ALL factors including crew fatigue and body clock.
If there is a strong crosswind, wet runway, heavy weight, tired crew then the use of the longest into wind runway is a no brainer...
Have I used 27 in YMML? Yes probably around 20% of the time when it was the duty landing runway.
I'm happy with my decision and can confidently back it up on the day as safe and acceptable.
And I'll say it again in capitals for you lot just to make it crystal clear, WE DO NOT REQUIRE THE LONG RUNWAY TO EXPEDITE OUR ARRIVAL OR SAVE FUEL...
I think you numbers with regards to factoring need looking at, you've obviously used a much higher factor..
( 1169 m to get 1951 m you've used a factor of nearly 70% !!! )Our mob use 15% on top of the figure and my numbers included that amount only. Also I used a typical landing weight of 175 T, dry runway, medium autobrake, no reverse and nil wind. So the answer would have been close to actual achieved with only 300m excess ( yes I know there is that safety factor )
As I said, I make my operational decision on the day considering ALL factors including crew fatigue and body clock.
If there is a strong crosswind, wet runway, heavy weight, tired crew then the use of the longest into wind runway is a no brainer...
Have I used 27 in YMML? Yes probably around 20% of the time when it was the duty landing runway.
I'm happy with my decision and can confidently back it up on the day as safe and acceptable.
And I'll say it again in capitals for you lot just to make it crystal clear, WE DO NOT REQUIRE THE LONG RUNWAY TO EXPEDITE OUR ARRIVAL OR SAVE FUEL...
Last edited by ACMS; 21st Jan 2015 at 23:20.
I worked overseas for a few years and never had 'requirement' from any pilot or other controller, a refreshing change after leaving Oz.
Now back here and a mere tower controller, if a foreign operator requests an alternative runway I'll treat that as a requirement, and knowing that local pilots are force fed the difference, I'll confirm with them requirement or request.
Now back here and a mere tower controller, if a foreign operator requests an alternative runway I'll treat that as a requirement, and knowing that local pilots are force fed the difference, I'll confirm with them requirement or request.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not actually relevant
The deceleration rate on an A330 is exactly the same as a A320, except the A330 can land at twice the mass with a higher approach speed.
Do the simple physics, which needs more distance ? (1/2*m*v^2)
Do the simple physics, which needs more distance ? (1/2*m*v^2)
Nunc est bibendum
Fine, ring ASA tower managers in SYD and report back what they say. I have never seen an international heavy land on the short runway, not saying it does not happen, never seen it myself.
I suspect it's a lot more common these days and that ain't a bad thing if it helps improve the traffic flow.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Which proves or disproves what exactly?
Are international operators being forced to land on runways they don't consider acceptable?
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Surrounding the localizer
Posts: 2,200
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
1 Post
Which doesn't prove or disprove anything but it does indicate a lack of evidence that a problem currently exists that needs to be resolved.
Are international operators being forced to land on runways they don't consider acceptable?
Are international operators being forced to land on runways they don't consider acceptable?
As for being forced? I don't think this is happening, but there can be a subtle pressure, generally reinforced through poor decision (on the pilots part) making and a lack of experience, as others have said, certain cultures a mere few hours flying time away from Oz seem to find it more difficult or are less able to challenge/query ATC instructions.
Keg,
International was in reference to the Foreign Aircraft AOC, Australian and NZ carriers have different rules.
Foreign aircraft AOC holders can now use both runways at SYD, it took a lot of convincing to be approved to do so, it only has been a recent change.
International was in reference to the Foreign Aircraft AOC, Australian and NZ carriers have different rules.
Foreign aircraft AOC holders can now use both runways at SYD, it took a lot of convincing to be approved to do so, it only has been a recent change.
Nunc est bibendum
Fair enough. I didn't think it was too long ago.
I know that every now and then the operators at Heathrow get a briefing about how their respective companies are going in comparison to others. Qantas tends to get some grief about runway occupancy on landing with the A380 because we didn't take the 'brake to vacate' option. Does ASA do a similar thing with operators into Sydney? IE talk to a particular operator about how they're always requiring the long runway and the impact on traffic flow such a request has?
I know that every now and then the operators at Heathrow get a briefing about how their respective companies are going in comparison to others. Qantas tends to get some grief about runway occupancy on landing with the A380 because we didn't take the 'brake to vacate' option. Does ASA do a similar thing with operators into Sydney? IE talk to a particular operator about how they're always requiring the long runway and the impact on traffic flow such a request has?
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Here and there
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From my perspective...
Callsign: "we require RWY whatever for departure/arrival/anything"
My response: "expect that. Current conditions are..."
No further questions needed. On with the job!
Callsign: "we require RWY whatever for departure/arrival/anything"
My response: "expect that. Current conditions are..."
No further questions needed. On with the job!
R
Apart from outrageously high costs, the problem in Oz for Heavy jets is the appalling lack of infrastructure.
For those of us that fly around the world, we consider 24R @ LAX ,the outer pairs at CDG shortish as is 4R at the notoriously underfunded JFK . 16L in SYD and 27 in MEL are both 1000' shorter than those.
While technically legal/possible, these cheapo 45m postage stamps are inferior, from an airmanship point of view, to 90% of runways most long haul pilots land on.
Don't worry though - you can buy unlimited grog in the shopping mall that blocks access to immigration.
As we said back in the 70s: Wake up Ostraya.
For those of us that fly around the world, we consider 24R @ LAX ,the outer pairs at CDG shortish as is 4R at the notoriously underfunded JFK . 16L in SYD and 27 in MEL are both 1000' shorter than those.
While technically legal/possible, these cheapo 45m postage stamps are inferior, from an airmanship point of view, to 90% of runways most long haul pilots land on.
Don't worry though - you can buy unlimited grog in the shopping mall that blocks access to immigration.
As we said back in the 70s: Wake up Ostraya.
Glekichi----
The fact is that if there is a long runway available that affords extra SAFETY margin I will make a judgement call on the day considering ALL factors, I think I've said that a few times already.
If it's not available then we will still use 100% of our professionalism to make a informed safe judgement call on the day pertaining to the circumstances I find myself in at the time.
Your basis of your question is just plain stupid and your ignorance of the operational issues is astounding.
The fact is that if there is a long runway available that affords extra SAFETY margin I will make a judgement call on the day considering ALL factors, I think I've said that a few times already.
If it's not available then we will still use 100% of our professionalism to make a informed safe judgement call on the day pertaining to the circumstances I find myself in at the time.
Your basis of your question is just plain stupid and your ignorance of the operational issues is astounding.
