Melbourne Air Traffic Control
Why cant we get things sorted, enroute acceptance etc, to be able to punch off waaaay closer spaced departures like other major aeroports? Ie LHR and DXB. Obviously they have dedicated departure runways but their airspace is way more convoluted
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Hongkers
Posts: 469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do you have "auto-release" yet or the ADC still have to call "next" to DEP?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia
Age: 41
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Obviously arrivals in between departures, or wake turbulence separation between different weight categories, or turbo-prop in front of a jet (sometimes unavoidable) can negatively affect our ability to do this.
We need to keep a visual separation standard until another standard exists that approach/departures controllers can use (3nm or 1000 feet), if the first aircraft is disappearing into cloud before they reach 1nm upwind, we have to adjust departure spacing accordingly.
For example, instead of firing two 737s 1800m apart, we may need to wait until the first aircraft has reached just past 1nm, to ensure we have 3nm by the time the second aircraft is airborne (as we no longer have both in sight and can't apply visual separation.)
Seeing we're discussing separation, Lizzi3v for 34 with a heavy on the arbey arrival also for 34. We get asked to reduce to 220, then 180 then back to min approach speed. It looks pretty tight, so we comply promptly and then get asked to sight the heavy on a 3 mile final. Ok, traffic sighted.
Then it comes..... Roger, maintain own separation, cleared visual approach, contact tower, ciaaaaao.
This instruction to maintain own separation doesn't actually give US any more track miles, in fact it can make things a royal PIA. Ontop of the approach, we're trying to shed energy, make a 'square turn on to final' and now trying to stay behind something that we're probably already too close to anyway. It can add a bit of workload at a busy time.
I have just presumed it changes your separation standard between arrivals, is this why it's done because it just seems to lob the separation back onto us.
Then it comes..... Roger, maintain own separation, cleared visual approach, contact tower, ciaaaaao.
This instruction to maintain own separation doesn't actually give US any more track miles, in fact it can make things a royal PIA. Ontop of the approach, we're trying to shed energy, make a 'square turn on to final' and now trying to stay behind something that we're probably already too close to anyway. It can add a bit of workload at a busy time.
I have just presumed it changes your separation standard between arrivals, is this why it's done because it just seems to lob the separation back onto us.
.... It looks pretty tight, so we comply promptly and then get asked to sight the heavy on a 3 mile final. Ok, traffic sighted.
Then it comes..... Roger, maintain own separation, cleared visual approach, contact tower, ciaaaaao.
This instruction to maintain own separation doesn't actually give US any more track miles, in fact it can make things a royal PIA. Ontop of the approach, we're trying to shed energy, make a 'square turn on to final' and now trying to stay behind something that we're probably already too close to anyway. It can add a bit of workload at a busy time. ...
Then it comes..... Roger, maintain own separation, cleared visual approach, contact tower, ciaaaaao.
This instruction to maintain own separation doesn't actually give US any more track miles, in fact it can make things a royal PIA. Ontop of the approach, we're trying to shed energy, make a 'square turn on to final' and now trying to stay behind something that we're probably already too close to anyway. It can add a bit of workload at a busy time. ...
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Hongkers
Posts: 469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The poster indicated they were asked to sight the traffic.
Regardless the transfer of responsibility, you still have to put the aircraft in a position where appropriate wake turbulence avoidance can be achieved by the pilot, albeit now visually.
Using sight and follow as a "get out of jail free card" for making the sequence work is not quite in the spirit of its use. (And yes I worked ML APP for a number of years, so am aware of the scenarios where it can be seen as a saviour)
I work arrivals and en-route at Melbourne and to be honest I can't think of anything that you guys regularly do that makes things difficult.
Sure, every now and then someone doesn't pay enough attention to a fix time, but then I'm paid to make it happen too. No point in getting uptight about it, just fix it and move on.
If you ever get the chance, drop in and see what we do - we get far too few visitors and most seem to find it of interest and learn a bit about the "big picture" view.
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: PA
Age: 59
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why cant we get things sorted, enroute acceptance etc, to be able to punch off waaaay closer spaced departures like other major aeroports? Ie LHR and DXB.
A few years back, we sat in the tower and looked at DEP from RW 27. This included timing from clearance to roll, time to rotation, and rotation point.The exercise was to determine how much time it would take from clearance to roll, issues with spool up times, and especially the rotation point as it related to the crossing. The theory was to say that DEP wake from RW27, had no effect on RW 16/34, as the ac rotate after the crossing. This was not the case.
Back to the timing, it was very interesting to see how much time some ac took from clearance to roll.
Last edited by underfire; 29th May 2017 at 01:10.
For instance, tower won't give a conditional line up clearance. When I queried that via my company, the response was 'because of the stop bars'. Well, they exist in other places, and ATC there gives the clearance, and you move as soon as the bars go out. There's probably 15-20 seconds in that.
Even simple things, like giving a heads up that you'll be next will help. That will allow me to spool the engines up a couple of percent, which then shaves a few more seconds (the 380 spool up is very slow from ground idle).
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia
Age: 41
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some people do...and some types are worse than others, but I don't think it's helped by the procedures used.
For instance, tower won't give a conditional line up clearance. When I queried that via my company, the response was 'because of the stop bars'. Well, they exist in other places, and ATC there gives the clearance, and you move as soon as the bars go out. There's probably 15-20 seconds in that.
Even simple things, like giving a heads up that you'll be next will help. That will allow me to spool the engines up a couple of percent, which then shaves a few more seconds (the 380 spool up is very slow from ground idle).
For instance, tower won't give a conditional line up clearance. When I queried that via my company, the response was 'because of the stop bars'. Well, they exist in other places, and ATC there gives the clearance, and you move as soon as the bars go out. There's probably 15-20 seconds in that.
Even simple things, like giving a heads up that you'll be next will help. That will allow me to spool the engines up a couple of percent, which then shaves a few more seconds (the 380 spool up is very slow from ground idle).
Most tower controllers agree with you that efficiency would be improved if conditional clearances were allowed, it would also reduce our workload and allow us to move on to other radio calls. This feedback has been passed up the chain many times but to no avail in terms of rule changes.
Given this, we do our best within the confines of the system to be efficient. Most controllers will give the heads up "be ready for immediate departure behind the landing 737" etc if they believe it will make a difference in the useability of a gap for departure.
If the gap isn't that tight, and only 1 departure will fit in it anyway, then there is less need for use of that phrase.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Sydney
Age: 60
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not fly before midday?
I work arrivals and en-route at Melbourne and to be honest I can't think of anything that you guys regularly do that makes things difficult.
Sure, every now and then someone doesn't pay enough attention to a fix time, but then I'm paid to make it happen too. No point in getting uptight about it, just fix it and move on.
If you ever get the chance, drop in and see what we do - we get far too few visitors and most seem to find it of interest and learn a bit about the "big picture" view.
I work arrivals and en-route at Melbourne and to be honest I can't think of anything that you guys regularly do that makes things difficult.
Sure, every now and then someone doesn't pay enough attention to a fix time, but then I'm paid to make it happen too. No point in getting uptight about it, just fix it and move on.
If you ever get the chance, drop in and see what we do - we get far too few visitors and most seem to find it of interest and learn a bit about the "big picture" view.
My biggest peeve is trying not to stop while taxying only to get an onwards clearance two seconds after setting the park brake!
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: PA
Age: 59
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Even simple things, like giving a heads up that you'll be next will help. That will allow me to spool the engines up a couple of percent, which then shaves a few more seconds (the 380 spool up is very slow from ground idle).
Although, I did notice a few twins that were simply not ready and rolled at around 45 seconds....I can see how trying to balance Arr and DEP on crossing runways would be a bit of a challenge, hence increased spacing.
It takes years of training to get that right!! Seriously, both of the majors have such restrictive policies and procedures applying to famil flights that it's almost impossible. Sydney Tower was using one-way famil flights when travelling to or from Compromised Separation training at the Melbourne Learning Academy (360deg radar simulator) but it all became too hard and so it is now a full price air fare both ways, go figure.
Six weeks with Mainline (TAA or Ansett), and two weeks with a minor? Airline (EWA, ANSw, MMA). About 80 -100 hours flight deck exposure. Invaluable.
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That must have been nice! We can't even get a jump seat on the national carrier now.
Virgin have been most accommodating, but getting a day off the roster to take advantage of it is the issue.
Virgin have been most accommodating, but getting a day off the roster to take advantage of it is the issue.
It really should be rostered.
I've been to a lot of Towers and two control centres and it is always good fun and I always learn something valuable. I am sure it would work both ways and make the industry both safer and more efficient.
I guess the only way it would happen is if it was a leagal requirement as part of training.
I've been to a lot of Towers and two control centres and it is always good fun and I always learn something valuable. I am sure it would work both ways and make the industry both safer and more efficient.
I guess the only way it would happen is if it was a leagal requirement as part of training.
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Melbourne Tower guys! Can you please put something on the atis when you know you're going to change the runway configuration especially early in the morning! Sydney does this and it's very much appreciated.
The amount of times we do figures for Runway 34 at 5:30am barely awake and waiting for the caffeine to kick in to be told by Delivery that it's now runway 27 is ridiculous. One extra line on the atis will save a lot of time and we would be very thankful. Cheers!
The amount of times we do figures for Runway 34 at 5:30am barely awake and waiting for the caffeine to kick in to be told by Delivery that it's now runway 27 is ridiculous. One extra line on the atis will save a lot of time and we would be very thankful. Cheers!
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Sydney
Posts: 470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here's another thought.
If your ATIS is saying 340/6 we will do the takeoff figures based on this. In reality, for a takeoff from 34, we would also usually take a worst case and plan nil wind and accept that we then have a few knots of fat in the performance figures.
It is unacceptable to then state "Qantas 93, clear for takeoff, tailwind max 4 knots". Especially when the aircraft is already lined up. The time to volunteer this vital information is not with the takeoff clearance for a 565T aircraft in the lined up position on an active runway. Before lineup would have been prudent.
To the Virgin aircraft that was forced to go around due to this unbelievably poor controlling I offer our apologies. Unfortunately there was nothing we could do given the circumstances we were put in.
I'll add that all indications from the windsock at the upwind threshold indicated nil wind and I believe the wind volunteered by the tower is taken from tower height. There is no way we will know the tower wind unless you tell us, at an operationally opportune time, or put the actual wind on the ATIS. Not something you dream up. We are obliged to use the worst case scenario for our takeoff performance calculations. If you tell us the wind is actually worse than you've made public, by a significant margin, expect delays while we recalculate.
Out of morbid interest we printed out the next three ATISs. It wasn't until the third change, 14 minutes after we had departed, that the real tailwind conditions were actually made public.
Why the big fu<king secret?????
If your ATIS is saying 340/6 we will do the takeoff figures based on this. In reality, for a takeoff from 34, we would also usually take a worst case and plan nil wind and accept that we then have a few knots of fat in the performance figures.
It is unacceptable to then state "Qantas 93, clear for takeoff, tailwind max 4 knots". Especially when the aircraft is already lined up. The time to volunteer this vital information is not with the takeoff clearance for a 565T aircraft in the lined up position on an active runway. Before lineup would have been prudent.
To the Virgin aircraft that was forced to go around due to this unbelievably poor controlling I offer our apologies. Unfortunately there was nothing we could do given the circumstances we were put in.
I'll add that all indications from the windsock at the upwind threshold indicated nil wind and I believe the wind volunteered by the tower is taken from tower height. There is no way we will know the tower wind unless you tell us, at an operationally opportune time, or put the actual wind on the ATIS. Not something you dream up. We are obliged to use the worst case scenario for our takeoff performance calculations. If you tell us the wind is actually worse than you've made public, by a significant margin, expect delays while we recalculate.
Out of morbid interest we printed out the next three ATISs. It wasn't until the third change, 14 minutes after we had departed, that the real tailwind conditions were actually made public.
Why the big fu<king secret?????
Last edited by IsDon; 4th Jun 2017 at 22:24.