Approach speed control in STN
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Euroville
Posts: 455
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Approach speed control in STN
I had the approach controller snarl at me on the ILS recently. I grew concerned as we were inside 4 DME and hadn't been changed to tower, so asked if we could. Controller "I was just waiting to see if you were going to bother yourselves to slow down but never mind, contact tower now 123.8"
I had been asked to maintain 160 Kts to 4 DME as always in STN, having read the very long debate on R&N about people who don't and the problems it causes I understand this perfectly. On this day we were heavy and bug speed for flaps 10 was 165 Kts which we had set as soon as instructed and achieved quite quickly, less then 10 secs. Now my company airfield briefing says:
This is the only thing I can think of that got the approach controller into such a state of agitation.
I am well aware that ATC merely require us to inform them if we can't maintain 160 to 4 instead of slowing early and they will accommodate us, but if our company liaises with ATC and they say 165 to 4 is acceptable, what's the problem? I have no problem putting the Gear down and flaps 15 out at 10 miles and keeping the speed at 160, and the thrust and noise way up but it seems a bit pointless to do CDA approaches and then do that.
It wasn't the time or place to get into a war of words but I was extremely rattled as I was so angry and considered going around, it was a very snotty and aggresive tone of voice. In hindsight I should have made an effort to speak to him by telephone afterwards.
I had been asked to maintain 160 Kts to 4 DME as always in STN, having read the very long debate on R&N about people who don't and the problems it causes I understand this perfectly. On this day we were heavy and bug speed for flaps 10 was 165 Kts which we had set as soon as instructed and achieved quite quickly, less then 10 secs. Now my company airfield briefing says:
The high weight flap 10 speed is
164 knots (-800). This is acceptable to ATC as 160kts speed required.
164 knots (-800). This is acceptable to ATC as 160kts speed required.
I am well aware that ATC merely require us to inform them if we can't maintain 160 to 4 instead of slowing early and they will accommodate us, but if our company liaises with ATC and they say 165 to 4 is acceptable, what's the problem? I have no problem putting the Gear down and flaps 15 out at 10 miles and keeping the speed at 160, and the thrust and noise way up but it seems a bit pointless to do CDA approaches and then do that.
It wasn't the time or place to get into a war of words but I was extremely rattled as I was so angry and considered going around, it was a very snotty and aggresive tone of voice. In hindsight I should have made an effort to speak to him by telephone afterwards.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Telstar,
I'm not an approach controller, so i don't know what happened. Some unofficial feedback.
It wasn't the time or place to get into a war of words - I agree with you on that, always bad practice from either end of the radio.
but I was extremely rattled as I was so angry and considered going around - Would a go-around have been the best option? You could possibly have been distracted, and (depending on traffic levels of course) there could have been all sorts of heading and levels to sort you out agains departing traffic. This could have led to dangerous situations.
In hindsight I should have made an effort to speak to him by telephone afterwards. - In future please do. Ask for a phone number when you're speaking to the ground controller. If you don't want to say what you need it for, don't, we'll discuss it on the phone. We are always happy to make an effort to sort these problems out, that way it will be of your mind. If you would have to do more flights, you can fully concentrate on them.
Hope it's any help. Don't hesitate to pm me if you want more info.
cheers, C
I'm not an approach controller, so i don't know what happened. Some unofficial feedback.
It wasn't the time or place to get into a war of words - I agree with you on that, always bad practice from either end of the radio.
but I was extremely rattled as I was so angry and considered going around - Would a go-around have been the best option? You could possibly have been distracted, and (depending on traffic levels of course) there could have been all sorts of heading and levels to sort you out agains departing traffic. This could have led to dangerous situations.
In hindsight I should have made an effort to speak to him by telephone afterwards. - In future please do. Ask for a phone number when you're speaking to the ground controller. If you don't want to say what you need it for, don't, we'll discuss it on the phone. We are always happy to make an effort to sort these problems out, that way it will be of your mind. If you would have to do more flights, you can fully concentrate on them.
Hope it's any help. Don't hesitate to pm me if you want more info.
cheers, C
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: united kingdom
Age: 62
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Telstar,
I note that your company procs state "164 knots (-800). This is acceptable to ATC as 160kts speed required."
As far as i understand, this has not been agreed for LTMA airfields, if it was it was in the dim and distant past and needs to be renegotiated
I do know that we are setting up a working group with airlines to try to figure out the best compromise of speeds on final so that ATC can land the required number of aircraft per hour and aircraft can have a stable approach by 1,000agl.
BUT until that has been agreed the AIP for all LTMA airfields says that pilots must fly speed instructions accurately (with no leeway). If they are unable to do so they should inform ATC.
I note that your company procs state "164 knots (-800). This is acceptable to ATC as 160kts speed required."
As far as i understand, this has not been agreed for LTMA airfields, if it was it was in the dim and distant past and needs to be renegotiated
I do know that we are setting up a working group with airlines to try to figure out the best compromise of speeds on final so that ATC can land the required number of aircraft per hour and aircraft can have a stable approach by 1,000agl.
BUT until that has been agreed the AIP for all LTMA airfields says that pilots must fly speed instructions accurately (with no leeway). If they are unable to do so they should inform ATC.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The international standard is that when required to maintain or where a pilot has informed ATS that they will maintain a specific speed then they are considered to be maintaining that speed when within 5% of that speed.
5% of 160 is 8Kt.
Thus 160 knots is maintained by keeping the speed between 152 and 168.
Yes in many cases we do better than that.
However, those are the allowances and in most cases, ATC would not know the difference between 160 and 165 with the changes in wind etc affecting groundpeed which after all is what ATC are really interested in.
If this ATCO has a problem with the speed being 5 knots high then he should have slowed the flight by 5 knots.
Sounds to me like an ATCO at TC who uses the selected speed readout of mode S and was not impressed by the selection of 165 when 160 had been requested.
Regards,
DFC
5% of 160 is 8Kt.
Thus 160 knots is maintained by keeping the speed between 152 and 168.
Yes in many cases we do better than that.
However, those are the allowances and in most cases, ATC would not know the difference between 160 and 165 with the changes in wind etc affecting groundpeed which after all is what ATC are really interested in.
If this ATCO has a problem with the speed being 5 knots high then he should have slowed the flight by 5 knots.
Sounds to me like an ATCO at TC who uses the selected speed readout of mode S and was not impressed by the selection of 165 when 160 had been requested.
Regards,
DFC
Join Date: May 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 796
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DFC, got an ICAO reference for the 5%? I've just had a quick look at my docs and couldn't see anything, but it was quick. Just that a 20 knot speed difference between two a/c if one is flying at the lower end and one at the upper could prove embarrasing to all at minimum spacing.
FWIW, the UKAIP says this for the main London airports, and I quote...
FWIW, the UKAIP says this for the main London airports, and I quote...
Speed Control: Pilots should typically expect the following speed restrictions to be enforced: 220 kt from the holding facility during the
initial approach phase; 180 kt on base leg/closing heading to final approach; between 180 kt and 160 kt when established on final approach and thereafter 160 kt to 4 DME. These speeds are applied for ATC separation purposes and are mandatory. In the event of a new (non-speed related) ATC instruction being issued (eg an instruction to descend on ILS) pilots shall continue to maintain the previously allocated speed. All speed restrictions are to be flown as accurately as possible. Aircraft unable to conform to these speeds must inform ATC and state what speeds can be used. In the interests of accurate spacing, pilots are requested to comply with speed adjustments as promptly as is feasible within their own operational constraints. Pilots should advise ATC if circumstances necessitate a change of speed for aircraft performance reasons.
initial approach phase; 180 kt on base leg/closing heading to final approach; between 180 kt and 160 kt when established on final approach and thereafter 160 kt to 4 DME. These speeds are applied for ATC separation purposes and are mandatory. In the event of a new (non-speed related) ATC instruction being issued (eg an instruction to descend on ILS) pilots shall continue to maintain the previously allocated speed. All speed restrictions are to be flown as accurately as possible. Aircraft unable to conform to these speeds must inform ATC and state what speeds can be used. In the interests of accurate spacing, pilots are requested to comply with speed adjustments as promptly as is feasible within their own operational constraints. Pilots should advise ATC if circumstances necessitate a change of speed for aircraft performance reasons.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 796
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Telstar, when we're operating at minimum final approach spacing we have an 880yd buffer between perfection and setting the snitch off with the associated possible suspension whilst it's investigated (think guilty until proven innocent).
That's not a lot in time or distance at the speeds being flown and whilst I in no way excuse the STN bloke for having a go at you on the r/t it is one reason why we can get a little touchy about how accurately final approach speeds are, or are not, being flown.
That's not a lot in time or distance at the speeds being flown and whilst I in no way excuse the STN bloke for having a go at you on the r/t it is one reason why we can get a little touchy about how accurately final approach speeds are, or are not, being flown.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Euroville
Posts: 455
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Roffa Well since FR is the biggest operator in STN may I suggest you contact their liason officer as we are being instructed, as above, that we can maintain 164Kts when heavy. I just felt a bit hard done by as I was only doing as instructed in Part C of our Ops manual and got a bollocking. Sniff, sniff 
From now when heavy, it's Gear down, Flaps 15, and maintain the bug speed for those extra 5 knots, and the power to match it. Damn the noise!
From now when heavy, it's Gear down, Flaps 15, and maintain the bug speed for those extra 5 knots, and the power to match it. Damn the noise!
Telstar, if you mentioned 165kts to 4 miles when you were downwind I'm sure the controller wouldn't mind, in fact, they'll probably catch on after a while.
BTW, having a go at a pilot in the air is never a good idea especially not 2 minutes from touchdown.
BTW, having a go at a pilot in the air is never a good idea especially not 2 minutes from touchdown.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 796
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Telstar, as Del P mentions all it takes is a quick word on the r/t and any speed different from the "norm" will be easily accomodated.
Ideally get the call in before you're on base leg as it's the base to final turn timing that dictates the spacing on final.
There was a time when some 737 operators seemed to prefer 170 to 5. The only problem that caused ATC was that it wasn't applied consistently across airlines or similar types. Perhaps the one thing that is really necessary for tight spacing and high landing rates is everyone doing the same thing for the last 15 miles or so of the approach. Too many variables and capacity is reduced.
Ideally get the call in before you're on base leg as it's the base to final turn timing that dictates the spacing on final.
There was a time when some 737 operators seemed to prefer 170 to 5. The only problem that caused ATC was that it wasn't applied consistently across airlines or similar types. Perhaps the one thing that is really necessary for tight spacing and high landing rates is everyone doing the same thing for the last 15 miles or so of the approach. Too many variables and capacity is reduced.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: 24/7 Hardcore Heaven
Posts: 525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BA still like to do 170 to 5DME in my experience at KK...never a problem as long as we're told on the downwind leg.
What can be annoying is when, during prolonged sequencing, they call established and ,when told to reduce to 160 to 4DME, they then get all uppity at not being able to do 170 to 5DME. Most of the time now I will build in an extra 1/2 mile of spacing in anticpation of the request which keeps everyone happy!
It's really no problem for us but please let us know well in advance!!
What can be annoying is when, during prolonged sequencing, they call established and ,when told to reduce to 160 to 4DME, they then get all uppity at not being able to do 170 to 5DME. Most of the time now I will build in an extra 1/2 mile of spacing in anticpation of the request which keeps everyone happy!
It's really no problem for us but please let us know well in advance!!
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: uk
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
While I agree that there was no need to for "tone" from the controller, I think you should have said that you'd be doing 165kts instead.
DFC - can you say where this mythical +/- 5% for speed is written please? I think it's something that is a bit of an urban myth to be honest - especially these days when speed can be more accurately flown and indeed aircraft are being vectored much more closer together than years ago. Just how happy would you be having been vectored to min vortex wake against a heavy - to find that it's doing nearly 20kts slower?
Funny how no one thinks that there's +/- 5% on headings or levels!! FL160 = anywhere between FL152-168?
louby
DFC - can you say where this mythical +/- 5% for speed is written please? I think it's something that is a bit of an urban myth to be honest - especially these days when speed can be more accurately flown and indeed aircraft are being vectored much more closer together than years ago. Just how happy would you be having been vectored to min vortex wake against a heavy - to find that it's doing nearly 20kts slower?
Funny how no one thinks that there's +/- 5% on headings or levels!! FL160 = anywhere between FL152-168?
louby
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: LHR/EGLL
Age: 45
Posts: 4,392
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FL160 = anywhere between FL152-168?
Sorry! I actually agree with you, no point having a 'speed range'. If you can fly it, then fly it; if you can't fly it, tell us.
Moderator
Join Date: Jul 1997
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is a bit in ICAO Doc4444 which mentions speed tolerances, but then throws it back to the relevant ATS authorities to specify them
7.1.1 g) maintain radar monitoring of air traffic;
Note.— Where tolerances regarding such matters as adherence to track, speed or time have been prescribed by the appropriate ATS authority, deviations are not considered significant until such tolerances are exceeded.
Use of Radar in Air Traffic Control Service - Functions
7.1.1 g) maintain radar monitoring of air traffic;
Note.— Where tolerances regarding such matters as adherence to track, speed or time have been prescribed by the appropriate ATS authority, deviations are not considered significant until such tolerances are exceeded.
No specific figure for tolerance published = no tolerance or leeway in my book.
Anyone able to point out that the CAA do in fact publish a tolerance level for the UK ?? All I can find is the stuff in AIC 53/2004, which is a straight lift from text in ICAO Doc 4444 again, namely:
4. Tactical Application Of Speed Control By ATC
4.1 In busy traffic situations it is necessary for ATC to limit aircraft speeds for traffic sequencing purposes and reduce the need for aircraft vectoring. Controllers will consider aircraft performance limitations in issuing speed instructions. Specific speeds should normally be expressed in multiples of 10Kts.
4.2 Only minor speed adjustments of not more than +/- 20Kts should be requested of an aircraft established on intermediate or final approach.Speed control shall not be applied within 4Nm of the threshold on final approach.
4.3 Aircraft unable to conform to the speeds specified by the radar controller should inform the controller immediately and state the speeds which shall be used.
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Europe
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
5%
I believe the 5% tolerance comes from the cruise-phase. If your TAS differs more than 5% from that filed in your flightplan, you have to let ATC know.
I recall something like this from my days learning airlaw, but that's awhile back now, so I could be wrong.
I recall something like this from my days learning airlaw, but that's awhile back now, so I could be wrong.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RadAlt you are correct. The 5% applies to cruise. It is 5Kt on approach according to the CAA.
On approach the CAA expect a competent pilot to keep the speed within +/- 5 Kt.
The source is the CAA examminers standards.
Regards,
DFC
On approach the CAA expect a competent pilot to keep the speed within +/- 5 Kt.
The source is the CAA examminers standards.
Regards,
DFC
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: united kingdom
Age: 62
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi DFC
the examiners standards are just that; for when they are examining for a flight test!!! AS the UK AIP states for aerodromes in the london TMA, speed instructions are mandatory As PPRUNE RADAR has shown there is no tolerance expressed in the UKAIP therefore if the pilot cannot fly the speed exactly, then ATC should be notified. In the LTMA speed control is used to maintain separation. When ATC are using 2 1/2 nm spacing it can go to a can of worms very quickly if the front aircraft is 10kts slower and the back one is 10kts faster
the examiners standards are just that; for when they are examining for a flight test!!! AS the UK AIP states for aerodromes in the london TMA, speed instructions are mandatory
As PPRUNE RADAR has shown there is no tolerance expressed in the UKAIP therefore if the pilot cannot fly the speed exactly, then ATC should be notified. In the LTMA speed control is used to maintain separation. When ATC are using 2 1/2 nm spacing it can go to a can of worms very quickly if the front aircraft is 10kts slower and the back one is 10kts faster
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DFC... nobody is talking "CAA Examiners Standards".. just read what it says in the AIP. I don't condone irritability on the R/T but I DO know what it feels like to be doing 2.5nm spacing when some prat decides HE knows best without telling me - it's bl**dy scary.