Originally Posted by
airdualbleedfault
I was going to call BS on the 15%, but as someone pouted out that's probably only departures, if it was arrivals it would be over 50% in Perth.
Gatwick handles roughly double the number of aircraft movements as Perth with 1 runway, far more complex and busy airspace and mostly worse weather. Yes I can hear all the BS excuses about high speed taxiways etc but really, 1 runway with high speed taxiways is better than 2?
Let's not try to polish a turd here, some bright sparks in ASA hierarchy have decided their KPIs are more important than moving air traffic so the ATC peeps have basically said "you give us x amount of controllers, we will handle x amount of aircraft", that comes from inside ASA.
Makes me laugh when the government gets on their pathetic little EV bandwagon meanwhile 100s of tons of avtur are being wasted each week and that's just into Perth
Oh blah blah. Gatwick is a serious operation no doubt. Go and research their wake turbulence standards. Add a unit that specifically sequences for TMA driven holds. It isn't the same. Not saying it shouldn't be but it's not.
I've mentioned before and I'm pretty much commiting returning suicide (I'm on the black list) but this bull**** that Jason throws up about we have enough ATCs is misleading in the extreme. Group numbers might be 15,1, 13.8, 20.5. That in AsA ideal adds up to 50,4. No it doesn't. For every point something, that is 1. If you need a console for 1 minute, that's an entire shift.
Reading the ongoing TIBA NIOTAMs I'm not involved but I was last time. Nothing has changed in 15 years. The only constant is Jason. I know him, good bloke, destroying the company. He got his head start brown nosing in 95/96 when he relieved as the centre manager in Melbourne. Did about 5 minutes on the tools then was indoctrinated by the decade of fools that ran the place.
I won't be one to comment on how to fix this. I have ideas but noone cares what operational people think.
Good luck.