EDI v GLA
Have to agree with the majority of posters , EDI is a lot slower for arrivals and deps than GLA , however having done exactly what the controllers here suggest and visited the existing tower a few years ago , i was completely horrified . I t was like something out of a war film . Ancient equipment , quite clearly starved of investment . The airfield lighting panel looked like a school science programme gone wrong and as for the view ! .
I asked at the time why they did not include a note in the AIP , Jepp , Aerad advising crews that tower could not see 06 or most of the stands . (maybe thats been done now)
I note the contoller says they have no RET 's , with all that investment in new taxi ways , surley that could have been included .
Having said all that , i found EDI a horrendous place to work as do most of my colleagues , nothing worse than getting a roster change to operate from there . The -ve cant do attitude starts at the staff car park and permeates every aspect of the place from the top down , some of the ruddest most abbrasive people i have ever encountered in aviation work there . a special mention needs to be made of some of the security people who seem to take great delight in being as rude ,un-helpful and obstructive as they can to staff whilst the DETR are wandering about with small arms strapped to their backs. When youve made it through this lot and out to your a/c the fun really begins !
In general though , it is increasingly obvious to those of us who operate regularly in to scottish airspace and the two main airports that the current set up just cannot cope with the traffic flow as it is now at peak times and someone high up needs to take a "blank sheet of paper " approach to the whole thing .
I believe the ATC guys at area and Airport control do a good job within the physical confines of the equipment /procedures they at the moment , however to take as an example the airpsace in london is more complex and the volume of traffic they can move is of a different order . Maybe some cross-fertilisation of ideas's techniques should prevail .
GLA ATC dont get too complacent i leave you with this one , B737 call for push stand 10 , approved . ATP call for push stand 18 . 737 asked to make long push to allow ATP to push .
Both taxi to A1 , 737 offers to take B1 to speed things up , "no you are No 2 to ATP" Both on TRN SID . ATP departs , 737 waits 6 mins , thereby increasing block time by 25% for a BFS sector .
GLA ATC state ATP taxied first so gets airborne first . This type of thinking will need to change . If the 737 had gone first there would have been no delay to the ATP . 6 mins of wasted space . Would not happen like this at LHR , LGW or STN .
NF