rolaaand
My experiences are identical to yours. Guess our colleague
Hootin works opposite a different kind of ScACC Watch to the 2 we work on. In which case, if they are regularly handed rubbish, then why are there no complaints ever made to the ScACC Supervisor AT THE TIME ?? (Cathartic though whinging on PPRuNE might be - and all of us use it for that from time to time.)
Headset Starter
Is it true that it's the location of the TWEED hold, ie not directly at the end of the STAR, that discourages controllers from using it?
In spite of allegedley not knowing about what happens on a daily basis (even although I regularly work the sector involved and am an examiner on it), I do see people using routeings to the entry fix (TARTN) all the time, or on headings 'towards' it (which as stated is allowed in our instructions). The only time I don't is when it is quiet and prior co-ordination has taken place either individually or on a block basis for routes to final approach fixes - or when it's not so quiet and it is a better plan to take traffic from the SAB direction straight in to get ahead of an inbound sequence from the South, again after co-ordination by the sector controlling SAB carried out with BOTH EDI and the TMA sector. That's certainly the general and accepted way my Watch works, but I can't guarantee all others do the same (nor even my own 100% of the time). Every unit has it's loose cannons or those who are sometimes less precise or behind the drag curve. It's just part of having individuals in the system and we won't ever eradicate it.
Wheelybin
As
Rolaaand said, if you are getting that regularly, then get on the blower and get it sorted out. There's no leeway for the guy at ScACC to be giving it to you so why not let them know you're not happy ? Or look ahead and when you see it coming ask for the first 2 and the rest either 10NM behind or to the hold. Then it remains ScACC's problem. In fact .. give me dates and times (by PM if necessary) and I'll look at the radar replays. If it happens so frequently then there must be plenty examples you can give me
We can in turn use those for LCE purposes to tackle the problem at this end.
Hootin
We are just trying that, its called Involve to Improve, but the initial meeting didn't sound very fruitful but we shall persevere.
And does this involve ScACC ?? I hope so because then the issues on both sides can be addressed.
Just as an aside, some of the biggest critics of some of the things that we see APC doing are the ex APC controllers who are now here and used to be at EDI. Maybe it's akin to ex smokers being the worst critics of smokers but all their experience and knowledge can't all be wrong. Before you jump up and down again, I will once again reiterate that this doesn't mean that all the fault is on one side or the other. Just an observation that there are a fair percentage of TMA controllers who also possess very many years of airfield and APC experience, so we're not all the uneducated ATCOs that you seem to wish to tar us as.
Come next summer we need to standardise the inbounds so everyone is on a level playing field and knows what to expect which is why we want traffic automatically routeing to Tweed expecting to hold (not on a heading, in trail or 3 abreast but level separated and maybe only 1000' apart)
In all circumstances ?? Or if you have more than 2 .. 3 ... how many ?? I think you are throwing the baby out with the bath water. If traffic is streamed and spaced to your requirements (which could be specified in a Standing Agreement) then why does everything need to go to the hold ?? It's not LHR, it's EDI. I don't see how you are not going to build in more delay. ScACC are going to have to keep the traffic until it's passed TARTN and heading back towards TWEED before giving it to you (that's what you stated as your condition) so it's already having to do once round the hold before it can turn back North on a vector to final. For every flight. A waste of fuel and time. Much better for EDI to agree with ScACC what delivery they want (spacing or timing) and then let ScACC achieve that or where it can't be, then to the hold to let EDI play catch up.
A bit of a personal slur I think, are you questioning my Professionalism? I thought we were talking about inbounds and stack management. Also seeing as you are a moderator of Pprune I think you should tone down your labelling of people as idiots.
Sorry, but didn't you slur ScACC as having incidents in the holds ?? Is that questioning
my professionalism then ?? If you start throwing accusations around, don't go bleating if someone throws some stuff back at you (that's EDI generically, rather than an individual specifically). Glass houses and stones don't go together. The incident rates at both units are very low but don't try and pretend that it's only ScACC that has them when talking about TMA operations (inbounds and stack management being an integral but not exclusive part).
I moderate JetBlast not the ATC Forum, but that aside, are you saying there are no examples of idiots in our company at all levels ?? I say again, that like any organisation, there most certainly are. If you haven't spotted any, I would be amazed.
Ooooh how patronising anybody would think you are an ATCO1!!!!!!
I guess you have a grading chip on the shoulder. Your grading is not within my power to change but it is certainly within yours. Live with it, or come and do an Area APC (Assessment of Prior Competence) and move here and take the pay rise. Plenty people have, the same as plenty people are happy to stay at airfields and make a lifestyle choice.
These issues I agree need settling and before next summer as really the whole TMA needs looking at as lets face it it is not very efficient compared to down south. We are hoping to move forward and meet again with your colleagues but it takes BOTH sides to budge a little not just us.
Who's to say you won't be meeting with me ??
Incidentally, there have been some folk up from London TC to look at the TMA and report on it with a view to providing their impartial expertise and offer suggestions for improvements. It will be interesting to see what they come up with bearing in mind the airspace and the operating environments we all face.