Maxgrad,
It will happen and regularly. Having said they they still ask even if the "visual" report is made at 30nm so no big difference. I suspect the
V is some times forgotten? To be noted that is.
I recall being asked
5 yes thats right
5 times one night. If you searched the circumstances would be here some where. Maybe the ATCer was winding me up?
Left Unrestricted
. The later notice we receive for aircraft on STARs is creating a situation where their estimate clashes with a slot already booked by a GA aircraft and so the STAR aircraft is slowed, effectively giving the GA aircraft higher priority. This is particularly frustrating when the GA aircraft doesn't show and the STAR aircraft is left saying what the hell was I slowed for? GA aircraft are doing the right thing by booking slots early (some booking arrival times before even departing DN), but the nature of most GA ops means that they are having trouble meeting these times inbound. This problem is known and has been raised, not sure what the solution will be.
This one I find a little hard to accept.
My understanding from "within" the inner cirlce is that bugsmashers are booking a slot time up to 4hrs in advance. You don't get our estimate from BN CTR until around 30 mins. Automatically an aircraft which
should have a higher priority is being penalised.
Are you aware that our estimates as soon as airborne at our departure point will generally be within a min or 2. Airborne Cairns we WILL be there within 2 mins of our estimate, not allowing for STAR simply based on our flight plan i the FMS. Are you able to receive our ETA any sooner to stik it in the flow slot time?
A bugsmasher from say E120 down will only use an estimate based on GPS and flight plan information. It doesn't really predict down the track it looks at current conditions, i.e. wind, altitude, TAS/GS etc. A jets info is FMS based and is predictive, hence more accurate.
Having spent several years flying bugsmashers in and out of Darwin, I can assure you there booking times are going to be more best wishes then any real intention to meet it. You could prove this fairly easily and charge a booking fee for each additional slot time they book or if more than ?? + or - 2 mins from their booked slot time. i.e. first one free, if you don't make the slot time you have to put a carton in the kitty for a joint RAAF ATC/Pilot xmas piss up. I guarantee it will be one huge party, or the GA industry will lift their act and request achievable slot times. .
These days were every one has a mobile phone, and were they don't work, like out in Arnhem land etc try VHF, HF, radio or land line from council office etc the slot time request should not be requested until the aircraft is ready to depart. Then allowance of whatever say 15 mins to load up taxi and depart and they will have a chance.
I have already been affected by the GA aircraft not turning up scenario and it pissed me off. Its the reason I started this post.
As an aside I imagine an aircraft tracking by the STAR would have a huge workload monitoring descent if told to descend not below the DME steps.
Well obviously Bloggs for one disagree's with me here, I would rather that, than the scenario we had the other day, described above.
With the FMS these days we can check what altitude we will be at certain distances before we even start our descent and pretty much forget it. Maybe monitor ones that may be close. In non radar environments we do it all the time and its not that hard.
Has the idea of light aircraft corridors had serious consideration?
keep them low until they leave CTR. You don't need to seperate them. Say to BTI Northbound 1000'until in "G" airspace and sounthound 1500ft. If there is no slot for them they can hold at a nominal position say Lee Point until there is one. Its nice and close so they can squeeze in at short notice?
IFR aircraft heading North have a restriction simialr to the Darwin 2, but make the turn 2500 for vertical seperation.