Quote:
So that's ATC's fault then, is it?
Where in the hell did you get the impression I said that?
Apoligies if I misunderstood - it seemed to be implied.
Was it you sent me 'round last night because of Aeroflot? The controller obviously saw him slow down, but said nothing to me. I unilaterally slowed down early, but it wasn't enough to save the situation.
That being said, has anyone actually discussed whether 160kts to 4 miles is safe or achievable?
Are you aware that the approach speeds of our aircraft (which we are required to be stable at by 1000', so 3 1/2 miles roughly) can be as low as 125kts? The FASTEST would be a 777-300ER at MLW, and that's 154kts.
In order -
No, it wasn't me.
I'm sure it's discussed regularly but we have to base the speeds on something. Those same 777s are often the ones who "can't do" 160 kts 10 mile out!
And yes, we are painfully aware of the problems with modern aircraft and approach speeds. The number of controllers suspended recently, pending investigation of the loss of separation caused by speed control being ignored is a testament to this.
We are required to work to an approach spacing of 5 miles / vortex wake, whichever is the greater. Here's the good bit - UNLESS YOU SAY OTHERWISE, having read back "160 to 4" then that's what we are basing the speeds / vectors of the following traffic on. If you then slow to 135 knots at 5.5 dme WITHOUT A WORD (regular occurrence), then we will not be aware of the fact until the following traffic is observed to be catching up at half a mile per minute. More often than not, it is then too late to avoid the separation loss.
To give an example of this, I now systematically provide 2.5 nm GREATER than the standard spacing behind a 380 because I KNOW that this will happen. The separation at landing is almost always the required 6 miles or very slightly more - ie 2.5 miles lost during the approach.
Bottom line is - if you can't fly the "standard speeds" then say so - preferably BEFORE the following traffic is established 5 miles behind!
Quote:
AD - nothing to do with Dubai CTA - no effect whatsoever. Also minimal traffic in comparison.
SJ - Depends on the situation. If the delay is due to runway capacity at DB (or lack of it), what does that have to do with SJ traffic?
Err...that was my point- the problems are Airport, not Airway capacity.
Do you often post angry comments to people, actually agreeing with what they wrote???
Not angry at all (believe it or not) - just confirming why
SHJ and ADB traffic uses the same airspace- and DON'T get inbound delays.
.
I am simply trying to point out how frustrated I and some of my colleagues are with being pushed constantly to increase runway utilisation (for emirates' benefit) and regularly getting royally scre^ed by that same company's crews who not only dont fly the "agreed" speed, but don't bother to inform us either. Notwithstanding your earlier comment regarding aeroflot - the vast majority of such incidents are "initiated" by emirates' aircraft.