Singapore ATC - anyone there

[FatEric]

I have been flying in and out of SIN now for a while and am increasingly frustrated with the way ATC process traffic.

Last week - arriving from NW of SIN and given JB Sinjon Samko for arrival for 02L. Radar vectors took us through the centreline of 02L about 5 miles south of the field then turned right onto right pattern downwind. Turned final at 18 DME.

We were instructed that we were number 2 - it was early afternoon and number 1 tfc was the only other aircraft around.

WHY if we were number 2 did we get approx 45 EXTRA track miles from when we were first advised our position in the sequence NW of the field. If we need 45 miles extra doesnt that effectively mean we arer currently AHEAD of the other aircraft.

Aso - when arriving from the east advised "number one - no speed control" for 20L. We reported visual with the field at about 20 miles (rare occasion where viz was good) and yet ATC still put us on a quasi downwind heading then base and final about 12 miles out. Surely when we report visual - when number 1 - we can be allowed to track for a left base visual approach instead of doing an IMC procedure in DAY VMC.

Finally - on numerous occasions I have been on final at 7-8 miles for 02L having been told by ATC 02R not avail due "departing traffic" only to look down and see a widebody slowly heading along EP just past SC. Surely we could sidestep to 02R and land before he arrives at the hold. Even if we delayed its departure by a minute it would still be more efficient than us landing on 02L and taxying for 10 minutes.

If someone from SIN atc can help me out with these queries that would be spiffing.

I am not intending to be critical but I am curious.

Thanks.

[hart744]

I have experienced the same myself. Was that other traffic a SQ flight?

[Slasher]

You can never know your track miles to run with SIN ATC irespective of your number in the pattern, only make guestamates. But 119.3 tends to be more acurate these days with D.T.G. than 124.05. The trick in SIN to minimise bein vectored through localisers and round the bloodey sky is to slow down earleyer than speed control dictates - if No 5 in seq slow to 250 knots by FL150, No 7 by FL170 etc. And soon as you know your gonna get shoved through the localiser bring the speed back as much as you can gear up. Works well for me. Only thing is you might have to speed up on final if they want you with that "190 knots till 8 miles" thing.

Knowing who your number 2 to helps a lot too. With experience you get to know which carriers whos policey is to drag there @rse in all the way for 10 miles at 140 knots and who doesnt.

And never ask for a visual approach lah. It confuses the hell out of em esp if you aim to rollout finals at 500 feet.

[PK-KAR]

SIN ATC?
Once I took off from Kijang/WIKN on the way to Pekanbaru/WIBB, and we were under Singapore Approach at 120.3 I think...

On climb we were cleared to climb to 8000, while a Lion MD82 was put on a crossing path to us on downwind for Batam's runway 22 from Jakarta... down to 4000 from FL140... We thought, well, ATC won't put us on crossing paths with inadequate spacing... that us until they start calling us and the Lion jet for our altitudes continuously. That got us looking out for traffic instead.

We had an emergency shortly afterwards. We called urgent need to return to Kijang... For 3 minutes he tried to get us to go to Seletar instead of vectoring us, and he didn't even ask what our emergency was. We were NOT happy.

I thought this was SIN ATC not the CAAS marketing department.

PK-KAR

[FatEric]

Slasher,

The question of slowing down seems to be an interesting one.

It appears to me that ATC is vetoring you to achieve a pre determined touchdown time in which case speed has no bearing on your arrival – it will obviously have a bearing on how much airspace you use in the process which in SIN is limited.

But shouldn’t speed control be adhered to – 250 below 130, 220 within 20 etc. Why then do guys - without being instructed by ATC – slow to 220 knots 80 miles away from the field. My favourite is when ATC advise “number 5 in sequence” when you are 80 miles out. A lot of guys will immediately wind the speed back and yet 5 arrivals only requires about 60 miles. Slowing down only causes problems for the guys behind.

I strongly think that it is pilots lack of speed adherence that causes problems in SIN – following an SQ 744 that is clearly doing approach speed at 15-20 miles (without being instructed to by ATC) happens too often.

[gyro]

Eric, you've got to stop pushing the bus in at 340k Fl180 50nm from the threshold.... you're frightening the daylights out of them!! I beleive the answer was on the front page of that holy grail of journalistic integrity during the week, something about a new reality if i recall correctly. A good little controller will now see you in the aforementioned position and think to himself.. "self lah, if i slow this bloke down he could clean at least 4 rows of J class before i have to say turn right hdg 350 intercept 02L loc, report established reduce speed 160k till 4 miles..."
You've got a lot to learn young Skywalker, and if anyone enlightens you, make sure you pass it on!!!!

[FatEric]

Not 340 knots - although I love going AFAP (as fast as poss) I do show restraint in SIN as it just throws a spanner in the works.

I love the way the only intercept heading appears to be 350 for 02L - I wonder if the controller realises there is a myriad of headings to choose from?

[Goofyfoot]

FATERIC
I doubt very much if they realise there are other hdg's as the Singaporean's have great difficulty thinking outside the box!

[greybeard]

You will never "hold" at S'Pore, they will vector you to hell and back as the punters will still think you are "getting there" and not "waiting to land" so to speak. Political stuff I feel.
As for the intercept headings, they do appear to be a mind set and a little adjust is needed to allow for the infrequent winds that can occurr, trying to get a local trainee to adjust their heading 5deg from ATC's is like trying to win Lotto, once or twice in a lifetime??
As for runway allocation, as there are so many requests from the locals that are ,and probably WOULD have been allocated, you could form the opinion that favourites are allowed. The proceedures are one runway for so called landing, one for T/Off and generally works ok, I refused to ask and would have I guess had 30% or better a "favourable" change anyway. Sometimes other Airlines would get the nod and not me, so be it, I told the F/O that it all helps to get the hours, which was lost on most

C YA
:ok:

[Kaptin M]

Years ago - when Slasher was a lad - I was rhs pf returning to SIN, in the 74 classic, and ATC told us to take up some ridiculous heading...like 60 or 70 degrees off our present inbound course. I asked the Cap to request the reason for the heading, and the reply came back, "Because you are too high."

Since my days in Changi, I have noticed a similar/same thought process with ATC'ers elsewhere - ie. they're either frustrated pilots, who think that WE don't know that we're too high and they do, OR, they are avid remote control airplane flyers!!

If we the pilots - and there are 2 of us monitoring - believe that we ARE too high, then WE will advise you, and request an orbit, or extra track miles.
Often's the time that we think to ourselves WE could have expedited traffic flow - but we bit our tongues, because it's YOU guys (and gals) who are the professional ATC'ers.

Please let US - the pilots - fly the aeroplanes.
If YOU think that you can do better, then become a pilot, and jump into your very own cockpit.
PLEASE.

[BlueEagle]

Kaptin M - did it ever occur to you that you might have been 'too high' to fit into his picture and that he had no real concern about yours?;)

(I had nearly ten years of SIN ATC and overall they come out pretty well, as an SIA aircraft I never got the impression that I was being 'favoured' over a non-SIN carrier, it was just their separation requirements that caused the sometimes drawn out arrivals. A visit to ATC is well worthwhile and very much welcomed by the controllers).