Dubai ATC

[ManaAdaSystem]

Am I alone when I say there are one or two ATCOs (Aussie/English?) in DXB who seem to suffer from constant PMS?
The ones who seem to spend 30-40% of the talk time flogging pilots for the smallest R/T mistakes.
The ones who threaten to vector you to hell and back if you miss two radio calls.
The ones who seem to be in a desperate need of some permanent R and R.

Apologies to the rest of you ATCOs in DXB. Apart from the need to read a 30 sec blablabla every time we check in for arrival/departure to DXB, you are a professional lot second to none.:ok:

The other two...

[ferris]

Am I alone when I say there are one or two pilots who fly into DXB who seem to suffer from flying while in a vegetative state?
The ones who seem to spend 30-40% of the talk time getting flogged for constant R/T mistakes.
The ones who get vectored to hell and back because they need two radio calls for every instruction.
The ones who seem to be in a desperate need of some permanent R and R.

Apologies to the rest of you pilots in DXB. Apart from the need to readback a 30 sec blablabla every time you check in for arrival/departure to DXB, you are a professional lot second to none. :ok:

The other two...

[jet4hire]

That hurts!!!

We are not, all that bad are we.....?
I missed a few calls! but the importance of ATC & Pilots is to communicate and NOT to censurade!:ok:
Cheers to all

I am just a pilot!

[Doodlebug]

Clever response from Ferris, you have to admit, eh? My 2 fils worth: have usually found ATC in this area helpful - own speeds; direct clearances; fast climbs - able, and often enjoyably witty - witness our callsign, 'Midjet', promptly morphed into 'Midget'! (corporate jet)
:p

[jet4hire]

Eh! you must be from Canada! right Pal?
just teassing!:cool:

[ManaAdaSystem]

ferris, I have absolutely no problems with UAE or Abu Dhabi. This is limited to DXB, and further down to one or two individuals. No need to feel offended unless the shoe fits, and you do some part time work in Dubai.

We all do mistakes, we can all have a bad day, but these guys behave in a way I've never experienced before, and they do it consistently.

[Captain Over]

....PLEASE understand that just as the nose-wheel is touching down, the noise level in the front office is the loudest (and somewhat busiest) of the entire flight.

NOT a good time to radio to us "ABC123, next right, over to Ground 121.x, blah blah...." WHAT DID THEY JUST SAY?? "Say again...??"

We know you are busy fitting out round pegs into the square holes around us, but hold off that transmission for just 15 more seconds. Once the reversers are stowed, you can tell us exactly what to do...'cause THEN we can HEAR YOU! :D

(or...how about clearing instructions when we first say 'ello?)

Cheers!
C.O.

PS: DXB isn't the only place guilt of this annoyance, but it has crept into the scene more recently there for some reason.

[Doodlebug]

jet4hire

Nah, that's one of my fellow-drivers. He'll be delighted to hear he's achieved the dizzying heights of a mention in the hallowed halls of pprune, though :D

Doodlebug

[Fly Through]

Ok was trying to resist but what the hell.............

Yes there are a handful amongst us that tend to go ott, we all know who they are and trust me we're trying to sort it but it's a slow process as they've mostly been atco's since Pontious was a pilot!

We all do our utmost but our patience does wear thin every once in awhile especially with pilots who think there outside Europe so they don't need to pay attention. Next time a controller barks just remember we're trying to do our job with not enough people, a crap system and a regulator who blames us for everything!

Rgds FT

[ferris]

ManaAdaSystem.
I was just having a laugh.

Remember, it's arguably worse for us at the centre. We have to talk to them all the time, and put up with their 'interesting' techniques.

[CRS]

Could one of the Dubai ATCO's tell me why we have to make the extraordinary long call on initial contact (published in Jepps) surely this takes up valuable RT time? The longest verbage required by any airport in the world, to my knowledge.

While I am on the questions, why can't DXB's mode c check be satisfactory for UAE and vice versa, climbing out of the UK, the French or Maastricht don't ask for another level passing check?

A delivery frequency would also take alot of pressure off you Ground controllers.

Thanks for the service ladies and gents

brgds

CRS:confused:

[CaptSnails]

Personally I think you boys are pretty alright over in DXB and I must say considering traffic conditions you do a good job. I also understand how frustrating it must be when you have to repeat clearances sometimes when people miss the call, but hay don't forget we're all just human and more importantly we're one team, together we keep em flying.
Keep up the good work boys
Cheers
Snails:ok:

[druckmefunk]

I work out of DXB and must say except for the Canadian guy we had a few years ago, who was a bit too highly strung, I find all the ATC pretty good. What I would like to see though is the ATIS abreviated. By the time you listen to that diatribe one and a half times, you have generally missed at least one radio call. Given that the weather conditions rarely change, do we need such a time consuming ATIS broadcast?

I second the call for a delivery freq. EK alone is expanding at a rediculous rate, let alone increased traffic from other airlines and already the ground freq is overloaded. It's only going to get worse, particulary as EK likes to put all its departures around 0800. Do you guys have any plans in the wind to address the problem?

dmf

[White Knight]

I second DMF's call for a delivery freq. as it can be a nightmare at 03:00 trying to get a word in on 118.35.

[Fly Through]

The initial call, well according to my MATS you're required to pass callsign, type, passing level, cleared level and SID/STAR. That's not really huge is it? If you don't we only have to keep coming back to you again & again until we get the info. It saves us alot of RT time if done correctly.

Mode C checks, seems unnecessary? Couldn't agree more, complete waste of time in IMHO but what regulator demands we must do.

As for on the ground, it is split in two during busy periods, a movements planner & controller. This will become a 24 hour thing as we get more bums on seats in the tower.

New digital ATIS is being installed as we speak but again the regulator raises his ugly head and we have to do what he commands.

Ferris - is there any reason that Dubai is the only place in the world that I know of where the Approach guy doesn't control his/her own hold? Is it just politics?

Hope I answered most things :ok:
Rgds FT

[ferris]

I can only assume the comment about RVSM is to give you fair warning that unless you have complied rigidly with a number of things, you won't be going up there?

RE; the holds. I couldn't agree more. APP should 'own' the bottom 2 levels, so you can bring them out as you see fit (done in the UK that way?). The whole flow control system needs fixing. It is a joke (but guess who instigated it? We've got buckley's of getting it changed- that instruction would have to come from on high. His lordship is juggling so many balls- lack of delegation- that it's down the list of priorities. There was a thread about 2 years ago critisising the inbound flow- and nothing has changed. It's good to see some common sense coming to the fore and asking us for gaps between 2 inbounds here or there, rather than the blanket '20' call. Could all be done so much better...... aahhh welllll.

Mode C checks- see above re; juggling.

[AirNoServicesAustralia]

I think the big man is a dane actually, but yes he is still running the whole show.

Agree on the Mode C checks, a waste of time, as Dubai APP does it then 3 minutes later, us at UAE centre do it, then most likely for Eastbound departures, 5 minutes later Muscat does it.

On the flow, I cannot believe that a place like Melbourne, has a fulltime dedicated Flow position, organising the sequence, whereas Dubai, which is much more congested only has a coordinator, who almost as an afterthought has a look at how the sequence looks. Basically it comes down to the Eastern UAE sector, running his sequence, and the Western UAE sector running his, and then they all come to a grinding halt over Dubai, and we end up with the infamous Dubai Air Show. Must be a better way.

As far as the Grumpy Dubai controllers, I personally have found 90% of them to be good to work with (even all those damn Kiwis!). Just a couple, especially one quite large individual, spoil the broth. Most of the time when things get strained whether its with the pilots, or with us poor centre controllers, its due to frustration at the procedures and restraints placed on them, and nothing personal.

[druckmefunk]

Fish,

Isn't it a pleasant change to see reverse slagging in progress. Can anyone remember the last time they saw a topic degenerate into a constructive discussion, on any pprune forum. We had best be careful though, someone will mistake us for professionals and completely blow our disguise.

On the other hand, I find it appalling that pprune is the defacto means of sorting these things out. It would be nice if our management could see beyond the parapets of their ivory towers and invite some of our colleagues from the other trades (ATC etc) to our meetings so that we could discuss something other than jump seat policy, pay and rostering.

Then having fostered a healthy professional relationship, we could adjourn to the Irish Village to continue another fine aviation tradition.


dmf

[ferris]

The EAA (Emirates Aviation Association) has a newly-formed ATC division, and I'm sure would be happy to send a couple of people along to an EK pilot's meeting (if invited). The EAA actually has some official standing, and may be a way of suggesting changes that a certain person may take onboard. You never know!

The Irish Village does sound good.

[Vercingetorix]

Ferris
how do they do it in the UK?

[max AB]

with their socks still on. :O

[ferris]

From what I have been told, APP owns the bottom 2 levels of the stack (say 10000' and 11000'). Area drops them to 12000', then hands them off. As 12000' is vacated, next one to 12000' and handed off. This way APP can keep them in the hold at 10 and 11, and bring them out as they see fit (you want 2 levels, so that you can control the spacing). It could work for any levels (say 8 and 9 even). Just a different way of thinking about jurisdiction. Essentially the area guy is thinking like this anyway, once you start holding. He purely reverts to levels during holding, which is why sometimes you have aircraft calling APP when they are not even pointing inbound. They have been told to turn in, call APP. The next one in is being seperated by vertical, but just spaced with lateral, so the area guy doesn't need to be talking to the bottom A/C in the stack. So, instead of APP 'owning' a set distance from the runway (the gate), they own the levels underneath the hold. This could be switched on and off as required. It's much more efficient, because instead of area sending them all in 10 miles apart or whatever, APP knows when they need a gap for an AUH arrival etc and can control their own inbound flow.

ps. Several pilots have told me that they would much prefer to take the delay in the hold, then just go straight in. It peeves them to come out of the hold, then get vectored all over the terminal area. I think the above scenario would alleviate that (which is caused by the current crappy system). It's frustrating to sit and watch the beautiful stream you have worked to create go to hell in the terminal area, because there are a couple in from the east and 1 from AUH. There has to be a better way.

[Antman]

Hi guys

Just a point about the start sequencing in DXB,when its busy everybody always seems to get started,taxied and cleared for takeoff in the sequence they called.

This is all very gentleman like but at times not very practical.Often you will have 5 departures on the same track in a row which I'm sure makes things difficult for the departure controller catching them.

Would it not make more sense to sequence traffic as much as is possible,one left turn departure ,one strait ahead,one right,one left etc.
I'm sure this would also help the ACC controllers and help everybody get there levels and reduce time between departures.Another thing that will help traffic flow is to have departures out of SHJ route north to RAK before on track to aid seperation from DXB traffic.

[Fly Through]

Ok with ya all the way Ferris, giving us the hold or at least the bottom few levels will let us control the spacing much better. The current system forces area controllers into doing the sequencing, not their job at all and they only have half the picture. If we could just get that :mad: Dane to stop playing politics and apply some logic..........sorry forgot where I am living there ;)

As for prefering to stay in the hold, would love to keep you there but as it stands our only flexibilty is in the vectoring hence the scenic tours. Ferris is the only coordination between North/West & East sectors done by Dubai Cod?

As for the start ups, usual problem with everyone wanting to go the same way at the same time, plus our local tower only atcos sometimes don't pick up on the bigger picture. As it stands we'll be splitting ground from March 1st into movement controller and planner. Also the longer term plans envision a Tower Coordinator. Obviously these plans hinge on us recruiting enough atcos which depends on our pay & conditions being improved (not holding my breathe there then :hmm: )

Wow controllers from the centre & the airport as well as pilots all talking together..............geesh, novel this innit? :ok: Oh the remark about the pilots meeting, care to PM an e-mail address and I'll pass it to my boss. As for the Irish Village, well alright, if you insist :E

[ferris]

ATM, the way the system is set up, Nth and East sequence independantly. The only way to get extra spacing is to call for 20nm etc. Flow shouldn't be run from the centre. This is very inefficient. It would work if east was given gate times ie. number 1 cross BUBIN at 34, number 2 at 39 etc. There has been some ad hoc experimentation recently by a few of us re; coordinating gaps in the west sequence to fit AUH and east arrivals. Whilst a marked improvement, it still doesn't cover all bases, and if you-know-who found out we weren't doing it his way, we'd be toast.

PM me for contact details of the EAA people.

[Wiley]

Firstly, a couple of ‘givens’:
- Emirates is DXB’s biggest customer
- Emirates aircraft (except one) all have datalink
- Many other users of DXB also have datalink

While it will be a great improvement to separate the ADC and Ground frequencies, (as only occasionally seems to happen lately), let’s drag DXB into the 21st century with something that’s been in use elsewhere for ages now – datalink.

DATALINK
Could we please have datalink as soon as possible for pre start airways clearances at DXB? It would go a long way towards reducing the terrible bottlenecks around 2.00 am and 7.30 am as God only knows how many people try to squeeze a word in edgeways. It’s like Mumbai HF some mornings.

***

A….T….I….S
I also have to agree with the many comments re DXB’s too long ATIS. It’s almost as bad as CDG where you have to sit through the French edition before they deign to parlez to us in (puh!) Anglais.


***

As for the personal complaints: I think I speak for the majority of DXB ATC users when I say that most of us understand that the silliness we sometimes see inflicted upon us is as frustrating for the ATCOs as it is for us. Like us, they’re only wing a set of ‘rools’ laid down for them by people who know better.

***

HOLDING
Re the holding stack: I’m more than a little anal retentive about fuel, and I really don’t like the cross country tours I all too frequently get after I’ve been cleared from DESDI or wherever. On occasion, I’ve burnt so much more than expected after leaving the stack going into DXB that I would have been seriously embarrassed had I been held in the stack to within a few minutes of my ‘bug out’ figure. (Like many, I suspect, I’ve since increased my ‘bug out’ figure for DXB.)

I’d really like to see the LHR system, where you have a fair to middlin’ idea (to within 100 to 200 kgs) of how much you’re going to burn after you leave the hold. Whoever it was who suggested inviting ATCOs to the next pilot meeting was inspired. Damn good idea.

***

Finally, it’s refreshing to find Pprune actually being used for what I suspect Danny created it for. I recall a similar thread some time ago about 777-300 approach speeds into LHR that seemed to have a very positive effect on both camps understanding of the others’ positions and preferences. Let’s hope this one has a similar effect.

[Vercingetorix]

Ferris
like it. Interesting stuff. Where did you do your approach ?

[AirNoServicesAustralia]

It's frustrating to sit and watch the beautiful stream you have worked to create go to hell in the terminal area

Sorry Ferris, musta been having a day off when you achieved that beautiful sequence :E

Seriously though I do agree that what Dubai needs is a dedicated flow controller who works out the sequence and then works back from that with times to arrive at the respective gates, which then leaves it up to us humble area controllers to meet those times and with a bit of luck the sequence would run smoothly.

If that is too much to expect then have a coordinator who selectively asks for 20 NM's between certain aircraft rather than the blanket 20 NM's or 30NM's between all aircraft after they have lost the plot and the poop has well and truly hit the fan.

[Late Landing]

Fly Through,

"just remember we're trying to do our job with not enough people, a crap system and a regulator who blames us for everything!"

Good to see not much has changed in the past few years!

As for the holding patterns... with local 'politics' gaining precedence over operational sense over the past few years - less airspace and more restrictions placed by the 'regulator' - things are bound to have become more operationally challenging. No doubt the empire building will continue...

[donpizmeov]

Might also help a bit if we were to actually fly the published star instead of the " maintain heading 300"!!!! Would stop a lot of the controller work load, would allow the flight deck (early morning after all night flight from hell) to use the FMC for track miles and descent profile....and hopefully free up the approach freq a bit.
Maybe if the chart reflected 210kts at bubok (oops can not remember its name!!!) and 180kts and 2000' at Umali (is that the right name for 12L ?) only small speed control would be required at busy times. The mile or two saved by the early turn at 0600hrs sometimes is not worth the effort.
Think the discussions that have taken place at Dubliners on those warm summer days between ATC and Pilots over the last few years have been well worth while, long may they continue, if only I could remember some of the answers the next morning!
Don

[Coastrider26]

Being quite new to DXB I think Dubai ATC is not to bad compared to the rest of the middle east. The only thing that really scared me a couple of days ago. Was the fact that an aircraft was cleared for take off while we taxied from M5 to k2(?) for 12R while there was a 747 lined up at the begining of the RWY. Apparently a smaller aircraft than us (B1900) was cleared for an intersection take off, would be appreciated if you guys gave us a bit more info on what is going on at our 6 o' clock. Keep up the good work i'd say

[Ghostflyer]

Probably just reiterating what's gone before but....

I have always been impressed having been sequenced by UAE and flapped at 240kts for 300 miles, when Dubai give me 'Direct Ukrim, no speed control'

The snag seems to be that they try to manage arrivals from 3 directions without a stack and only have control of the full picture when the aircraft get to Desdi et al pointing at 12L. London have the luxury of a much larger area in which to get the whole sequence squared away.

It all seems to go horribly wrong when the stream from Iran meets the Saudi and Omani streams. After all they even said in Ghostbusters, don't cross the streams.

Is there a way that the routing into Dubai's airspace for 12 could have a timing leg (just like out of Lambourne) so that aircraft can be picked off to meet a time at Ukrim. Then if it gets busy the hold could be used to slow the flowrate. Right now, there seems to be not enough trackmiles or angles in the STARs to sort out the problem.

I'll just go and feed my granny another egg!

Ghost :confused:

[Fly Through]

I think the sequencing should be left to the approach guys, we're the only one's who have the whole picture re inbounds from other directions. Maybe even try being old fashioned by giving centre lowest levels and EATs, then you guys can arrange your flights accordingly, we can achieve minimum spacing and centre isn't spending all there time trying to get 10 miles. We're also spending much more time on the phone these days with individual coordination to try and speed things up but some UAE watches don't like this and it is officially against our rules.

As for flying the stars, great if it's quiet (I just love letting all the technical gubbins do the work for us:ok: ) but when we're attempting max runway utilization then we need to vector you to get the gaps accurate. As for descent profiles, we can give you a best guess at distance from touchdown but at the moment due to a number of reasons (ie. every star & sid conflicting, only allowed to use 5 miles separation in a system set up for 3 miles.....etc) we can't always ensure the continuous descent.

There's a hell of lot of changes needed in the system here but all though we shout ourselves horse trying to get it we're only atco's so we're ignored. What we need is complaints from the customers, so come on all you mrats guys get whinging to your company, then pressure might be brought to bear.

Cheers FT

[Late Landing]

Fly Through

Check your PM

[Crazycanuk]

I think the controlers do a very good job in DXB. A hold is almost non existant even at the busy times. As for the profiles, vectors and speed control when it is busy, I say they see more of the picture than we do, so I just follow and let them lead me in. They always get the message across when we are get high or low on "their" profile (sometimes you have to read between the lines). As for the rare instance when we are arriving in the pattern with close to min fuel, if you let them know I'm sure they will do all they can to help out.

Keep up the good work guys.
:ok:

Crazy

[AirNoServicesAustralia]

Not stealing Dubai's thunder but generally all the holding, vectoring and speed control is care of us guys in Abu Dhabi. So you can thank/blame us for that.

[ferris]

Vercingetorix.
I've never done APP.

Ghost.flapped at 240kts for 300 miles, when Dubai give me 'Direct Ukrim, no speed control' It just means you have taken your delay before entering the terminal area. Area spaces you 10nm behind the one in front by DESDI. If APP have sent the one ahead of you direct to UKRIM, then you too will go dct UKRIM (barring them trying to fit another one in from the east between you). Alternatives; you could steam on in for those '300nm' at 320kts, then enter the hold at DESDI and take your delay there, or just plunge on into the TMA, overload the APP freq and his airspace (like it used to happen) and have no idea about how long you have to run.
Donpizmeov
I'm sure if you want a more regimented system (ie always fly the STAR) the boss would be only too happy to oblige.

All the complaints are fixable. It's no joy to have to work this system. I'm sure it worked well in Copenhagen in the early 70s....:hmm:

[Fly Through]

'Not stealing Dubai's thunder but generally all the holding, vectoring and speed control is care of us guys in Abu Dhabi. So you can thank/blame us for that.'

Hmmmmm let's just say you start the ball rolling, we're the one's that run with it. Next you'll be saying that you do the sequencing!! ;)

By the way you area guys, are there rules on how you get the gaps through Desdi or Bubin? Seen some really bizarre methods of late!

Rgds FT

Ps. I know we do a liason visit as part of our training but we never see you guys up here. Come on we won't bite and we'll even shout a beer or two!

[Muttley Crew]

No real complaints about the ATCOs standard. Yet to see R/T floggings or vectors from (to) hell.

One gent however has a habit of responding to pilots' readbacks of his instructions with a clipped "Correct..." or sometimes just a double click. Is there a requirement to acknowledge readbacks on UAE Control or departures? Why don’t other controllers do this?

Might be an old chestnut but why does Muscat invariably have no runway info for all the aircraft transiting through to Dubai?

One other question, when the Altn GND freq is used at Dubai, why isn’t this mentioned on the ATIS so a call and air-time isn’t wasted on 118.35?

[AirNoServicesAustralia]

Hey fly through, sometimes we need to pull out some really bizarre tricks out of the hat to achieve our ten miles, cos Muscat and Tehran decided to "help" us :uhoh: The expats in Muscat are great but the locals seem to have a great attachment to their aircraft and therefore don't want to give them to us until they are all on top of each other roaring into Bubin. As far as Tehran.. well nuff said.

As far as the visits go. We have tried to make it a part of our training but at this stage we get a trip to Abu Dhabi APP (Woohoo!) and thats it. I certainly have made many trips to Dubai and met many of the Dubai App controllers, but that was strictly personal :hmm:

There is no requirement to acknowledge a readback as being correct. Silence from the controller is acknowledgement that you got it right, and we'll respond only if something was readback incorrectly. The only time I would tell the pilot he got it right, would be for our Eastern European friends, who readback the clearance and finish with a big questioning upward inflection in there voice, and I will confirm he got it right rather than responding to the inevitable queries 2 minutes later.

We have no requirement to tell Muscat of the runway in Dubai, and I guess Muscat expects you guys can get the ATIS and find out for yourself. I do know this can be hard when Dubai change runway but the ATIS remains unchanged for half an hour :mad:

[halas]

If there is a problem with flow and hand overs, would it not be better to design better SID's and STARS if the ATCO's hands are "tied" by regulation?

This could help reduce the vectors and facilitate speed control.

Or is this the last straw when everything else fails?

halas

[Fly Through]

Halas,

We're already in the process of a ground up airspace review at the moment, only because no one is willing to pay for outside help it's gonna be 3 - 5 years down the line. :*

Ah real shame as we needed it about 3 years ago!!

Oh and just to cheer everyone up, don't forget we'll be closing one of the runways 24 hrs a day shortly as it needs to be moved!! They never like to see us bored around here do they?

Rgds FT

[quarefellah]

Hi All!
In the spirit of 'constructive criticism' of this thread can I tackle the thorny subject of Dubai's lengthy ATIS? It starts off by saying ' Dubai International Airport, United Arab Emirates ATIS information __'. What's that all about? How's about 'Dubai information __'.
Of late I've heard a longwinded message about the fact that RVSM has been implemented also included. This is the ONLY ATIS message at any airport in the region that mentions this. Why the big fuss? After all, unless you've teleported to the field you'll have used RVSM on the way in OR maybe taken a glance at the notams prior to departure. It's only a computerised text message. Can't it be made more 'user-friendly'?

[menard]

I agree with Crazycanuck. These guys are doing the best they can within their power to help us.... I think there is far more serious problems other than DXB ATC in Dubai right now!!!! But this is another forum......:E

[LondonRadar]

If there's such a shortage of ATCOs out there in the UAE, then why is it so hard for some of us guys here in the UK to get a job out there?
What's with this 5 years experience at a busy civilian airport requirement all about - if the locally recruited and trained ATCOs are capable of validating (without ANY previous experience) then any ATCO, who has previously validated his/her ratings at a unit, would already be in a better position, surely?
Seems to me that the best way to reduce the ATCO shortage in the UAE would be to be more flexible with the required experience and treat each applicant on his/her individual merits.

There you go, problem solved...NEXT!

[Invictus]

Hello all,

Just to provide some history to a few questions raised.

With regard to the long "first calls"; It is not uncommon that the aircraft types for a few of the regional flights are not correctly represented on the (version of the) Flight Plan that ATC has for a particular flight. This has in the past lead to incorrect wake turbulence separation being applied on final approach when the "medium" ahead has turned out to be a heavy. I believe that the root of the problem is the filing of revised FPL by the operator before the RPL (held at the airport of departure) has been filed, thus the data received is the data that the operator intended to amend.

The level passing has to do with the fact that there is no automated data interchange between Dubai and UAE or anyone else and UAE (as far as I know). The advent of OLDI in the future should go a (very) long way to sorting that out. In my opinion, a procedure that requires that Dubai and/or UAE advise the other unit when a Mode C variation is evident and assume that a non-notification means it is OK would be the easiest and safest interim solution.

Somebody asked why DXB does not just design their own (improved) SID's and STAR's.. I believe that our Regulator at the GCAA is considered to be the only one that can make those kinds of changes at the moment.

Regarding the sectorisation and airspace review, Emirates Airlines and the Airport Authority (including ATC and other departments) are heavily involved in a project/program that is being run by an outside agency that allows extremely high speed simulation of various proposed scenarios. There are a multitude of factors that get considered and parameters that are tweaked. This simulation allows for fine tuning of procedures and routings to find the optimum spacing, routings (air and ground) etc with the increase of traffic. The solution(s) may be some time off in terms of realisation, but they are in the making.

It is apparent and obvious that the amount of traffic arriving at DXB during the peak times, and the varying (?) directions and sectors from which they come make it extremely difficult for any ATC or group of ATC's to make it work out all the time without hitches, delays or crock up's. There are tools out there that can, based on final spacing requirements, calculate backwards out to a few hundred miles regarding ideal speeds etc to create a consistent flow of traffic with optimum routings etc. The difficulty in this part of the world is trying to get the powers that be to open up their cheque books and pay for this kind of technology.

The operation level managers know the problems and the solutions, but they do not control the purse strings and so they can only work within the parameters that they find themselves in.

Between regulatory issues, limited funding, ageing equipment, staff shortages, some aircrew that can hardly speak English, some ATC's that Bark at every opportunity and the construction site that has 2 runways associated with it, methinks the guys (and girls) at Dubai and UAE do an outstanding job.



:ok: :ok: :ok: :ok:

[clipped_wings]

Nice one Invictus

You joined PPrune specially to say that didn't you?

Going back to original posting I believe that there are two or three individuals in Dubai that are letting the side down. :ugh:

What a pity that the good work of many is spoiled by the impatience of a few.

Keep up to good work chaps! :D :O :p

[Invictus]

Clipped_Wings,

Yes, I had forgotten my previous login(s) and had not been on these pages for more than a year.

Regarding the few "Bad Apples" you will always get those wherever you go, fact of life. The good thing is, that most pilot's will see the whole picture.

Invictus

[Fly Through]

LondonRadar

PM me if you really are interested in working out here in the sandpit.

Invictus very thought out & considered post but leaves out the fact things could be improved overnight if wasn't for a bloody minded regulator, who's more intent on building empires than setting up a safe, orderly & expeditious unit.

As for the various positive comments above....... thanks, we try our best :ok:
FT

[AirNoServicesAustralia]

London Radar, you have to understand they will always go the extra yard to get a local validated here, and understandably so. For that reason they give them at least 18 months training, whereas the expats get 3 months with no simulator training, just straight on the job. To be honest you need to be experienced to make it here, because as an expat they expect you to slot straight in and do the job. You can't compare the locals with the expats because the expectations as far as time frame for validating is completely different.

In defence of the locals though, your post gave the impression that the locals are a lesser controller than expats, and in UAE centre at least, that is far from the case. The locals I work with are some of the best controllers I have ever had the pleasure to work with.

In response to invictus, I accept the financial and regulatory constraints placed on Dubai, but my issue, is why doesn't the Coordinator spend more time working out the sequence and proactively asking for specific 20 NM spacing rather than letting East and West provide 10 NM spacing and then realising overhead Dubai there are not enough slots for aircraft. No WhizzBang new system needed for that, just work the sequence out and communicate it to us, and we will do the rest. This blanket 20NM or 30NM is overkill to the extreme. But agreed generally that within the parameters provided things run pretty smoothly most of the time.

[AREBEE211]

3 Things that need to be addressed with Dubai ATC.

1. The ATIS. Its way to long. Just give us the runway in use and the weather. Drop all the other crap- we have notams. Why do you have to update it every half hour? Its a pain in the ass to have to go off ATC frequency in the descent to get the new ATIS code.

2. Clearance delivery. Time for its own frequency all the time! There is no reason why we should wait for taxi clearance because someone is getting their clnx. Ground frequency is over congested as it is especially with all the airport work going on.

3. The verbal speal we have to give with departure and arrival. On departure this is a very busy time in the cockpit, low to the ground and we have to spit out aircraft type blah blah. Name, SID and altitude climbing out of.

Thanks

RB

[Zomp]

AREBEE211

you hit the nail on the head

[granny smith]

Sorry this is a long post but I’ve just joined the thread and want to add a few of my humble opinions. It is good to see some sensible dialogue between Area and Approach ATCOs and pilots. Chronologically …

ManaAdaSystem

“Am I alone when I say there are one or two ATCOs (Aussie/English?) in DXB who seem to suffer from constant PMS?”

No unfortunately you’re correct. You’re not alone in finding their conduct on the r/t unprofessional and we are trying to change it.

Captain Over

“We know you are busy fitting out round pegs into the square holes around us, but hold off that transmission for just 15 more seconds. Once the reversers are stowed, you can tell us exactly what to do...'cause THEN we can HEAR YOU!

(or...how about clearing instructions when we first say 'ello?)”

Agreed – this is an ATC training matter but please mention it to the controller at the time it happens. The flip side is for you to get off the runway asap. We have a big problem with runway occupancy, especially EK aircraft. Also “expedite” means hurry up not go as slowly as possible!

Ferris

“Remember, it's arguably worse for us at the centre. We have to talk to them all the time, and put up with their 'interesting' techniques.”

B*$%&cks

CRS

Could one of the Dubai ATCO's tell me why we have to make the extraordinary long call on initial contact (published in Jepps) surely this takes up valuable RT time? The longest verbage required by any airport in the world, to my knowledge.

It’s not long – it’s exactly the same as the report required by UK ATC. It gives us all the info we need and avoids increasing our workload 4–fold by having to ask for the info you haven’t volunteered.

While I am on the questions, why can't DXB's mode c check be satisfactory for UAE and vice versa, …?

Couldn’t agree more and we’ve tried believe me.

A delivery frequency would also take alot of pressure off you Ground controllers.

There is a Delivery frequency on 118.35 between 0730 & 0830. That’s why you get transferred to 118.85 for Ground. The published hours of GMP, of course, mean that GMP closes whilst the GMC controller is still up to his neck in departures and now has to work 2 frequencies. Sometimes there aren’t the staff available to keep it open.

Ferris

“RE; the holds.”
How’s this for an idea? Dubai has control of the holds (which are too far away from the airfield and should be moved closer / replaced) at altitudes i.e. up to 13,000’. UAE drops arrivals spaced 10nm apart to FL150 and transfers them to Dubai Arrivals. If holding is going to be such that levels above FL150 will be required for holding the Coordinator informs UAE North. This simplifies the task for everyone and gives the customer the best service. This would require UAE to descend aircraft earlier. To ensure the system works and entry in the AIP vis aircraft must plan their descent profile to be level FL150 around 20nm before DESDI/BUBIN (and for this to be applied at all times) just like the UK. Maybe a CCTV system so UAE North and East can see the ARR strips to see which levels are vacant is needed too. It’s still not perfect but better than the current system, but then again anything is better than the current system!

Antman

“Would it not make more sense to sequence traffic as much as is possible, one left turn departure ,one strait ahead,one right,one left etc.”

Great idea – already been thought about but again problems of SIDs that go straight ahead to 5 or 9 nm before turning make a mockery of expedition. We have started giving early turns to a fix so that you can maintain your own terrain separation and turn early. These should be prefixed with “when ready, turn L/R direct to…” or “when safely able, turn L/R direct to...” Also ask EK ops to stop filing all their European departures in the rushes solely via RANBI or PAPAR. This means we get 15 deps via one SID and nothing via any other route. There goes the operational flexibility then…

Wiley

“While it will be a great improvement to separate the ADC and Ground frequencies, (as only occasionally seems to happen lately), let’s drag DXB into the 21st century with something that’s been in use elsewhere for ages now – datalink.”

We have separate ADC and Ground frequencies H24. datalink and DATIS – agreed.

“I’d really like to see the LHR system,”

Wouldn’t we all!

Donpizmeov

“Might also help a bit if we were to actually fly the published star instead of the "maintain heading 300"!!!! Would stop a lot of the controller work load, would allow the flight deck (early morning after all night flight from hell) to use the FMC for track miles and descent profile....and hopefully free up the approach freq a bit.”

Sorry, doesn’t work. It is impossible to sequence arrivals on the RNAV STARs without all the hassle of gate times etc. Much more trouble than it’s worth. Then you’ve got the problem of a) training ATCOs to do it (assuming all are able) and b) actually getting people to do it. See scenario under holds above.

”Maybe if the chart reflected 210kts at bubok (oops can not remember its name!!!) and 180kts and 2000' at Umali (is that the right name for 12L ?) only small speed control would be required at busy times. The mile or two saved by the early turn at 0600hrs sometimes is not worth the effort.”

Don’t seem to know the TMA, oops sorry we can’t have a TMA cos Abu Dhabi doesn’t have one (go look up the definition), CTA very well.

… early turns at 0600 – so why do you always say yes when asked if you want one?

AirNoServicesAustralia

“Not stealing Dubai's thunder but generally all the holding, vectoring and speed control is care of us guys in Abu Dhabi. So you can thank/blame us for that.”
Yeah, right. Come for a liaison visit on a night shift then you’ll see.

Muttley Crew

“One gent however has a habit of responding to pilots' readbacks of his instructions with a clipped "Correct..." or sometimes just a double click. Is there a requirement to acknowledge readbacks on UAE Control or departures? Why don’t other controllers do this?”

This might be me. Reason is to reduce the verbal diarrhoea that is a regular feature of radio transmissions here (from both sides). KISS - Keep It Simple Stupid

”One other question, when the Altn GND freq is used at Dubai, why isn’t this mentioned on the ATIS so a call and air-time isn’t wasted on 118.35?”

Let me get this right - you want us to make the ATIS message LONGER? We use 118.35 for GMC most of the day. GMP (Delivery) is only used at certain times but is likely to be required much more often in the future. 118.35 remains the initial contact frequency. GMC moves over to 118.85 for simplicity. You still get your clearance on 118.35 so it’s never a wasted call.

You should hopefully have noticed a different way of using the Delivery frequency recently. We’re aiming to keep congestion at the hold to a minimum so try to deliver aircraft to the hold in such a way as to never have more than 3-5 there. This means we’re operating a queue system on GMP (118.35). This is closely based on the way London Gatwick works and is a proven system. My pet hate is queue-jumping crews who get their clearance on 118.35 and then free-call on 118.85. You MUST wait until transferred otherwise the system doesn’t work.

LondonRadar

“If there's such a shortage of ATCOs out there in the UAE, then why is it so hard for some of us guys here in the UK to get a job out there? Seems to me that the best way to reduce the ATCO shortage in the UAE would be to be more flexible with the required experience and treat each applicant on his/her individual merits.”

Ah, now I see why you’re unsuited to life and work here – you’re applying common sense! We aren’t allowed to do that here. Seriously though – have you been given knockback? We’ve recently taken people with less than 5 years and even our first (ex-EGKK) tower only. PM me with details and / or a CV.

AREBEE211

“3 Things that need to be addressed with Dubai ATC.

1. The ATIS. … we have notams.”

So why does everthing come as a surprise then?

“Why do you have to update it every half hour?”

Because things change

“Its a pain in the ass to have to go off ATC frequency in the descent to get the new ATIS code.”

Please, oh please, tell me you mean the co-pilot uses box 2…

”2. Clearance delivery. Time for its own frequency all the time!”

Yes – you get us the staff and we’ll do it.

“There is no reason why we should wait for taxi clearance because someone is getting their clnx. Ground frequency is over congested…”

Agreed

”3. The verbal speal we have to give with departure and arrival. On departure this is a very busy time in the cockpit, low to the ground and we have to spit out aircraft type blah blah. Name, SID and altitude climbing out of.”

I’ll give you aircraft type on departure is usually unnecessary but the rest is the same as Europe and gives us the info we need. If you gave it all on 1st call it would reduce our r/t workload and frustration levels immensely.

[LondonRadar]

ASNO,

In defence of the locals though, your post gave the impression that the locals are a lesser controller than expats, and in UAE centre at least, that is far from the case. The locals I work with are some of the best controllers I have ever had the pleasure to work with.

If i gave that impression, I apologise. That was not I meant, maybe I should have said Student ATCOs rather than locals.
Regarding the time frames involved in validating, so what if some expats take a little longer to validate (for eg 5 months instead of 3). It's still better than being short staffed!!
But what do I know.:rolleyes:

Fly through and Granny Smith - check your PMs.

[Fly Through]

Bravo Granny Smith.............. you must have waaaaay too much time on your hands ;)

Agree with everything in your post but one thing needs to keep being reiterated.......THIS AIN'T EUROPE!!!!! Why is the Atis so long ? 'Cos here not every crew checks their NOTAMS. Why do we have a problem with runway occupancy? 'Cos everyone thinks it's only Dubai we can relax ie. High speed turnoffs, they're called that for a reason, so no crawling off the runway please. Frequency congestion? 'Cos crews standard of English is pitiful and certain sub continent pilots insist on everything being confirmed twice over. We could make this place run really smoothly but we keep having to cope with the lowest common denominator, all it takes is one pilot on arrivals with a bad command of English (usual with a heavy russian accent), who isn't following instrustions and everything slows down.

ASNO We've just been applying a blanket 20m flow over the last 2 nights when it's been busy. It worked pretty well but tell me why, if you guys do so much sequencing is everything left unil last minute? Once everything enters the holds, it's impossible for us to work out the order as everyone in the centre seems to have a different idea on how a hold works. Why when we put flow on can't you give crews a time to leave Desdi to achieve the required spacing rather than vectoring them? Even give it to them as they enter your airspace so they can arrange their flight accordingly? I personally like the proactive approach (I'll take that one on this heading, at this speed followed by....) but not all centre controllers like doing that.

Rgds FT

[Invictus]

Perhaps ASNO meant to say streaming and not sequencing.

ACC has no requirement to sequence the traffic at DXB. All they must do is stream the traffic according to what DXB stipulates from time to time.

If individuals at ACC are trying to work out the sequence and apply speed control and so on based on what they think the sequence should be, then I reckon there are going to be some pretty p1$$ed-off pilots out there. I have previously read postings on these pages where pilots are b1tch1ng about being given high speed by ACC and then immediately get told by DXB to hit the brakes or traffic slowed down by ACC and then on first contact with DXB get "Best Speed direct to ..."

A big part of the problem was eluded to by Granny Smith (I think) when he/she stated that DXB is published as a CTA and not a TMA. By definition, DXB should be a TMA.

Side Note:
Hey Late Landing, you still hanging around the DXB discussions eh? Compliments of the season to you and yours. How is the weather ?

[AirNoServicesAustralia]

Hey Fly Through, the problem we have (especially with one crew) is that you try and organise the order in the hold and have it all set up and then the plan gets changed to 30 NM blanket. So we usually stack them up and then as you guys can take them, whether 10 apart or 20 or whatever, we bring them in. I think generally it works ok if there is an open line of communication, my big gripe is when you call Dubai COORD and ask if you can shortcut the guy overhead MUSAP and the COORD responds with "Who??". Surely the COORD should be on a big range and have the sequence sorted well before they get in this close. I just get the distinct impression a lot of the guys see COORD as a position where you pass on COORD and if you get a chance you look at the sequence. From our point of view, the COORD is the guy we are looking to for a bit of guidance as to what you want or need.

Granny Smith, I had tongue firmly in the cheek, when I commented on us doing everything. When working with a good crew, Dubai APP and UAE Centre cooperates and helps each other out a lot, but when there is a bad crew either side of the fence, its the pilots that suffer.

BTW I know Big Brother is watching this thread, so be careful about letting on who you are, as criticism is not appreciated I hear.

Fly Through, again the lowest common denominator thing, we can't trust most of these pilots to make a left hand holding pattern (the right hand pattern at DESDI, scares the crap out of those RANBI departures), so how do you expect us to trust these guys with a time to arrive instruction. We have to get in and do it ourselves, which means wicked vectors all over the sky sometimes. I mean the amount of times aircraft fail to meet Vertical requirements here is scary, and thats after checking twice to make sure they will meet it. In a perfect world (Australia I hear you all saying :E ) you can trust the pilots will do the right thing, sorry here, due to a really bad minority, all techniques have to be dumbed down.

[Invictus]

BTW I know Big Brother is watching this thread, so be careful about letting on who you are, as criticism is not appreciated I hear.
I am going to assume that ANSA was referring to the "Great Dane" (GD) as Big Brother.

If this is indeed the case then I have 2 things to say.

1. ANSA's warning is pertinent.

2. Without the luxury of unions or representative groups in this part of the world, this is a most excellent opportunity for GD to listen to what the troops are saying. Of course there will be criticism and more, but when seen in the big picture, it should at the very least give him some good pointers as to where he should be looking if he truly wants to "make it better".


.

[ferris]

Granny Smith.How’s this for an idea It's not very good. How do you intend to hold a/c closer to the field at up to 13 000' ? You won't get them down and they'll get vectors all over the place to lose height. The mechanics of holding mean that the longer the hold runs, the higher and higher the aircraft are (if the in-trail-spacing leaving the hold is less than the distance around a pattern). You would also have to deal with the low-level overflyers (C130s etc) and insertions (Kish Isl). Departures would also be held down for a long time. I still don't see the problem with holding as we are now, and APP owning the bottom 2 levels. Holding is a vertical thing, so I have no idea why you want a/c run INTO the hold with 10nm spacing. Bringing them OUT of the hold is where the spacing is achieved. Also, how is the problem of the vectors after holding addressed? Read the pilot comments. It is almost a safety issue that at the moment we bring them out 10nm or whatever spaced, then APP still has to synchronise east, west and AUH arrivals. Flowing for threshold arrival times solves all that. It isn't rocket science, and could easily be achieved either manually or via automation (MAESTRO etc) This simplifies the task for everyone and gives the customer the best service Forcing them down early to hold at low altitude? Not exactly 'the best service'. Issuing gate or threshold arrival times so that sequencing can commence whilst still prior to TOD is a much better option for the customer. Especially with modern avionics. The AN12s etc just have to be 'pushed'.
Fly through.
We've just been applying a blanket 20m flow over the last 2 nights when it's been busy Yeah, it makes it really easy for APP, but the ACC workload goes thru the roof! It's not exactly 'the best service' alluded to above, to come out of the hold and be 20nm or 30nm behind the arrival ahead. if you guys do so much sequencing is everything left unil last minute We don't get them until the last minute. The airspace is pretty small. And we don't 'sequence', we 'in-trail-space'. Big difference, and the cause of a lot of the problems mentioned. Also we can't do a lot until we get them down out of the tail wind. They are doing about 600kts over the ground up there, so vectoring and speed control is a waste of time until they are lower. Why when we put flow on can't you give crews a time to leave Desdi to achieve the required spacing rather than vectoring them You give us the times, and we'll tell them. Once again, it is APP who should be sequencing. ATM, there is no 'sequence'. It's worked out at the last minute when the a/c call APP. Not exactly pro-active. We can achieve whatever you want. But we have to know what that is.Once everything enters the holds, it's impossible for us to work out the order as everyone in the centre seems to have a different idea on how a hold works. It is not impossible to work out, it just isn't done ATM. We just provide a distance, specified by APP. If someone was actually centrally controlling the inbound flow, EVERYONE'S workload would go down. It is true that different guys work the hold differently. eg. I was always taught first in, first out. That isn't necessarily so with others, and their way is no better or worse, it still achieves the distance between inbounds.
ps. Why isn't the COORD position staffed all night? I'm not sure that you guys realise how thin the staffing is at the ACC.

[Invictus]

Ferris,

With regards to the holding closer to the field, I do agree with Granny.

Traffic @FL150+ holds with UAE. When Traffic previously transferred to DXB is observed as having left A130, then the next A/C gets cleared on the STAR and dropped to A130 and so on.

The (approach) hold (would be) published at the common point of all the STAR's.

The Arrivals controller then continues the decent of the traffic on the STAR, towards the holding facility. The fact is that the decent would be mostly continuous anyway, so the high level close to the field will not be entirely true.

The departing traffic would be kept (as present) clear of the holding areas and this would be regulated by the SID's/STAR's

Traffic approaching the holding facility will get told to expect no holding or one hold ect.. and be either vectored to final or spun a few times in the hold as appropriate.

This system works at Heathrow and other places in the world. I do not claim that our facilities, abilities or staffing levels are even close to those of Heathrow, but we are talking theory now (right?)

Regarding the 20nm/30nm through the gate

We do not make those rules, the GCAA did. OMNE was designed by and enforced by the GCAA and ... all considered it may not be the best system available but it is the only system that may be used legally to enforce the GCAA's sector capacity limitations (5/8).

Regarding the COORD H24

Subject to staffing, the COORD position is H24. There are occasions that, due to critical staff shortages and after the flow has been set, the COORD may man the Director position. This is an obvious move and it allows the arrivals controller to increase his/her sector capacity from 5 to 8.

As you have said, "I'm not sure that you guys realise how thin the staffing is at the ACC". I could bounce that straight back and tell you that we too face serious staff shortages and if the grapevine does not speak with forked tongue, then we face even more departures (staff) soon.

Regarding getting the traffic at the last minute

There my friend, you are right, but for that you will have to blame the size of the country and the insistence of the regulator that the ACC do the coordination with Muscat.

To the North I think we can agree that there is not too much problem as there is not too much traffic through DARAX. If however that route picked up, then there is a risk that that could become a nightmare.


Your suggestion regarding central Flow Management.

Spot on, except I would say that the MAESTRO (or similar) would be vastly more effective than the manual option.


So .. What to do ?

There is a good chance that the DXB approach facility will be moved to an alternate location on the airport by the end of 2006. This means that there will be new equipment. My hope is that those running the project will go the whole nine yards and get the all singing all dancing equipment, including OLDI (latest version) MAESTRO (with nodes at Muscat/UAE ACC/OMAA App) and whatever else is required.

There is also a TAAM’s project underway to streamline many aspects of the airport operation, including airspace and routings; I hope that this will produce more cost effective and less stressful solutions for all concerned.

Immediately however, You, I and everyone else will be best served by accepting the fact that the other ATC unit has problems that we may not fully understand and restrictions that are not clear to us and, as such, just try to keep our suggestions and comments constructive and non-personal.

.

[Fly Through]

ferris

- 'How do you intend to hold a/c closer to the field at up to 13 000' ? You won't get them down and they'll get vectors all over the place to lose height.' What you mean like at the moment? Things are running smoothly until the next one off Desdi is at 220 for 12!! Hey the lower they are at Desdi, the easier it is to get a straight in, 13000 is about right for max leaving Desdi.

- Overflyers, do what we do already vector them clear of the hold.

- 20nm through the gates worked, I didn't say we got it, anything between 15 & 30 was what we ended up with. It still meant a damn lot of work for arrivals. Don't think anyone is getting an easy life around here.

- 'sequence' 'in-trail-space' talk about splitting hairs, you line them up with a required space between them, does it matter what you call it?

- 'Why isn't the COORD position staffed all night? I'm not sure that you guys realise how thin the staffing is at the ACC.'
Coord is staffed all night. This is Serco, ya think we're flush with staff? No director last night cos we had only 7 outta 12 in for work!!

- 'It's not exactly 'the best service' alluded to above, to come out of the hold and be 20nm or 30nm behind the arrival ahead. '
Just how do you expect us to fit in arrivals from other directions?

- Threshold arrival times, great idea we do need some strategic flow control at busy periods but it needs to be worked out so crews get a dep slot time, they do it in other parts of the world!

ASNO

Completely with you ref the open line of communications, I like to be constantly on the phone giving the best service but some of your crews hate that.

Coord has to do all you mention, external coordination, internal coordination between arr & dep(thanks to new rules we have) and try to look at the big sequence. So yes he/she may not have got around to the a/c you mention but they will. Oh and don't forget calls from pillocks in the military who want to know what such a sqwuak is at such a range from Dubai :*

Why exactly do we have right hand hold at Desdi? We all have the same problem with some pilots, if they don't do things correctly we must file against them (I know I get lazy about it too) lets bury the Great Dane in paperwork until we get the morons banned from our airspace.

Big Brother

The great dane here, I feel honoured, come out of his ivory tower just to hear what we have to say:hmm: Maybe he might learn something as he never seems to come to the workface!

FT

[AirNoServicesAustralia]

Agreed this is all very constructive and there should be more of it.

Fly Through, there is no right hand hold at DESDI, what I meant was some pilots can't even be trusted to know the airspace and they turn right at DESDI and that sets the cat amongst the pigeons.

[Airtoday]

I work every day with Dubai Air Traffic Control at the lower levels. I think they do the greatest job.

But, also, each and every day, I hear the unprofessional idiocy they have to deal with. It does not come just from Uzbekistan or any other 'Istan but also from you with Speedbird callsigns and, more often, with Emirates, callsigns. You could all help if you had more professionalism and tolerance.

Understand what these people have to cope with and help them achieve what they need to do by putting your "own tuppence" into the GCAA and trying to make them spend the money that is necessaryto achieve what Dubai wants most: 'The Best.'

[Granny]

Airtoday
Not enough commers,,,,,

[ferris]

It's sad that this forum is the only avenue for a discussion between the ACC an APP. Says a lot, really.

Invictus.
Regarding holding closer to the field; see Fly through's commentThings are running smoothly until the next one off Desdi is at 220 for 12!! As I said, the mechanics of holding mean the a/c get higher and higher the longer it runs. Desdi is pretty close, you sometimes have problems with them being high, but you think you can run the hold closer?The fact is that the decent would be mostly continuous anyway I disagree. It isn't now, and we have more room. If you get more than 6 holding, you have to put rates of descent on them to stop running out of levels. I see what you are saying, but I think your stack would become too vertical and unmanageable very quickly. The rate the traffic is growing, we need to do something soon as an interim measure, until a longer term solution is available. Flowing to the threshold is a good (medium term) solution.abilities or staffing levels are even close to those of Heathrow That's for sure.the COORD may man the Director position My mistake. I should have said "why isn't director staffed all night?" If we have to open any extra positions, we lose our breaks. So if the STH Sector needs a coordinator (which is happening all too often lately- even the GD concedes it needs to be split, but they won't provide the staff), or APP put flow control on (which means we must then open West regardless of how busy Nth is), we lose our break. It wears thin very quickly, especially when the reason given is "freq loading (5)".I would say that the MAESTRO (or similar) would be vastly more effective than the manual option I disagree. I've seen both, and IMHO the manual flow is far superior (more flexible). comments constructive and non-personal. Here, here. My frustration shows at times.

Fly through.'sequence' 'in-trail-space' talk about splitting hairs, you line them up with a required space between them, does it matter what you call it Yes, it matters. If Nth (or West) was 'sequencing' with East and AUH, it would be smoother for us, you, and the a/c. In-trail-spacing is a cumbersome and rudimentary method of trying to achieve what sequencing achieves. last night cos we had only 7 outta 12 in for work Were there 12 rostered? At the ACC, we have to staff the watch. If 1, 2 or whatever number are sick, the rest of us are called in until the watch is fully staffed. Or are you saying that you should have 12 on the watch, but can only muster 7 to be rostered? Are there that many spare slots up there? You do realise that guys down here who want to go up there, aren't allowed to? The boss is always telling us how many resumes he has, ready to go, for area. Yet they won't release guys to go up to DXB. Just how do you expect us to fit in arrivals from other directions? I realise you can't under the "donut" regime, but it's easily done. Several times the ACC has provided a basic 'overall sequence'. If only it was koshe:hmm: . I like to be constantly on the phone giving the best service but some of your crews hate that. We hate it because we don't have anyone to answer the phone for us. Staffing again. Why exactly do we have right hand hold at Desdi The 'RH hold' is a surprise, sprung upon us by the odd a/c, just seeing if we are awake. bury the Great Dane in paperwork Yeah, right. He is either in Paris, or sorting out Iraq's airspace or some such thing to be worried by the trivial matters as we are discussing.

What to do? The obvious answer is to approach the GD. I've seen what he does to people who try and change anything in the empire. Any takers?

[Late Landing]

Interesting to see nothing really changes!!!

Invictus check your PM

[2daddies]

Granny Smith/ other DXB controllers,
Just a quick question from the point of view of Dubai's 2nd major airline, Falcon Express (c'mon, I'm joking!!:} ).

When our 1900s land on 12L and are instructed to "Vacate left at N4, contact ground on 118.35" it is not uncommon for us to hold short of P4 for 3-4 or more minutes waiting for a chance to break in on ground frequency in order to be cleared to taxi to E18 - a distance of only a couple of hundred metres.

I know you guys are working your socks off (this thread makes that perfectly clear) but if there's anyway you could get an approval from ground to just send us to the gate as part of our "Vacate left....." instructions it would be helpful.

If that's impractical during busy (we get so cleared all the time when it's quiet) times I understand, but the one scenario that it could lead to would occur when a company aircraft lands behind us on 12L and is told to "Vacate left at N4......" only to find we're blocking the taxiway. The 2nd 1900 could be cleared via N5 but this means he's on the runway for longer.

Not a big issue but certainly something to think about. BTW, I think you guys do a GREAT job at DXB. It's always a pleasure coming home when you've just spent 4 hours in Saudi airspace. And has anybody heard the Bahrain ATIS lately???? :{

[Invictus]

Late Landing,

PM

.

[Coastrider26]

2Daddies,

Once in a while we get an clearance from TWR to taxi to E18 when we come out of Iraq but I'll agree it's much easier and time saving/workload reducing if we would be cleared this way more often. And like you say it's a relieve to enter Dubai Airspace again after coming from the kingdom

[divingduck]

Well my view from the other side of the FIR fence is that the flow in Dubai is not that flash.
For goodness sakes distribute the workload a little!
Get a proper flow controller in, work out the landing times (not rocket science) and TELL all the relevant controllers INCLUDING those not in UAE.
Here in Muscat, we have some of the aircraft for about an hour before the boundary with UAE. You give us a set course BUBIN time and it'll get done. Rather than all this last minute vectoring.
Just my .002 Baisa worth.

Nice to see a constructive thread for a change.

[Yakkity MK2]

Hello again Guys and Gurls,
I see that NOTHING at all has changed since my departure.
Did i also just read that Muscat would sequence?????, never happened in all the years i was over there.
Good to hear that the Big guy is still keeping the pilots on their toes.:p
Seems that Mr Riis is on top of it all as usual.:ok:
One small point though. Prior to the implementation of the SID's and STAR's , which also was the time of the Sectorisation of Dubai's airspace , Dubai requested GCAA to allocate it MORE Airspace.This of course was turned down and in fact they LOST Airspace out to the East and shortly afterwards the holds close to the Airports were removed ........If i remember correctly , jobs were threatened if any Dubai Controller held Aircraft within thier Airspace.
Well i had to put in my sixpence worth..been quiet far too long ..Back with a slight Nic change...
:cool: Hey there DW...

[Dan Winterland]

My company used SAS charts until recently. They showed no published hold at DESDI, so when told to hold there, we executed a hold on the FMC which of course defaults to a RH hold!

Thankfully, we now use Jepps.

[Invictus]

Hello Yakkity !!

Long Time Eh!

Check your PM.

Invictus

[AirNoServicesAustralia]

Hey Dan, sorry if a controller tells someone to hold at a point and doesn't specify the pattern (ie. direction, lengths of legs etc.) then the pattern must be a published pattern. If you cannot find that published pattern for whatever reason, it falls on your head to query the controller as to a description of the pattern. Saying that we didn't have it published so we held right, doesn't hold any water with me.

This all comes down to good airmanship, and for any pilots reading this that includes on first contact reporting level passing and level cleared to. It takes 3 seconds but it saves 2 more bits of RT. That is particularly aimed at the Sub-Continent airlines who's first call is always, "AirIndia XXX Hello".

[Dan Winterland]

Don't agree with that. Being told to fly an unpublished pattern is not uncommon in many parts of the world. If you are told to hold at a reporting point and there is no hold published on your charts, you default to standard PANSOPS (or TERPS if appropriate). You don't ask,

"How do you want me to hold as I don't have a hold published and I'm asking because there is a possibilty that my approach charts may be wrong".

Incidently, the DESDI hold is published on the radar vectoring chart on the Jepps and not on the STAR - which is the chart a pilot will have clipped to his control column. Also, the hold defaults to standard in our aircraft's FMC - the database is produced by Jeppesson. This could be why pilots new to Dubai fly RH holds at DESDI. May I suggest that someone in your organisation contacts Jeppesson suggesting they amend their charts and database. I will do it at my end, a double pronged attack would work best.

We did contact SAS about their charts having filed an ASR, but got no response.

[AirNoServicesAustralia]

I will chase that up Dan, and I didn't realise that there were parts of the world that do it as you say. I just know that in Oz, where I was trained, it is a requirement to specify the pattern if not published whether that pattern is at a reporting point or not.

By the way, I have got into the habit here, of saying as part of my hold instruction, "make all turns left", when speaking to the less familiar visitors to the UAE. But I still think the short and sharp phrase, " Confirm Right hand pattern" when given the hold instruction won't upset any controllers, if in doubt in any way.

[divingduck]

Yakkity old son....

Ask and ye shall receive!!
Sitting there watching it all happen and then getting all bent out of shape when the wrong one is in the wrong spot just doesn't cut it! My Jedi mind link only works within our ops room, not across the border.

Imagine our chagrin when we sequence for a neat 10 mile trail through both entry gates to then watch as they all get vectored around the sky for a 20 or 30 mile trail or even stuck in the hold at BUBIN.
This after vectoring and/or speed control has them beatling along in a neat trail...
surely if you want them in a 20 or 30 trail...don't keep it a secret!

BTW for all those pilots out there...Muscat doesn't know what runway Dubai is on, we are at least one unit too far out to be given that advice. Not like the old days, when we sequenced and handed straight off to Dubai Approach.

We also have our instructions regarding dead heats at PASOV and TAPRA..if we have one, just drag one of them to the other point (traffic depending). As you would be aware, D37 (Naval firing range) just happens to be right in the middle of the two tracks, so sometimes the SHJ bound guy is to the south and the DXB one to the north...not a lot we can do to swap them over depending on where they are coming from. This of course sets UAE control up for the dump, as they have to cross them over.

As the workers here say...."what to do?"

[Fly Through]

DD

So that's why the UAE have to do the late tango with shj inbounds! You learn something new every day!!!!

We're very friendly here but I think the Great Dane thinks we're not trust worthy enough to talk to our Omani colleagues direct....that or we'd start sending our Cv's :ok:

Would love a decent flow system so we could give you slots to aim for, seems logical to me...................... ahhh there's the problem then :}

DW

A little bird tells me that to hold in one of the new wunder planes, you just hit a button and it will take up the hold in your present position, is this right? Also would you prefer a greater speed reduction earlier to miss out on the vectored tour of the northern emirates?

Cheers FT

[Three Wire]

If I had my druthers, I would rather be told earlier than later. The wonderplanes do not like coming down. It is either idle and save gas, using IAS to bleed energy, or chuck out the boards and end up wasting all the fuel you have been hoarding.
It can work - my thanks to the Muscat controller who co-ordinated my request to delay descent. My crew finished up nicely, I had an idle descent to the glidepath, following the purple line. Very satisfying and economical!
Just my pen'orth.
:cool:

[Late Landing]

Time for a history lesson....

In the 'old days' (pre 1999) Dubai used to accept traffic directly from Muscat in the east and at 70nm from the west. There was plenty of time to plan and if need be hold aircraft. Then, in 1999, along came 'political interference' and the great Dane began to stamp his authority on the whole UAE ATC interface. An approach unit did not require a large airspace was one of the reasons quoted. So Dubai lost airspace to the east and west and had some seriously restrictive operations placed on the route through PAPAR. Also all flights into/out of the Northern Emirates had to pass through imaginary 'gates'. Work load went up and flexability was restricted. At that time Dubai ATC was able to have the ridiculous SIDs and STARs that were being proposed, shelved. The whole fiasco was the result of a decision maker, who had no recent operational experience in the area, deciding how things should work. The UAE 'Centre' SERCO management at the time were not prepared to voice any objections, and at the meetings I attended they just sat and accepted it all. Dubai management at least tried to get some concessions to facilitate orderly opertions, however most of these requests were rejected out of hand, with indirect threats of political repercussions if the matter was persued.

People need now to look past the current mess and perhaps someone with a bit of 'waasta' could get things reversed; more airspace to work with and better inter-unit proceedures. But don't hold your breath; one of the biggest hinderences to effective ATM that I came across during my five and half years as an ATC in Dubai was the unwillingness of management to accept ideas other than there own. Perhaps (hopefully) things have changed and some of the ideas / thoughts expressed in this post will be accepted by the management and will help bring about change.

During my time there, Dubai ATC was a professional bunch of guys and girls who, under often trying circumstances, kept things moving. I don't see that that would have changed. Give them a break - perhaps a visit on a busy night shift might let you flyguys see why things sometimes tend to 'fall apart'!

[Dan Winterland]

FT,

That is possible on some jets - I used to fly a glass Boeing which gave you the option of holding at present position. No knowlegde regarding the Airbus. On ours (a Classic, no Nav screen but with a reasonable FMC) you can hold at any point simply by telling it to. If there isn't a defined waypoint, you can create one up, enter and execute it and then create a hold. Not instant, but pretty quick all the same.

As I mentioned, we don't have a Nav display and when we tune the ILS (our NAV controllers can either have the ILS or VOR but not both) we lose a lot of our position information now the NDB has been de-commisioned. Therefore we tend to slow up earlier to prevent being caught out. The times we arrive (freight), we don't tend to get the guided tours so we are happy the way things are.

We are getting a NAV screen soon, courtesy of the european RNP requirements so things should be better.

[clipped_wings]

It's plain from the lively comments passed that there a lot of Ppruners out there who deeply care about improving "the system" but it seems we have strayed a considerable distance from the original thread.

Am I alone when I say there are one or two ATCOs (Aussie/English?) in DXB who seem to suffer from constant PMS?

No, you're not alone many of us have heard their tirades. Their attitude is a stain upon the unit and the profession.

These guys must by now be aware of this thread. (Who isn't in the UAE ATC scene) A little inward reflection or even HRT would go a long way as a prophylactic against requiring the services of a good proctologist after being shown the way out!!

[EuroATC]

After reading 6 pages of postings here are my 2 cents.

1. First some very good posts and excellent discussion!

2. I work in Bahrain ACC and there has recently been a memo posted for job openings in Dubai...looking for radar/tower validation/ 5 years exp. I was told they are looking for 10 controllers. It has come to my attention that someone from the UK was recently hired with just over 12 months validated tower time and no approach validation.....scraping the bottom are we??? When I asked the "person in charge of hiring" why people with more experience are being turned away I was basically told to mind my business.. The problems do not only lie with the so called great Dane... it's also a local management problem.

3. Speaking of procedures and RVSM. UAE has a procedure that if they have not received an aircrafts flight plan via the AFTN (the system that transmits flight plans to the appropriate facilities) the aircraft is not allowed to enter RVSM airspace ... Even if we as BAH ATC confirm the aircrafts RVSM status they still do not accept these flights. Well what we predicted happened a few nights ago. THe UAE has a total AFTN crash... Just about every single flight had to be descended to FL270 or below before entering UAE aispace.. We are talking flight from EGLL to WSSS. Try telling a pilot at FL 390 he must descend to FL 270 half way through his flight. This time I do believe the GD is responsible for this procedure..

Moral of this story is that you can't always blame ATC because in most cases they are dealing with incompetent managers/regulators.

Last thing! Can you guys/gals flying through BAH Fir wear your headsets in the cockpit.. :)) "Say again Bahrain?!!?"

[Vercingetorix]

EuroATC
AFTNs don't crash per se. They have primary, secondary and tertiary routings. For a flight plan from say Bahrain to Karachi all stations on the route would get their copies by the primary link. Should this link fail they would get a copy by the secondary link etc.
If as you say that in this case UAE was not receiving flight plans then the cause would have to lie with Bahrain as they would have knowledge that the primary link was malfunctioning and therefore should initiate the switch to the secondary link.
Most stations have will automatic switching but perhaps in Bahrain they have a manual process.

[AirNoServicesAustralia]

Don't know the technical details but UAE was receiving practically no Flight plans from Bahrain and also practically no flight pans from Muscat, so I'm sure it was a UAE problem.

By the way it's not just a fuel burn issue, when pushing everyone down, it's a safety issue. Suddenly you have every man and his dog at the same level, not exactly what RVSM was supposed to provide.

[EuroATC]

vercingetorix..
it was a UAE problem.. i was working

[clipped_wings]

No it wasn't.

Computer fault in Bahrain but this is immaterial and should not have stopped flight plans getting through as fall-back procedures are in place to divert AFTN traffic.

Trouble is that the fall-back unit refused diverted AFTN traffic.

What to do? :mad:

[divingduck]

Gents, you are missing the point!
WHO CARES why the AFTN failed or where!!!

The point is the ridiculous requirements of UAE forcing Muscat and Bahrain to descend aircraft that are RVSM approved FOR NO LOGICAL REASON!

Sorry about the shouting, but we have more than enough to do on our side of the fence without descending or in several cases in the past two days, climbing a/c from F270 up to their requested levels as soon as they clear UAE airspace.

If the pilot says he is RVSM approved...that should be the end of it. Up he goes!

Can some of the companies kindly complain??
Most service providers do tend to listen when the paying customer has a whinge.

[EuroATC]

thanks diving duck!! exactly.. who cares what failed.. and it's funny.. UAE seem to be the only ones who don't get the flights plans.. at least 1/2 dozen a day.. oh sorry.. it's our fault in Bahrain.. it's always our fault !! LOL

[granny smith]

Hi Ferris

Quote
It's not very good. How do you intend to hold a/c closer to the field at up to 13 000' ? You won't get them down and they'll get vectors all over the place to lose height. The mechanics of holding mean that the longer the hold runs, the higher and higher the aircraft are (if the in-trail-spacing leaving the hold is less than the distance around a pattern). You would also have to deal with the low-level overflyers (C130s etc) and insertions (Kish Isl). Departures would also be held down for a long time. I still don't see the problem with holding as we are now, and APP owning the bottom 2 levels. Holding is a vertical thing, so I have no idea why you want a/c run INTO the hold with 10nm spacing. Bringing them OUT of the hold is where the spacing is achieved. Also, how is the problem of the vectors after holding addressed? Read the pilot comments. It is almost a safety issue that at the moment we bring them out 10nm or whatever spaced, then APP still has to synchronise east, west and AUH arrivals. Flowing for threshold arrival times solves all that. It isn't rocket science, and could easily be achieved either manually or via automation (MAESTRO etc)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Okaaay, so the whole of Europe are doing it wrong eh? My experience prior to here is only the UK but I think we do ATC pretty well there.

Holding - A/c enter the hold at FL150 or whatever is appropriate depending on the volume of traffic. A/c are then laddered down in the hold to the bottom then they leave at 8,000 feet so you can hold much closer to the airfield. The holding stack is therefore placed 25 to 30 track miles from touchdown. DESDI and BUBIN are too far away from one of the landing direction (DESDI is good for 12 and BUBIN for 30 but not vice versa) so a 3rd stack is needed. Actually overhead the DUB would work nicely (when we get access to another non-airfield radar) and also allow a totally non-radar procedural system to be designed in case someone with a shovel cuts the essential cable. A/c would route DESDI - DUB for 30 and BUBIN - DUB for 12. Having the hold overhead then means it conflicts with the SIDs for the minimum time and a/c approach the field 'down the pipe'.

Sequencing is an approach task. Owning the bottom 2 levels of a hold is insufficient and inefficient. Just ask any approach ATCO what he thinks when he sees Area trying to manage a stack on 100nm range settings. It's painful to watch. Control of the stacks should be delegated to the airfield - it is virtually everywhere else.

The system requires that

a) Area control gets the a/c descending to around FL150 before the handoff (just above is ok but 10,000 extra feet of fresh air is unacceptable). If they are at least 6 miles apart in-trail and speeded then they can be transferred in the descent to separated levels otherwise they have to be actually level.

b) A/c come out the hold at the bottom having been laddered down to enable more a/c to go in at the top. In my experience it is very difficult to fill a stack so that area run out of levels unless there is a runway blockage.

If everyone is doing it properly (with the Dubai Coordinator becoming a tactical planner and / or stack controller) then Area will probably be dropping to FL150 all night without the need to hold higher.

From the hold a/c are radar vectored (in the UK) but with the proposed introduction of RNP 1 to the UAE in 2005, properly designed post-holding STARs may be usable. It doesn't really matter how they get from the hold to the ILS as long as they do it expeditiously. The pilots will be happy with that because they don't get taken on any more midnight cross countries. Proper application of speed control in the Approach environment is essential in high capacity operations. Also the matter of runway occupancy by a/c needs to be addressed.

Low level joiners are a pain but easily accommodated. I believe Gatwick in the UK still has these and they're fitted in without any gnashing of teeth.

It is a mature system that has been refined over many years and needs only ATCOs who a reasonable amount of ability and flexibility. What is also essential to integrating multiple stacks is training and practice which is where our simulators comes in.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This simplifies the task for everyone and gives the customer the best service
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Forcing them down early to hold at low altitude? Not exactly 'the best service'. Issuing gate or threshold arrival times so that sequencing can commence whilst still prior to TOD is a much better option for the customer. Especially with modern avionics. The AN12s etc just have to be 'pushed'.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The better service comes from them getting on the ground safely and expeditiously with the minimum of delay from holding or sequencing. I have no experience of threshold arrival times so cannot comment on it. I am however willing to learn so tell me where this system is in use at another busy TMA operation with multiple airfields and I'll go look it up.

EuroATC

We take people with the correct level of maturity and experience. The controller you mention was valid at a very busy UK airport and has therefore proved their ability. That controller can teach the rest of us here in Dubai many things about how to operate a busy tower properly using modern techniques. I for one have no problems with employing people like this.

Unfortunately, many ATC providers worldwide are listening to their accountants not their controllers and are developing single validation units. If we want to continue to recruit high calibre people we have to move with the times.

Clipped wings
Yes we are getting off the original subject but the discussions that have developed are very valuable. Why go back - we all agree that those contollers behaviour is unacceptable. I believe one of them can change but the other just doesn't give a toss which makes it a management issue.

Please don't let this AFTN thing degenerate into a 'yes it is / no it isn't' type slagging match as this thread has been one of the few I've seen that has generated almost universal agreement amongst ATCOs and pilots.

regards

Granny

[Coastrider26]

[off topic]

Flying into DXB this week UAE control and DXB appr requested us to give best fwd speed @ FL250. The 1900 doesnt go much faster then 190kts at those altitudes, however below +/- 17,000 FT we can fly 240 kts.

Yesterday I informed TWR we could do 240 till 5 nm out and asked the local twr guy to pass it to app as far as I got it he didn't pass it on.

So my question is does it help you guys out if we keep the speed up longer? And can you see on the radar screen we are speeding up to 240 kts.

[granny smith]

The (relatively speaking) high speed of the B1900 are well known to Dubai approach and we use it to advantage (I hope).

I'm not having a go at the area guys but we've cringed watching them trying an overtake with a megajet and it just not happening. Then the poor old FC gets vectors half way to Iran and back.

Time to bring back cockpit visits (not much use on a freighter I agree) and familiarisation flights. Time also for more pilots to come visit ATC at either UAE centre or Dubai so we can get a better relationship going.

In answer to your questions:

- depends on whether you're no 1 or no 10 in the sequence. Generally faster is better unless told otherwise.

- we have a groundspeed readout on the aircraft's SSR label but if we're busy might not notice the speed winding up (or down). Failure to fly assigned speeds is a big problem at Dubai with many carriers (though generally not the B1900's) and this type of slackness has caused losses of separation in the past. So a general request - please fly the speed you are asked unless you need to slow down then ask or at least tell us you're slowing.

cheers

Granny

[EuroATC]

Granny,

A couple points, first the controller from the UK that was recently hired has barely 12 months validated tower time. Serco has a requirement of having a TOWER and APP validation with minimum 5 years experience.. this person only has 1 of the 3 requirements. It's pretty sad if you need someone with barely a year's experience to teach you all in OMDB. I know of a couple good controllers already working there that have suggested how to move more traffic.. i'm told the resistance comes from the management and the regulator. Just over a year ago, I along with another controller were turned down in Dubai because we did not have busy tower experience. We both had APP ratings with more than 5 years.. I am not at all upset for being turned away but my point is firstly don't have a double standard and secondly don't turn into an ATC school.... I thought we were here to provide ATC service.. not to teach approach control.

Second point, holding.. What you say is all a mute point really because it's all based on opinion. As the sytem in the UK works well the system in north america works just as well and we run just as much if not more traffic than most European airports. In Toronto if we needed to hold we would open the stack 40 miles out and it was the area controller who was responsible for it. Everything worked out great and we still managed to run 3-5 miles down each parallel runway. There are a 100 ways to skin a cat mate... of course everyone thinks their way is best....

[ferris]

Granny; Okaaay, so the whole of Europe are doing it wrong eh No, not the whole of Europe. MAESTRO is a European invention. You appear to only be aware of what happens in the UK. Which brings me to to the bottom then they leave at 8,000 feet Did you not understand what I said earlier? LHR has 4 stacks, feeding in up to 3 at a time from each stack, where the a/c have been holding long enough to be at the bottom. That won't happen at DXB. You need to come to the ACC and watch the holding. We essentially have only 1 stack, and the a/c aren't in it long enough (usually) to be at the bottom when they exit (especially the longer it runs- Area has so little airspace that there is no transition into the hold. It's 'on frequency, straight into the hold' at which point the a/c reduces both speed and ROD. We have a lot of problems pushing them down to free up the levels the ORSAR flyers arrive into our aispace at.) Control of the stacks should be delegated to the airfield - it is virtually everywhere else That isn't true. Holding isn't a TMA function. Controlling the flow out of the hold is. Sequencing is an approach task Agree totally. Area trying to manage a stack on 100nm range settings. It's painful to watch East and West manage the stacks on much smaller range. What exactly is painful about the way they are managed? What is painful is watching them come out of the stack then do another 50 track miles of vectors. I think what you mean is "it's painful watching the way the flow out of the stacks is managed". That is out of Area's hands. In my experience it is very difficult to fill a stack so that area run out of levels unless there is a runway blockage. In your experience has LHR ever run 30nm in-trail spacing? Or the LHR TMA get itself into such a bind that they put out a call "hold everyone until further notice". Happens once a fortnight here. I have seen the holds fill on at least 6 occasions here in the last 12 months. You can't tell me there is a lot of planning going on. It doesn't really matter how they get from the hold to the ILS as long as they do it expeditiously There is absolutely nothing to prevent that happening now, yet the "cross country" is a regular occurrence. Flowing to the threshold is a better way.
Finally I'm not having a go at the area guys You are. You obviously don't have much understanding of what Area does, so give it a rest. BTW, there are plenty of guys at Area who have loads of approach experience around the world (Toronto, HK etc) who shake their heads in disbelief at what goes on in the TMA- EVERY DAY OF THE WEEK. So why go there? We can sling arrows all day, but it won't fix anything.

Did anything come of the invite to the EK pilot meeting this month? That, I believe, might be the best way forward.

[divingduck]

Granny and others.

In my limited experience with holding (only 4-5 years in Brisbane Arrivals) Area has the 50 mile stacks (4 of them and regularly full) and holds from F130 upwards. APP have their inner (25 mile) stacks but they are rarely used as the Flow is done properly there.

generally the Flow will give set course times over the 50 mile points, the Area guys hit the times (either by vectors or holds), descend the aircraft to 7000ft, put on the speed restrictions etc etc. The Approach guy "tweaks" if necessary and keeps the inbounds away from the outbounds.

Not having worked in Europe, I can't say how they do things there, but the Aussie method seems to work well without a lot of fuss.

Now the Dubai method on the other hand....

[Three Wire]

Divingduck,
the last time I was in BNE in my megajet, there was a mega WX problem. The controller told me to cross XYZ at 250 kts at such and such a time.
Trouble was that the requirement required us to lose 4 minutes in 30 miles - impossible even for a reasonably good jock like me. We said that we would immediatley reduce to 250 kts, but were unable to meet the requirement. The response was "OK" and his attention turned to the others who were wandering all over the sky.
In the end the box of PFM was left to do its magic thing and we followed our 3D path all the way to the glideslope.
It is great to see all this interaction, but the aim of the game remains the same - safety and efficiency. We all want safety, that is clear, but none of us are using ALL the tools available to us to achieve efficiency.
Sadly, we probably aren't allowed to by those in higher authority.
:cool:

[granny smith]

Hi Ferris

Yes I'm UK only - said that in my earlier post.

We watch way out past ORSAR on the COD position and appreciate that you have little time to get the a/c down. What are your standing agreements & liasion with Bahrain & Muscat like? Can they not start the process off for you? The UAE FIR is pretty small and obviously the problem goes further. A post by one of the Muscat guys earlier that answered a lot of our "why are they doing that..?" questions.

Just as there is not enough coordination internally within the UAE FIR units there also seems to be too little externally at the higher echelons and as usual we the ATCOs and the a/c crews are the ones who have to pick up the pieces.

What is clear about our holding debate (and we could go on firing ideas and counter proposals backwards and forwards for ever) is that there are many ways to do it, almost all of which are better than the way it is done now. I don't think there is any point continuing the holding debate on Pprune. We need to take it to a joint DXB / UAE ACC working group or whatever and thrash out a new system that we can all buy into. Are you involved in the promised-but-not-yet-forthcoming Airspace Review? It needs operational people from both DXB and ACC that are enthusiastic and committed to be involved right from the beginning or we'll just get another version of what we've got now & that would be a disaster.

What is also clear is that the standard of controlling at both units varies enormously. That is a problem that needs to be tackled asap and the sims need to be made use of more. One of our problems at DXB is becoming one of increasing staff disatisfaction across a wide range of issues such as pay & allowances, exchange rates, medical cover etc etc etc that is leading directly to greater apathy and less commitment to customer service.

Our senior company management needs to find ways to motivate the staff (not just with money - but that would be nice too) and some of the operational problems might also be reduced too. Customer dissatisfaction will eventually lead to an impact on the bottom line and contract retention issues. They might sit up and pay attention then. You only need to look at the different styles between BA & Virgin in the UK. BA puts the customer above all else - and has had 2 hugely damaging strikes in the past 2-3 years. Branson at Virgin puts his staff first realising that a happy workforce provides good service because they want to. Which model does Serco follow I wonder?

By the way, I'm REALLY not having a go at you area guys and yes I do understand what area does. Further details would compromise anonimity. Obviously you've got your gripes about the way we do things and vice versa - I found those 'beverage cruises' to be a useful way of getting to meet some of your guys and have a decent chat about the important things in life (women, beer and sport obviously). I've been for a visit to the ACC some time ago but should come down again. Liasion visits & fam flights should be compulsory. We've had a couple of your ab initio Nationals up for a cycle's famil which is an excellent idea but we need to see more of the older hands too.

Do you think having the ACC and DXB approach in the same room would solve a lot of these problems? What invite to an EK pilots meeting? First I've heard of it.

EuroATC

Like I said earlier, we need to be flexible and move with the times. I think Serco needs to recruit the most suitable controllers for the job regardless of most other considerations.

Yes there are plenty of people here with lots of good ideas - we have a Tech Comm that represents the staff and puts their ideas forward to management. It has had some success but, for a variety of reasons, not all of them can / have been implemented yet. That is an issue for DXB to tackle. In my opinion the local management is very pro change and wants to make the improvements that the staff put forward but have their hands tied at various levels for various reasons. I'm sure you know what I mean.

The UK controller in question does have busy tower experience that we at DXB can use to our advantage. The management here has changed - why not re-apply to the MATC again? Oh, by the way we are here to train. Serco's contract is to train Nationals to be ATCOs and eventually replace all the ex-pats. We provide the ATC service in the meantime.

yours concilliatoraly (if there is such a word - if not I've just invented it)

Granny

[Wiley]

I hate to sound like one of the Three Yorkshiremen of Month Python fame, but ‘in the old days we…’ The fact is, in the old days, DXB ATC was damned good – and I still recognise many of the voices from those ‘good old days’, so it’s obviously not a question of the skill of the individual ATCO, but the rules they are now forced to work under. It all seemed to grind to a much slower pace about two to three years ago, when they had to go to five miles spacing on departures. I’m assuming there were many other new rules that were introduced at the same time.

Now I know the traffic is heavier than it was in the good old days, so my fond memories of ‘looxury…’ back then have to be tempered by that factor, but the fact is, the ATCOs are obviously working to a far stricter set of guidelines that will not allow on the spot ‘tactical’ decisions that would lessen the many logjams we seem to suffer these days.

What is painful is watching them come out of the stack then do another 50 track miles of vectors.Hear, hear. As a ‘customer’ of DXB ATC, on arrivals, my main complain is the post hold vectoring. It’s not unusual to approach Dubai with not a lot of fat in the noise-producing department – (maybe twenty minutes on average, but that can vary quite considerably either way depending upon where you’re coming from and what’s occurred in getting to Dubai with getting planned levels etc). Thanks to the usually benign weather in the area, most times that can be stretched somewhat thanks to the second runway/Sharjah option. If I’m put in the hold, I can work out, with a pretty good degree of accuracy, (even without the PFM box Mr Sperry provides me), my last divert time, be it for RAK, AUH or SHJ/the second runway. This last divert time from the hold includes a calculation for how much fuel I’m going to burn between leaving the hold and crossing the threshold.

In London, (which has to be the yardstick in my opinion for how arrivals at multiple, very busy airports should be conducted), you can be pretty sure, (to within 100-200 kgs in my experience), how much you’re going to burn between release from the hold and touchdown. The controllers there have even tweaked their system (thanks in part to an excellent thread that ran here on Pprune a year or two ago) to make allowance for the higher min clean speed of the 777-300. (If you’re in a heavy -300, anything below 230k really gobbles the fuel, so the ATCOs in Heathrow go out of their way to allow a -300 to stay at 230k until the final turn in to finals, with about 15 – 20 nm to run.) It would be really nice to see the same thing done in Dubai, the home port of all those -300s. Whilst on that point, 160k demands the gear be down in a heavy -300, and that really drags the fuel flows up. It’s not unusual to be asked for that quite early in the approach.

In Dubai, anyone who held right ‘down to the line’, (as we frequently do in Heathrow), could end up embarrassed because of the cross country vectoring between the hold and the threshold. (The speed control as mentioned above only adds to the difficulty.) Simply put, because of this vectoring, we can’t predict with any degree of accuracy how much fuel we’re going to burn between the hold and the threshold, so most of us add a ****** factor, which in the worst case, could lead to unnecessary diversions.

Most of these problems could be fixed if we talked to each other. I can only agree wholeheartedly with the comment made an earlier poster:Time to bring back cockpit visits and familiarisation flights. Time also for more pilots to come visit ATC at either UAE centre or Dubai so we can get a better relationship going. It would be stretching credibility to the extreme if there was to be any security implication in allowing an ATCO onto the flight deck.

[AirNoServicesAustralia]

Coastrider, even though Granny seems to be under the impression that us Area guys know nothing about aircraft performance, we do realise that B1900's can do 240 IAS when on the descent (actually thought it was 245 kts but whatever). If by the time the 'Megajet', gets out of the 150kt jetstream that he is in, and is able to slow down to anything near 250 kts IAS, and I still have him close to 10 NM behind you guys I will happily keep you number 1. The problem we have that Approach controllers sometimes seem to forget is our aircraft aren't all similair heights, in similair winds, doing similair speeds, so it sometimes is a little hard to predict when and where the speed will come off. So Granny you guys might cringe, but instead maybe come and offer us direct UKRUM and high speed with our number 1 and that would be more helpful :ok:

By the way we do notice when you guys have increased to 245 kts, but its a double edged sword cos I've had you guys start an early descent so as to speed up earlier and stay number 1 but by descending early you get out of the tailwind and any increase in groundspeed gained from the increase in IAS, is lost due to the lesser wind.

Sometimes unfortunately with the big boys mixing it with the FC's and DHX's, it will always turn ugly no matter what we do, and someone will feel hard done by, but I assure you the majority of us do know what you can do, and try and accomodate as best we can.

[Captain Over]

DXB, change these things, please:

Now (on the ATIS):
"Dubai INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, UNITED ARAB EMIRATES"

SHOULD be:
"Dubai" <<<< now THAT's how it should be changed to. WE KNOW where DXB is. It won't reduce the "status" of the Emirate by not reminding everyone everytime where it is, for heaven's sakes. And imagine the time it saves us from listening, over and over again, to the un-needed. Stop it...please. You likely didn't start that trend, but stopping it will save everyone time and let us look outside BEFORE we hear "Traffic, traffic!" on the TCAS. OK that is a stretch, but it still will save time.

Next "now" (but not always, thankfully...) point:
Now: (Mains on rwy, nose almost....now the reversers are deployed, with max sound in the front office) "AB123, next right, hold short on Twy, Contact ground..." (HUH? What was THAT??) Too loud to hear, and tonnage does not stop on a full-stop - as in one of these.... >.<

SHOULD be:
"AB123, good afternoon, you are number 2, plan exiting taxiway Alpha, continue approach" so we can easily plan OR AT LEAST WAIT until the reversers are STOWED before issuing taxiing instructions!!

Last (for now): Have someone fix the STAR charts, please. They are ambiguous and can easily lead to violations (has happened recently...) or worse. Where is the hold, for example, if you aren't given clearance to pass beyond the STAR clearance limit (or go lost com)? Make a hold up and WHAM, metal meets metal. OK, another stretch....but remember we are stuck waiting to listen past the "...International Airport, United Arab Emirates" part of the ATIS. (insert smiley-thing here) Anyway, whoever de/redesigns the approaches, have a look at this issue.

Small gripes, maybe. Overall though, DXB = good ATC IMHO.
Cheers,
C.O.

[Fly Through]

Ok ok there are a hundred ways to skin a cat but we need to find one that we can agree on soon, before the customer gets shafted even more than they already are.

Only ever held all traffic until further notice once, when we had a bomb warning and every sheikh and his dog wanted to know about it :mad:

You don't think as approach controllers we hate the cross country vectoring too? We try to keep it to a minimum but sometimes in this system it's a necessity, being able to use a modern flow technique would be great but based on estimates that vary wildly in accuracy makes it difficult. Would actually make it easier if there was only one stack and everything went via Desdi, instead we have Bubin plus the inbounds from Darax & Miadi that don't have holds to go to.

Oh nice dig about the '30 mile trail' like we chose to work that way.....get real. Was down to bare minimum staffing on my past 2 nights and we avoided extra in-trail spacing completely (except for the odd fumble over a runway change :O ) by coordinating alot more closely with the ACC, so it can improve.

Does the ACC not understand the sector loading on approach? If director is closed arrivals can only have 5 being sequenced into Dubai or Sharjah on their frequency at once. If director is open then we have 8 on arrivals and 5 with director. Ridiculous rules but we're stuck with them so please no giving us traffic at itita!!

We need to get visits more often to each others units, not at quiet times but during the busy nightshifts, then we can really get an insight into each others problems.

Wiley, thanks for the post, learnt something new and will bare that in mind next time.

Coastrider, as you can tell most of us are well aware of your speed profile and make the most use of it, only tends to catch us out when you scream past the 10 mile point with a 777 ahead at 160 :}

Granny Smith, you don't think the whole situation we're are in is caused by management at all levels, new & old, not standing up to the Great Dane? No use in coming up with new ideas if we can never get them implemented. We need to start taking a pro active stance, ie. implement new procedures whilst keeping gcaa informed and if they have problems with it come to us afterwards.

FT

[EuroATC]

Granny Smith,

You should becomes a Serco manager.. that is if you are not already one.. because you sure sound like one from the things you write.

1. The management is identical now as it was when I applied.

2. I will never re apply to come to Dubai, I am glad I chose to work in bahrain where I am, we actually have a great working relationship with the local management and the Bahrain CAA are a bunch of great guys.. I would absolutely pull my hair out having to work with the incompetence that goes on in DXB on a daily basis.. moreover having to deal with the Aberdeen mafia.

3. Yes we are here to train locals.. not expats. Sorry you'll never be able to sell me on hiring someone who does not meet the min requirements. .. she's never sat at the approach radar and will now have to work the same number of days training as a local on the app. How is that profitable for Serco? I guess when no one is applying you have to scrape the bottom of the barrel to get warm bodies in the seats.. that part I understand.. don't give me the crap about moving with the times... if you want to move with the time.. up the pay and you'll get some quality guys from busy airports.

4. There are 2 guys in UAE that worked both Toronto and HK app, one of them is by far the best approach controller I have ever seen. Why don't you all give him a call... you want someone to show you how to run your operation? Call him.. don't hire a pretty little girl from the uk with 12 months on her license.

Flame Away

[Fly Through]

Euro ATC

Did you really need to add 'pretty little girl' bit? Or are you trying to lower what was a decent, productive thread into the usual slanging match? I'm impressed at how much you see from all the way over in Bahrain and also glad your happy there. Who said she'll be training in radar?

As for lowering the bar yeh I'll agree we can't get enough people, the package is just too pathetic these days and Serco management don't seem to want to do anything about it.

Incompetent????? What the :mad: would you know having never worked here? Do you hear me slating the standard of controlling in Bahrain? No never been there so won't offer an opinion. Same management? All changed in the past year so unless you know the facts, butt out & take the sour grapes somewhere else.

[EuroATC]

Fly through,

No sour grapes here mate, I know many facts you would be surprised. The manager that is there now is the same one who told me I needed a tower rating back in June 2002.

About the "pretty girl" thing, I have no idea if she is or isn't, never seen her. My point is why was she hired over others who applied at the same time with more experience. If this person in question will not train in radar then you would best advertise your new positions as tower or radar.. you might be able to fill seats a little easier.

You're right, it's not attractive to work in the middle east right now, the exchange rate is terrible and I along with a few others will leave here before the end of the year if the company does not do anything to protect us from the falling exchange rate.

About Bahrain, yeah there are problems here aswell, mostly equipement problems as our procedures are dictated by those who surround us. Seeing that most of our airspace is over Saudi, we have to play by their rules. There are 12 operational expats here and I have to say all are very good. Local management here does not hire people without the required experience. Even with this experience, there have been a number who have been unable to validate here in recent times. If you want to know about Bahrain ask one of your co-workers since he used to work here. Better yet, you're more than welcome to come on down anytime for a visit. I've been to your unit and seen how your operation works.. come see how mine works.

[AirNoServicesAustralia]

Hey Fly Through, just a bit of a suggestion here. We in Area understand about the sector loading with/without a director (we don't like it like you but we understand). The problem we have is we are very rarely told when there is a director working, so we don't have any idea how many aircraft you can take on frequency until we are told to keep aircraft on our frequency or hold them as they are approaching DESDI/BUBIN. This means our workload goes up and if we hold, it makes us look incompetent as we have spent the last 10 minutes vectoring the ass off guys trying to avoid them holding. We have just got our 10 in trail and we get the traffic loading call from you guys.

Wouldn't it be better for it to be procedure to call us when Director is not there, especially during busy periods so we have some awareness of the situation arising before it happens.

Instead (as happened 4 days ago) the North controller transfers an aircraft approaching DESDI, and then gets a call to keep the aircraft on frequency. On telling the snooty Coordinator that the aircraft has already been transferred, he recieved a bollocking about the fact that we should know that there are too many aircraft on ARR frequency without a director working and so he shouldn't have transferred the aircraft???? 1. How do we know there is no director, and 2. When and how do we accurately know how many aircraft are on the ARR frequency. To top it all off the North Controller concerned was told that he is "just an Area controller" (even though he has worked 20 years as an APP controller before he came here!!).

These occurances only widen the gap between Dubai APP and Area and helps noone, least of all the Aircraft.

[Invictus]

OK guys,

Just before we actually start throwing stones (from our glass houses)....

Assuming that most, if not all commentary, on this forum is generated by the "working class", nobody here needs to justify or mitigate the employment of an individual who is not qualified (based on the advertised minima). If you are pi$$ed off, then take it up with the man at the top. Very few of us actually know who will be joining the ranks until they arrive in the Radar Room with a headset in hand. Hmm, actually, I forgot, they do put a mug shot on the wall nowadays... anyway; I think the point is made.

It is obvious that both UAE and DXB suffer from too little airspace too late in the flight. The solution lies in a joint strategy between ACC and APP, along with a common tool (software) that keeps us both in the picture based on it's recommendations.

ACC and APP both have ATC's from all over the world, and all have varying skill levels. They have come from units where ATM was conservative, liberal, restrictive and all other stuff in between. A common tool will put a single yardstick in place and there will be clear and obvious common procedures which are agreed and understood. Muscat, Tehran and Bahrain will need to have some sort of indication (auto) that keeps them in the picture and allows them to set up the aircraft as well.

In my opinion, this is the only way to make the system full-proof (pun definitely intended).

Invictus

[granny smith]

Hi guys

This is hotting up to be a good old traditional slagging match - shame as we were getting on soooo well.

AirNoServicesAustralia

Obviously some of your guys (just like ours) don't understand a/c performance because everything I've said is based on personally witnessed fact. I know you're going to come straight back and say the same thing about DXB and you are absolutely correct - just another of the things on the To Do list!

I agree with you that there is a glaring problem in you blokes on North & East not knowing when DXB DIR is manned. Point taken & we'll try to do it better next time. I'm very disappointed that you were spoken to so badly by the COD controller as you describe. You should report that type of crap through you Supervisor to get the DXB Sup to take action as that is not acceptable behaviour. Despite the (mostly good natured) slagging we are on the same side.


EuroATC

Oh ******, have I been "Rumbled"? No, not a SERCO manager not Aberdeen mafia but I do still think you are wrong.

Your point 1 is incorrect - Contract Manager is the same but the rest are not.

Your point 2 is unnecessarily abusive. I'm glad you're happy in Bahrain.

Your point 3 is incorrect. The young lady in question certainly not the bottom of the barrel. We are obviously getting quite picky who we take - would you not agree? Do you include yourself in the "quality ... busy airports"? If I understand correctly from your last post you don't have a Tower rating? That'd be a problem then.
About the pay - I agree we deserve more but I have no say in that. The person in question is from the busiest single runway a operation in the UK so we are getting people with the required experience.

Your point 4 is also incorrect - she has 3 years valid experience not your less than 12 months assertion. Never let the truth get in the way of a good rumour. Your post is also sexist - but that isn't against the law here.

[2daddies]

Just for my daily fix of anal behaviour:

The B1900 AFM dictates that the aircraft can maintain 247 KIAS to FL132, decreasing linearly to 192 KIAS at FL250.

Sufficed to say in the interests of simplicity, when Dubai asks me what speed I can maintain in descent I say 220KIAS to FL130 thence 245. It averages out.

I know we're small fry at Dubai but every little bit helps!

[EuroATC]

Well Granny I think you are wrong as well...

point 1. Yes contract manager is the same and he's the one who hires last time i checked so I don't know why you keep arguing this point, I could care less what management has changed.. til they make the hiring decisions is a mute point.

point 2 there is no abuse, it's my opinion based on what I know and also from a few friends I have who work with you. yeah it's probably a surprise to you.. I do indeed have many friends. :) Why is it when someone says the truth and tells things like they are.. it's considered abuse. politically incorrect etc.. etc.. Don't know why you are so offended.. I am not attacking you..

point 3 I respect your opinion and mine is that hiring someone without the adverstised requirements is scrapping the bottom of the barrel. I've worked in Ottawa and Toronto Canada, Geneva Switzerland and now in Bahrain. You're right, I do not have a tower rating, and the person you hired doesn't have an approach rating so what is your point?

point 4 Say what you want, I base my comment on this matter from facts. There was no sexism.. what there is indeed is.. double standards.

PM me, let me know who you are and next time I am in Dubai we'll have a face to face.. I always welcome good open and constructive discussions.

[AirNoServicesAustralia]

Hey 2daddies, next time I talk to you guys I'll be a real smart arse and tell you to maintain 247kts when able. As far as you being small fry, I can honestly say I will base the streaming of aircraft through my airspace based on what makes life easy for me. If I can keep you number one with a bit of a tweak to the 747 behind thats what I will do, whereas if by kicking you left and sliding the big jet through my life is easy then thats what I will do. Hope that clears things up.

Hey Granny Smith, the controller concerned did complain to our supervisor and got an apology out of the Dubai Controller concerned. So while the issue was closed, I thought it highlighted the growing antagonism between the 2 units. My feeling is we are well overdue for a long boat trip with lots of beers being drank where differences can be sorted out, and a feeling of comeraderie can be built up. If a few of the more problematic individuals go missing while out at sea, so be it
:E

[Invictus]

Hey,

Let's just move the ACC functions to the New Approach Centre (Q4 2006) at Dubai, still part of the GCAA and all, just move the functions. I reckon that will be the best way to improve the OPS conditions between us.

No, seriously..

Invictus

[Coastrider26]

It's a bit off topic but since there are so many UAE controllers I was hoping somebody would know the answer to my question.

The other day we came in from ORBI and I got a "land after" clearance, I am familair with this term from the time I was working in UK but is it a legal clearance in the UAE as I can not find in our manuals or the AIP.

P.s. sorry for upsetting the groundcontroller this morning with the ranbi request.

[Fly Through]

Coastrider,
I was on departures at the time. He just got confused and rang through to me saying you wanted to go vfr, when what he meant to say was you wanted an early left 'visually' ie. maintaining own terrain clearance. As I said at the time I prefer the early turn as it gets you clear of the next departing quicker and the tower guy can keep you insight thus reducing the required departure separations.

As for the land after clearance, you're dead right, not permitted at Dubai (even with 4km of runway!) but old habits die hard ;) We're allowed to clear you to land, though, with someone else on the runway, as long as a reasonable assurance exists that the previous aircraft will be clear before you cross the threshold.

Silky,
How about 'Turn right/left direct........ when established on track you have no speed restrictions' ok or too much in one go?

ANSA,
Count me in for the boat trip mate, missed the last one, think the company will spring for the beer? I know I'm a dreamer:rolleyes:

Was working with the controller concerned and we did give him some grief for you. Your right when director is open we'll try not to keep it to ourselves in the future :ok:

Rgds FT

[Nimmer]

Euro ATC,

Read all your comments about the latest recruit to Dubai ATC and your opinionated thoughts. Sounds like you're still really bitter about not being employed at Dubai. Have you ever thought that you are just not a good enough controller, and you may have the required length of experience but somehow I just don't think you would fit in.

Just for the record she has over 3 years experience at the busiest single runway operation in Europe and she is proving to be extremely capable here at Dubai.

Do you get your information from the Lebenadian??? Don't trust him - we don't, can you get him a job in Bahrain? The Jumeira telephone box is already booked for his leaving do!!!!!!

[EuroATC]

Nimmer..

I am not bitter at all, you are right, I would not fit in because I don't work beside incompetent people.. so sue me.

I do feel sorry for the person you metioned, his own co-workers making racial comments about him.

[granny smith]

EuroATC

oooooooooooooooohhhhh, handbags at 50 paces!!

Quote
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"you are right, I would not fit in because I don't work beside incompetent people.. "
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

...ah, but can your co-workers say the same???? ;)

p.s since when was 'Lebadian' a race? I thought it was a different planet - just joking.

Anyway, whilst this is very entertaining in a childish way, enough of the personal attacks & lets get back to the thread's subject please. :D

[divingduck]

Granny Smith, you beat me to it.

Gentlemen please, this slanging match is not becoming, Euro ATC, give it a rest.
You have no idea about the competence of ALL of the Dubai controllers that you are disparaging, so it would probably be better to retire gracefully and agree to disagree.

Getting the thread roughly back on track, whoever said that it started to get more messy around 2-3 years ago is probably quite right.
That was when (for what seemed to us political reasons) UAE took over airspace and became the "piggy in the middle" of Muscat and Dubai.
The restrictions that were immediately placed on the aircraft did cause some concerns, back in the good old days, we just rang Dubai APP, and he would be happy to take, 5 miles, vertical or a combination of the two..I remember one telling me that it didn't matter, downwind was a long and lonely place and they only needed 3 miles!
Now of course we have silly vertical restrictions of F270 by TAPRA and PASOV (for all the pilots out there..this is NOT a Muscat requirement, we would by far prefer not to have to say it) and now two entry gates that don't have to be separated. Easier for us, but of limited value to the airlines that get slowed down or vectored for a trail through one or both points just to have it happen all over again by UAE.
I did mention earlier in this thread...if you are having to go to holding, 20 mile spacing or whatever...dont' keep it a secret!

[Nimmer]

There has been loads of good stuff about how we can improve the ATC interaction between UAE and Dubai. Yet nobody has mentioned the glaringly obvious, how awful the basic ATC procedures are at Dubai!!!

Pilots read on with interest. All the STARS end at the same place and at the same level, about the 10 mile final point. If your are ever left to fly the full procedure hope you are the only inbound!!!

The SIDS out of Dubai and Sharjah conflict, all climb to the same level and head for the same point . The Tardi out of Sharjah being the best, this brilliant route crosses the Dubai centre line at the 3 mile point at 3000 feet. I always thought these things had to be decided to be procedurally safe!!! If this wasn't enough the routes then conflict with all the inbounds aswell, brilliant isn't it???

The man who designed this isn't willing to accept any changes or new ideas to improve the system, great!!

Add into these factors that we have to use 5 mile radar separation and we have an ATC system designed by MICKEY DONALD and GOOFY, welcome to DISNEY ATC!!!!

Oh and just one more point, operated low vis procedures today, wait for this 15 mile gaps with no departures, and a 30 mile gap required to get a departutre airbourne. Lets just turn the radar off!!!

The only thing that makes the aircraft move are the controllers, just keep working hard everybody, the pay makes it worth-while, we know SERCO cares!!!

[Fly Through]

Now Nimmer, the sun is shining, the sky is blue, reelllaaaaaaxxxxx! Better just take what little money we do get and go hit the beach 'cos nothings gonna change around here anytime soon.

Oh and you UAE controllers, okay telling you when director is open, passed on our sector loadings, so why do you still give us aircraft at Itita when we're on 30? Earliest we want is on 30 at Desdi or 5 to run to Bubin and on 12 at Bubin and 5 to run to Desdi. Simpler? Draw a 60nm radius circle around our 10 nm final point. We didn't come up with this bloody system but give us a chance!!

FT

[ShooTheGap]

Hey Nimmer,

This is Labadian here. Is that your girlfriend that got hired? Sounds like it to me. Have no fear, I will leave when I want. Her CV states that she graduated from NATS College dec 2000. Began her training in Gatwick in Jan 2001. That is not experience my friend. Anywhere in the world they would politely ask you to re apply when you have an IFR ticket and are out of diapers. I could not care less about her hiring if it was not for my child being without her mother because she only has 14 years of IFR experience in one of the most complex sectors in europe and that is unsuitable for Dubai (MAX 5 Planes) Control. It is nice to be british hey?
So as much as I have no problem with you or your girlfriend, I have a serious problem with the incompetent management that is running this place and I am not afraid to speak my mind. P.S. Do you still put your pen on the radar screen everytime you vector? So Accept the fact that who gets hired here has nothing to do with experience cause she has none. Single runway ha! clear to land clear for takeoff. I am excited now. What goes around comes around...
Sorry about the use of this forum, I feel a lot better.

Breaking every stupid rule and proud of it, for the sake of service !

[AirNoServicesAustralia]

Hey Fly Through, point taken about giving you the aircraft too early and yes I have seen guys in the centre do this, not just to you guys but also to the other units around us.

I do have an issue with making concrete rules on when to hand off aircraft ie. 60 NM from 10NM final. I hand off aircraft based on when and where I think you will need to talk to the aircraft. If I have a sequence of aircraft and I have them all set up with speeds, I won't give you the first aircraft and not the second 2 aircraft as too many times I've had Dubai put the brakes on the first guy and have the two left on my freq. run up the back of the guy on yours. So bottom line I will hand off the aircraft when I think you should have them, that includes keeping them longer if I need that. If I get that wrong sometimes then ok, I apologise.

If you do get aircraft given to you really early, then do what I did to Nimmer (that is if Nimmer is who shoo the gap says he is) one day when I got a really unclean handoff, and that is give the aircraft back.

[Fly Through]

ASNA

Agree completely, wasn't meant to be set in concrete and of course every situation is different and we all do what is required at the time. Was just looking for a little consideration:ok:

ShooTheGap

How personal do you want to get on an open forum like this? Do you want us all evaluating your CV over the internet? Whilst it's always entertaining to watch a cat fight, this thread was actually doing some good. Speaking of which, think most of us agree with your last statement but if something goes wrong we'll be for the high jump. Maybe if we stuck rigidly to the rules imposed on us and to hell with the service, then maybe complaints would rise and we might see some change around here. Well we can always live in hope :}

[ShooTheGap]

Fly Through,
Don't want to get personal but no one will attack my integrity without repercussions. My CV is open for scrutiny for anyone who wishes. It meets the requirements and so too is my wife's. If they don't want competent controllers here and they want me to leave they only have to give me 3 months notice. Its only a Job.! I tried to stick to the rules, but unable to restrict because I know that one day it will be me on that plane and I sure don't want to sit in that hold because the arrival controller has reached 5 planes and that's the rule.!

AirNoServicesAustralia,
Where I come from, if you as an area controller who receives my departures must do anything other than identify and climb the aircraft then I did not do my job. On the arrival flow You may count on my help anytime I can provide it. Thats my job!

To all the pilots,
Anytime you hear unprofessional comments on the frequency, please report them. Our management knows about it and chooses to ignore it. I care about the issue because I am a Dubai ATCO and that is my unit's image which is tainted.
And just for some fun, The go around alarm button is 3 times the size of the crash alarm and when it sounds off it wakes up all the roosters... So please try to minimize your go arounds until I can convince someone to send it to a museum somewhere...or sell it on Ebay!

respectfully submitted,

[777Goose]

I didn't know you had a G/A button, need to get by for a tower visit.

Regarding G/As (other then due to no visual), these invariably do not conform to what is practiced in the SIM. i.e. if following a high energy approach the flaps may have to be retracted earlier then standard to prevent exceedence.
If from an intermidate altitude then little time to MAA. Although briefed it's rarely performed and one is in a landing mindset and quickly needs to reboot the brain. Have you ever noticed the gear dangling for an extended period and wondered why? Oops 5H1T, gear up... :\

I know ATC have thier requirements and sometimes request reason for GA at an untimely position, just as the flightdeck is a flurry of hands and spinning eyeballs.:ooh:

May I respectfully request, in the interest of safety, that the request for info is delayed until the fligthpath is stable and that the MAA is not ammended. Reducing the MAA and giving an early turn only increases the workload. Let the crew fly the profile to MAA and get settled down. There is enough evidence to support this and it has been raised with the SATCO in the past.

And why do GAs? Because unstable approaches (for whatever reason) are the biggest contributor to Approach and Landing Accidents and management would rather have the occaisonal GA then an aircraft overrun.:ok:

[Sheikh_Yaboody]

Hi guys. I just discovered this thread and spent the last hour reading thru it. Nice to see the forum used for such constructive purposes, tho i don't suppose it will result in any real changes or improvements to the system :{

"New digital ATIS is being installed as we speak ...."

Hey FlyThrough, whats happening to the old one? Any chance of sticking it on a lorry and sending it up the hill to Al Ain. The guys there would all give their left testicles for an ATIS.

[Fly Through]

STG

Aren't we a big tough boy then ooooh:hmm:

Sheikh_Yaboody

Of course you can't have it, it's Dubai's and you know this is one country only in writing!!!! Anyway if we sent it to you, OMAA would only steal it off you like the last one 'cos they really need it :hmm:

FT

[EuroATC]

Fly through,

"Aren't we a big tough boy then ooooh "

What is the purpose of this comment? STG merely states what the reality of the situation is.

Finally the truth comes out about why a person with no experience is hired. Like STG says.. must be nice to be from the UK.

I wonder if the DCA knows exactly how much real experience this person has? Having 3 years experience and having started training 3 years ago are 2 different things ladds.

And to comment on an earlier post about a single runway operations.. well single runway just takes the complexity out of it. You can only get so many airborn. The real challenge working a busy single runway op is sitting in the approach and area positions. It's those controllers who have to flow the traffic. A control tower is always protected...

[Invictus]

ShooTheGap

Breaking every stupid rule and proud of it, for the sake of service !

My friend, you walk a very dangerous walk. It matters not if you think the rule(s) are stupid or not, you do NOT get to choose which ones to apply. Trust me, you would be well advised to consider your young family and apply the rules as they are written.

This is NOT a personal attack, it is just a friendly word of advise.


Invcictus

[Captain Over]

I still say TOSS the part after "Dubai" from the ATIS: "...INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, UNITED ARAB EMIRATES...". We all know where Dubai is. It would save so much time to chop the obvious out...PLEASE.

Q: When are the STARS being re-designed?

Keep the thread alive. Some good can come out of all of this.

C.O.

[Sheikh_Yaboody]

FT

Wot if we offered a brand new, you beaut radar system in exchange:D . I am sure we wont get to use it for a year or 2 ...... and an ATIS would be much more useful.

Speaking of ATIS, I always thought that the TI stood for "....TERMINAL INFORMATION..." ... is this not the case in Dubai. I'm sure I heard someone mention talk of RVSM info on it :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused:

[410]

Two totally unrelated questions to the DXB controllers from of your frequent controllees:

Firstly, EK, (and, I imagine, every other user of DXB), has an engine out procedure for R/W 12 that reads: “continue straight ahead, take up the hold at OSTIN, climb to 3000’ ” (or words to that effect). Some of us controllees have on occasion questioned the commonsense of this procedure, for a number of reasons, and have been told that it is the ICAO procedure for DXB and ATC won’t change it.

From the point of view of us controllees, winding a heavy 777-300 up to 3000’ on one engine on a 42 degree day (which, thanks to the inversion that’s frequently there in summer, could be even more than 42 degrees as you ‘climb’) in a tight holding pattern seems to be a really good way to end up observing an oil temp overheat on the remaining engine.

I know this is probably of little interest to you controllers – at least not until you receive a rather high-pitched scream advising you of the fact – but I would have thought that from a controller’s point of view, the absolute worst place for an aircraft that’s just suffered an engine failure would be in a holding pattern 15 miles on the extended centreline of the busy departures runway. Surely you’d prefer him out of the way, maybe out to sea (where he can jettison the fuel he will almost surely have to jettison) and be nicely set up to commence an approach – maybe even in a hurry if his malfunction develops into something time-critical?

When I’ve asked that the procedure be changed, I’m told that ‘on the day’, you obviously wouldn’t carry out the full procedure, that ATC would almost certainly vector the aircraft off somewhere long before you got to 3000’, maybe even before you entered the hold. Which leads me to my question: if that’s the case, why not have a procedure in place that details what a would actually happen in such a circumstance? It would reduce the workload for the controllees suffering the engine failure enormously if they could plan, pre-takeoff, exactly where they will go in the event of an engine failure. What would be of particular advantage would be a designated fuel jettison holding point somewhere off the coast, preferably not too far from land. Ideally, any engine failure procedure (for all runways), would end with “track to XXX (the designated jettison hold) and take up the hold”.

It seems to me something like this would make life immeasurably easier for both us controllees and you controllers, reducing the verbiage after an engine failure to almost nothing. (As has been mentioned by others on this thread, calls from ATC requesting information or intentions after a go around or failure can be more than a little distracting for the crew.)

******

My second question is in regard to the Cat II conditions DXB suffered on the morning of the 19th. From just before 6:00am local, the viz was rapidly reducing (at one stage, the ATIS changed four times before the previous info got through one reading, which I know, considering how *** long the DXB ATIS takes for one read through, might not sound too unusual).

12L, as the only current Cat II runway, was obviously made the active, but the low cloud was so localised that the south eastern side of the airfield and the approaches for R/W 30R were in the clear – you could have done a visual onto 30R and been at taxi speed before going under the low cloud (where, believe it or not, the viz was still relatively good), while aircraft were missing out on 12L.

I know this wasn’t immediately obvious to someone in the Tower, which was swathed in the low cloud, but when it was pointed out to the Approach Controller, he said, (and sounding very frustrated, I thought), that they were bound by the rules to use 12L in the current conditions.

My question is this: are the rules so set in concrete that the controller on the spot isn’t allowed to use his best judgement to make the best use of the facilities available to him and the conditions prevailing at both ends of the field? Aircraft were diverting (or at least one did that I heard) while the other, non-Cat II runway was wide open, at least for a short time, certainly time enough to get the gaggle of aircraft in that were in the approach sequence at the time. (30 was also into wind.)

It’s not as though this was a one-off situation. It’s quite often when fog/low cloud affects Dubai that you find one end of the field at zero viz while the other runway is in the clear. Years ago, I missed out on a Cat II to R/W 12 and then did an immediate turn back and landed on 30 off a visual approach. It would seem, from what the controller said on Thursday morning, that thanks to the rules now in place, that option would no longer be available and I would have to divert – unnecessarily – because in Cat II conditions, the rules say that 12L is the only runway that may be used.

[Dropp the Pilot]

The engine out procedure is something that the company requires to have in print to prove that an airplane may safely continue a take-off with one engine out.

There is precisely no reason on earth why you need to follow it if you don't wish to. In an emergency you have perfect freedom to do whatever you want (FOM 20.2).

Personally I can think of no instance under which I would follow the EOP off of 12. In the normal prevailing conditions in Dubai I would turn right to a 290 track as soon as I was above 1500 feet. If perchance it was IMC I would wait until I was out of 2400 feet before turning.

But to enter a hold on one engine and stagger up to 3000 just because the BLT tag line told you too, well - that's the kind of programmatical thinking that should disqualify people from command.

[Fly Through]

First off EuroATC & ShooTheGap

Not gonna waste my time discussing this further, we obviously will never agree so I'm happy to agree not too and to make better use of this forum.

Sheikh Y

Sorry mate, we've just got a brand new primary and a 'mode S capable' secondary system. You need the radar anyway, if only to scare yourself crapless at how close the morons actually get and how much they don't follow your instructions anyway :ok:

As for our ATIS, new one is installed but we're not allowed to use it yet???????? As for the crap on it, agree entirely, way too long but then it's not the most user friendly pieces of equipment.

410

Hmmm procedures, nothing to do with us, we get all our procedures forced on us by the GCAA ivory tower by people who don't have a clue what we do here. Afraid it ain't gonna change anytime soon either. As for an emergency, you tell us what you want to do and we'll move heaven & earth so you can, so suggest you brief what you want to do from the beginning. As for pestering you at the wrong moment, yeh that'll be the lack of experience at anywhere but here showing. I will always do my utmost to let you alone until you've got the aircraft all settled down.

In Cat II consitions the procedures are set in stone. Once IRVR's below 1500m are being reported we have no option but to go into LVPs and using 12L. Again absolutely no flexibilty is permitted by controllers. Extremely f:mad: ing frustrating from our point of view, especially with the 15nm and 30nm gaps required on finals (see Nimmers post above).

Now a question for you, what's with the 2mins required by your SOPs behind previously departing aircraft? There's no way you can get away with that kind of thing in Europe, surely? If you must then advise us early ie. when your following the problem aircraft down Kilo and not when you're actually given the take off clearance.

Captain Over

The whole airspace is being looked at as we speak, an Australian company has been brought in to re-evaluate our airspace in a joint Emirates/DCA scheme. When will we hear anything? Inshallah :E

Rgds FT

Ps. To all our 'controllee's', if there is something that needs changing or infringes on safety here at Dubai please, please, please report it to your bosses. From the 'hour' long ATIS to excessive delays file reports to the company, whatever we say falls on deaf ears so maybe an irate customer would help :ok:

[410]

Hmmmm, I won’t comment on your second paragraph on an open forum DtP, but I’d love to debate the point with you over a coldie sometime (and so, I suspect, would Hassan or Grainger, FOM 20.2 notwithstanding).
Your reply illustrates my point all too clearly, (and I have made this very point in submissions to the powers that be), that I doubt if there are ten captains out of the 400+ captains in the airline who would follow the full EOP for 12 – certainly not any who’ve given the matter any thought, anyway – and I very much doubt ATC would let you if you wanted to.
So we’re left with the strange – some would say silly – situation where there are possibly 400 different ‘private EOPs’ for 12 tucked away in 400 different minds, and God only knows what some of those may be. Which is why I’d so dearly like to see something official down on paper that reflects what we would – or should – do if one of us were ever to find himself carrying out the EOP for 12 for real one day. The moment you move out of the groove ATC expect you to be following, the frequency is going to be going into overload – just when you’d prefer to be dealing with an absolute minimum of radio calls.
Like you, DtP, (and, I suspect like many pilots who use DXB), I’ve got my own private procedure for 12, which is very similar to yours – “as soon as the aircraft is fully cleaned up, request a turn left onto a track of 300 and continue climbing to 3000’ ”.
This leaves me with the Sharjah right in front of me for a straight in onto 30 if the problem turns into a really serious time-critical one, and heading out to sea (where I’m going to be sent eventually anyway to jettison fuel). It also puts me in a nice position to set myself up for an approach back onto 12 with minimum delay after I’ve dealt with the non-normal, as well as being out of everyone’s way (with the possible exception of SHJ traffic as I groan on past SHJ, but I’m sure the powers that be would prefer that to overflying the palace and the high rises on Sheikh Z Road on one engine).
Your comment regarding ‘…programmatical thinking that should disqualify people from command’ is unworthy, although we all know that there are people out there who will follow the book blindly because it is ‘the book’, even when it’s blatantly obvious that a slightly different course of action would be more appropriate, even safer. This is why I’d so dearly love to see ‘the book’ reflect what we should do and why I’d like to see an officially designated jettison area promulgated rather than have to sort that point with ATC out on the day. (Imagine, a jettison area WPT with a designated holding pattern in the FMC database – even a full FMC EOP – and all you have to do is punch it in, hit LNAV, and you can get on with the non-normal. No talking to ATC required beyond “engine failure, following the EOP.”)
The powers that be in EK agree that an aircraft would be highly unlikely to follow the 12 EOP completely, but say that DXB ATC won’t agree to change the procedure because it’s the ICAO officially recognised procedure for the runway. I raised the point here asking if a DXB ATCO could explain why they won’t. I suspect it may have a lot to do with not infringing the Sharjah circuit, as any immediate left turn would do, but surely an EOP that demands DXB ATC simply inform SHJ by landline to hold their traffic for no more than five to ten minutes is streets ahead of one that demands multiple radio calls with the aircraft having the problem?
There’s going to be enough talking as it is if someone ever does lose and engine on takeoff off 12. Why not do a little bit of planning ahead of time so that both the pilots and the controllers know as much as possible what the other party will be doing on points that can be agreed upon ahead of time rather than doing it all ‘on the fly’ on the day?

[Captain Over]

Fly Through - thanks for the feedback. Good luck.

[menard]

Dtp,

How far away are the mountains of hatta and Oman? How high are they? Mmmmmm, engine failure, hot, how many miles will it take you to climb to 2400'.....Just food for thought. :hmm:

[Wiley]

Bit sad that when this thread had degenerated into a character assassination exercise, it was humming along with multi posts every day, but the moment it gets back on subject with someone asking a couple of very pertinent questions about DXB ATC procedures, it dies.

I wouldn't mind knowing too why the senior ATC people in DXB insist on the ridiculous engine out procedure they have for runway 12.

Anyone care to explain?

[Father Jack]

As far as I'm aware, ATC (Senior or otherwise) do not specify any engine out procedures (ridiculous or otherwise).;)

[Fly Through]

Have asked around but nobody on my watch seems to know anything about single engine procedures. If you do have a set procedure like a nominated fuel dumping area and a turn on passing 1500', won't it be effected by which engine you lose?

FT

[Three Wire]

As far as I am aware no ATC unit anywhere has responsibility for the design, implementation and maintenance of EOPs from a runway.
It remains the responsibility of the pilot in command.
Companies, and in particular, their performance departments, provide EOPS to their crews for runways. Most often they are derived from Jeppesen designs, based on obstacle surveys. Companies are however free to design their own, eg, the several iterations of EOPS at 07L in Chek Lap Kok, that EK went through.
Companies may or may not provide these EOPS to local ATC units. As far as I am aware, there is no obligation, and anyway think of the problem for the ATC unit when a pilot declares he is flying the EOP. Which company? What type? And then sort through the filing system! :cool:

[menard]

I think that the E/O procedures are elaborated by the performance departements of airlines...They must be utilising performance models from manufacturers... I think, second guessing a procedure is a big gamble, if we think something is wrong, it should be forwarded to the appropriate people into the airline...:rolleyes:

[HealthWarning]

I heard that there is aonther vacancy at Dubai from Today/Yesterday .....................???????

[EuroATC]

someone was fired ... being too "disruptive"....

I guess speaking your mind and being honest is not appreciated anymore.

[ferris]

someone was fired ... being too "disruptive"....
Care to elaborate? (either here or by pm)
I take it you mean 'disruptive' at work? Bagging procedures etc?

[mutt]

Gentlemen,

Please forgive me but as a foreign B777 operator to DXB, I'm pretty sure that our engine failure procedure is to climb straight ahead and within 12 miles yell to ATC that you need assistance..... We have never discussed this procedure with DXB ATC, nor do i believe are we legally obliged to! Our purpose in designing engine out procedures is to obtain the maximum takeoff weight possible.

I may stand to be corrected when i check the Jeppesens tomorrow, however i would find it strange to find an engine failure procedure published by the authorities........


Mutt.

[7x7]

I think you'll find that ATC or the local authority would buy in if your home grown procedure infringed (for instance) restricted or prohibited airspace, Mutt. There are royal palaces quite near DXB, and Sharjah, which can be very busy itself, is only 10 miles away. I believe ATC would become very interested if your procedure had you either overflying a palace or dragging yourself through the Sharjah circuit.

Is there an ATC person out there who'd care to comment? I don't like the 'enter the hold and climb to 3000 feet' procedure for 12 either. Can't see it ever happening, so why is it the published procedure when you're almost certain to do something else? Is it ATC who insist it remains the way it is for EK, or are EK management telling porky pies to whoever it was who asked them to have it changed?

[Cap 56]

Dropp the Pilot wrote:

The engine out procedure is something that the company requires to have in print to prove that an airplane may safely continue a take-off with one engine out. I would climb to 1500 ft and turn........


I think you do not realise were you would be after reaching 1500 ft.

If climb limited at 2.4 % it would take you around 10 Nm and another 8 Nm to reach the clean speed. That is 18 Nm from your runway and only 7 Nm from the aera covered by the MSA.

The only area that is really cheked for obstacles is the one checked and published by the performance department. Once you go outside that area you have to know dammed good what you are doing.

Proceeding to a holding pattern at 3000 ft is flying towards an area that is checked for obstacles and that gives you the time to get prepared for the approach in all safety.

Going on a walk at 1500 ft and 220 kts in an area of high MSA during split cockpit operations is sign of bad airmanship.

Dropp the Pilot wrote:

But to enter a hold on one engine and stagger up to 3000 just because the BLT tag line told you too, well - that\'s the kind of programmatical thinking that should disqualify people from command.

Getting away from obstacles and into an area of which you are certain is exactely what you achieve by going into a hold.

Thats what holds are made for, to get done what is needed in a safe area, before you go any further.

[White Knight]

Better just to tell ATC you have a problem and that you ARE TURNING towards the coast and to kindly clear everyone else out of the way. A Mayday prefixed to your call would be of great help. ATC are not flying the aeroplane - you are...

[Cap 56]

White Knight

It is really very simple. Pans Ops covers the all engine profile and the company is legally responsible for the (n-1) profile till 1500 ft.

Basically speaking, there are differences between different airlines, some ops departments cover you till the minimum requirement of 1500 ft and some use a wider area, wind profiles then others and will even cover you until the enroute structure and then you are on you own.

If you deviate from the area and subsequent routing that has been checked by the company then you can do so under an emergency, but you have to have a dammed good reason to do so.

As far as ATC s concerned, they are responsible for separation with other aircraft (depending on the class of airspace, I presume you are in a CTR most of he time) and the pilot in command is responsible for obstacle clearance.

Basically what the performance department will do is to give you a routing straight ahead with an acceleration segment for cleaning up the aircraft. Only if payload is that much affected by obstacles will they give you a routing with a turn.

In my previous airline the chief pilot had obliged the perfo dep (for certain complicated aeroports) to put the (n-1) routing on the SID whatever the cost in payload.

If you decide to clean up the aircraft then you are trading your climb gradient for acceleration towards a speed with less drag.

If the decision was made to return to the field of departure then that is not necessarily the thing you want to do. You may then elect to climb instead to a minimum of (MSA -700) as this altitude will cover you with the minimum obstacle clearance.

The only other option you have for an early turn is to use the protected area for circling approaches and the circling MDA.

If you are sure you can meet the required climb gradient of the SID you may elect to stay on the SID because that is where ATC will expect you to be and they organise their flow management around that principle.

1% climb gradient is about 60ft/Nm so 2,4 % is about 150 ft / Nm and you will need 10Nm till 1500ft and a bit more than 20 Nm for 3000 ft since you will not be able to maintain the 2.4 % due to engine performance and the fact that you accelerate in TAS with IAS constant.

It is of course your right to call a mayday and throw you aircraft in the hands of ATC and have them remove all other traffic. But, ATC are human beings just saying you are responsible to get the others out of he way is not the same as achieving that.

On a busy airport a simple go around under normal conditions already starts some kind of domino effect upon the other traffic with all consequences indeed.

Depending on the nature of the failure you will need considerable time to get ready for the approach probably with some dumping in an area that has been designed for that.

So I can very well imagine that ATC has some preferences as to confine the aircraft to a designated holding area to reduce the knock on effect on other traffic and take it from here.

As a pilot I also prefer to get in a hold thereby reducing the crew load and he effect of the split cockpit.

So if ATC requests you to go to the hold and you can comply with that request in a safe manner then that’s the best thing to do.

In order to get to the MHA and achieve that objective quickly you may elect to delay the acceleration or not accelerate at all.

Definitely will you not accelerate until all turns are completed since that achieves nothing good if you are in a (n-1) configuration.

Early turns in VMC at an airport you know are acceptable but what did you really achieve with that except anything else than a complete surprise to ATC who may well argue that under those circumstances can not reasonably be expected to continue to cater for separation.

Finally, since most operations are carried out from home base I think it’s a good idea that management talks to ATC and work out a plan beforehand.

Edited for clarity:

With climb to (MSA -700) I mean climb straight ahead till (MSA -700) before you want to make any turn if you have elected to deviate from he standard profile.

[tic]

What about the emergency turns at certain airports like MCT, SHZ, THR.? Given the language problem from the latter two airports can you just imagine, after losing a donk, on take off, "calmly "!!!!!,telling atc, ( that is the requirement), that you will be turning this way or that to intercept some radial and stagger up to some altitude. Almost certainly you are going to get, "say again", and then possibly dead silence, as the beautiful day gets shattered, for both of you.Rome F, a case in point, where our E/turn can take you right across, another active runway. Bet that would open up a few eyeballs. Maybe that is why a lot of aircraft have brown seats. What colour in atc? It would appear, that every airline has it's own proceedures, based on the aircraft they operate, and the performance differences. Do the controllers know this?
Also can someone give a definition of "high speed", which we are often asked to maintain. Above approx FL 300 we are using Mach, not IAS. I have heard controllers asking for over 300kts descending thru FL 380. Not possible. Below about,FL 300, generally, but not always, we can descend at round about 300 kts IAS +,and increase as we get lower. Depending on type, turbulence speed ( my A/C ) is .78/290 kts, and 250 kts below 10000' AGL, but definately no faster than 250 kts below 5000' AGL, otherwise it's into the office. I am pretty sure most types of big jet have similar restrictions. Comments ?

[ferris]

TicAlso can someone give a definition of "high speed", The Area controller (in AUH) is the guy giving this instruction, as he is deciding the 'gate sequence'. He is fully aware (usually) that you are on a Mach no., but wants you to transition into a high IAS. That will vary, of course, between type, operator etc. What he is really saying is he doesn't want you to waft on down doing 270kts or so. So 310kts IAS or higher would be considered 'high speed'. If you can't give higher speed (due turb or whatever), then just let him know. This guy may also ask for slow types to give 'high speed' , but he knows that high speed might be 240kts instead of 220kts. That may be enough in a given situation to make something work. The geometry of say, the DESDI gate sequence, means that a combination of speed, vectoring and direct tracking are used to obtain spacing. So having some idea of what speed you will be doing is extremely useful (and with the limited space available there- essential). This guy owns down to 10,000', then DXB App takes you and may change the speed to fit you into the 'runway sequence' with traffic from other gates. By the time App gets you, you will be sequenced with same gate traffic, and speed is nowhere near as important closer in as a different technique to sequence will then be used. App is fully aware of the speed capabilities and limtations, but it never hurts to keep ATC informed.

[tic]

ferris
Tks mate, you answered my question, but surely it would make your life easier, and mine too, if it could be published. I am quite sure that Airbus and Boeing have very similar speeds, especially regarding turbulence, which you may or may not have. Having flown in Africa, and having a Vulture injested, I am not keen at all in maintaining 250 kts above 10000' agl, because of windscreen limiitations. It wouldn't be a pretty sight to have a bird that big, hit the winscreen, at"high speed". I know you don't get birds that big in this part of the world generally but even a falcon on the windscreen at 310 kts is like having a brick thrown at you. As you say, if you not happy, then say something, before it all goes pear-shaped. Works both ways. Different airlines have different SOP's , which have to be adhered to, otherwise, it's the walk up the gang-plank.
You Guys do a great job, and thanks for that,even though you have language problems, with the nationalities that fly in this region,so do we, and the restrictions placed on you that us pilots don't even know about.Read the whole forum and all of you seem just a trifle p----d off. You have the "big picture"on your screens, we only have a little one. Be sure, most of us will try our best to do what you want us to do, even if we don't like it. Speed control and standard set up, for the big guys anyway, if adhered to,would help you a lot I think. BIG message, if you can't, say so.

[AirNoServicesAustralia]

I agree with Ferris, but I also would like to say, that the term "high speed" must be one of the most wishy washy terms used here. One pilots interpretation of high speed is different to anothers. Personall I like to ask what speed on descent a pilot can maintain, and set it at that. Otherwise you tell a guy high speed and it turns out he has decided that 290 kts. is high enough for today, and conversely, another guy squeezes 340kts out of his machine when asked for high speed. Its a bit like asking a pilot to give you a good rate of climb. An Air France 742 thinks he is giving you a good rate of climb if he gives you 500 ft a minute, while an MD11 will give you 3,000ft a minute. Personally I try and nail down what everyone is doing so everyone is on the same page, and then if any of the pilots can't hold up their end of the agreement, they speak up so the plan can be tweaked.

Just an aside, if you are on departure, and you experience turbulence (and you are a Gulf Air A330, not to name names at all), and you pull back to 260kts, with a company aircraft clearly on your TCAS 11 NM behind also climbing, would you please say something to ATC about reducing your speed dramatically. It certainly changes the colour of the ATC chairs when the following company traffic doesnn't experience said turbulence, and continues on at 320kts, and all of a sudden you have 100kts ground speed closing. Even without anyone on TCAS, if you pull back by 50 or 60 kts indicated, please tell us. We are very interested in these things, believe me!