EGSS Approaches

[Checksix]

Spent a week flying in to Stansted and on all approaches was brought in high and sometimes fast as well, then given the good ol' slow down and descend command at about 10-15 miles...

I guess the reason is airspace and of course sequencing, but I am concerned that one day someone will come unstuck thru either:

a. false glideslope capture or

b. Descending thru the glideslope.

I think it's only a matter of time before the right chain of events is in place ie. hot and high at 10 miles, tired and/or distracted aircrew, tired and/or distracted controllers, bad weather, GPWS u/s, and BANG - one smoking hole.

Any thoughts?

[26L]

Suggest you arrange a visit to TCR to see for yourself, from the other side. Pilots are always very welcome, although we don't see that many!

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

Bit pointless complaining on here - why not bell the controllers and ask them why it happened? Mind you, one pilot's view of a too-high, too-fast, rushed approach is another pilot's view of bliss!

[cxi]

with ss approaches what you say is just a fact of life for any lorel or abbot approach.they all start too high too close for the final positioning onto the ils. Dont worry though,when tc capital gets going you will be even higher closer to the hold so you will be sure to be taking a turn around lorel rather than the usual straight in or you just might be doing a few rushed approaches!! airline management seem to think you can cope!

[ATCexpert]

For CXI

Why does the introduction of the TC Capital Sectors mean aircraft will be higher / faster. The are no changes in procedure between OCK and BPK.

[cxi]

there is no change as far as the aircrew are concerned but, and it is a big but, on the atc side tc capital are only required to get the a/c to fl140 at bpk before they are given to lorel. in the past the lorel controller had control of the a/c before vaton and generally got the a/c below fl120 at bpk (except when busy and sequencing was occurring.)The other change is that as the lorel inbound is only at fl140 at bpk instead of fl120 the tc capital controller has to get the egkk lam departure thruogh this inbound and the lam stack before it can be given to lorel. yes this happened in the past but the integration was done by the lorel controller and so there was more opportunity for the lorel controller to do the level change and integrate the lorel inbound into the lorel holding traffic.(with me so far?)Now the lorel controller has to wait while someone else does it then there is a frequency change and so the a/c will come over later and consequently higher (because it has travelled further and only descended to a level 2000 higher than in the past.)This means the a/c will probably lose a place or two in the sequence because if the controller doesn't have the a/c he will generally do things with the ones he knows can be descended ie the ones from the north! The other problem is that generally if you cross bky above fl100 you generally have to take a spin at lorel to get the height off so that you can go downwind and stay inside controlled airspace or through the luton gate at the required altitude.

Hope this clears somethings up for you!!

[This message has been edited by cxi (edited 12 December 2000).]

[ATCexpert]

Is that all speculation or experience from the training at the ATMDC - did it happen during the simulation in March.

[cxi]

the simulation that i was on the tc capital controllers were giving a/c to lorel late but the sim also only had one ex where lam was above fl140 almost all egkk lam deps were above fl170 at lam and jea146's can make fl210 south of bpk!the presentation from the big controller of these a/c was always early and the a/c were given climb without any reference to the lam controller.I suppose if that is how it happens in real life then there wont be a problem! But the introduction of a new sector means an additional frequency change on this route and later control of the lrl1c &2q for the lorel controller. You know what it is like waiting for traffic from another sector, there are only 2 controllers i trust and sometimes i have my doubts about you!!

[Hedge End Estate Agent]

Fear not cxi - ops in TC and AC say it will be alright. Who are we to disagree.....!

[Hedge End Estate Agent]

I hear that the training for AC controllers prior to the changes in procedures next January is not very good. Has anyone had comment back from AC Management ?

[Checksix]

G'day again.

It seems the original intent of this thread has been lost! I just wanted to highlight the situation at STN and it's potential for disaster. I've studied or been involved in enough accidents to appreciate the value of highlighting a potential accident chain link. And for info, an A320/321 is more slippery in the descent than a 737, therefore less able to slow down and descend at the rates sometimes required.
Thanks

[bill]

hedge end:

just to clarify, AC controllers did not receive training, merely "familiarisation" on what, in my view, was a less than perfect sim.