Prestwick Radio

[2Donkeys]

Big radio problems for Prestwick Approach both arriving and departing yesterday (5/11). Starting with a little vectoring through the localiser, and finishing up with a 35 minute wait at the holding point outbound whilst Tower doubled as a procedural approach service.

Glad you managed to get the wires connected again before we ran out of fuel. Will send a fresh hamster and wheel next time we're up. :)

[Legs11]

2D, you should have gone to West Freugh :D

You wouldn't have had any of those problems there ;)

Poor old PIK, when will they ever be fully staffed?

[Chilli Monster]

Trouble is they have a fully rated controller living on the doorstep but can't make up their mind as to whether they have a vacancy or not. Obviously they don't think they have a problem but then denial is always the sign of big problems ;)

Legs - you can probably guess who I mean

CM

[The Fat Controller]

Yesterdays problems were nothing to do with Prestwick staffing !
The approach frequency failed.
Simple as that.
The first arrival changed to tower frequency when he realised all had gone quiet during his radar vectored ILS and completed a procedural approach from the PIK.
The 3 other arrivals (1 Ryanair and 2 PC12s),were routed (by us at ScACC) to Turnberry initially, the Ryanair had the least holding fuel, and was then routed to the PIK, half way there the frequency was restored and he was vectored for the ILS.
Operations then were restored to normal.
Those of you sitting on the ground were safest there until the approach radar controller had a frequency to use.
Obviously in a situation like this there can be a backlog, it was just unfortunate that Prestwick had 4 arrivals and 3 pending departures in a very short space of time.
Just one of those days when something relatively minor happened, and some people read more into it !

[NextLeftAndCallGround]

But aren't they supposed to have an emergency back-up radio so that a simple comms failure doesn't cause such havoc. Back-up radios may not be as convenient or have the same range but a radio failure shouldn't effectively stop the approach control service in its tracks!

[Chilli Monster]

So - the question then has to be asked:

How come the stand-by radios took so long to get up and running?

CM

[NextLeftAndCallGround]

CM - do you miss the point or am I lacking a sense of sarcasm this evening?

I think the emergency radio is supposed to be battery powered and independent of other comms so it shouldn't be necessary to get them 'up and running'. If I'm not mistaken they're the red handsets in your black hole! :p

[Bigears]

I don't often knock Prestwick, but feel inclined to point out that when NATS had the contract there was (omitting the UHF, which doesn't apply in this case);
118.15 TWR
119.45 RAD/VFR's depending on what year!
120.55 APP/RAD
121.8 GND (yes!), providing at least one spare (and maybe two spares, if selectable) for this particular occurance.
:rolleyes:
Edited to give correct freqs!

[ 06 November 2001: Message edited by: Bigears ]

[Chilli Monster]

Nextleft

No - I'm not missing the point nor are you lacking the sarcasm. Look at the times of our respective postings - I started typing mine before yours arrived. You just got to the server first.

But as you say - they should have been available, at the most by the flick of a switch, nothing more (where I've just left the standbys were selected in this way, with no more than a 5 second warm up)

CM

[ 06 November 2001: Message edited by: Chilli Monster ]