BRI - This & That WARNING [Archive]

Fool's Hole

28th Jan 2005, 07:39

Here's an email I haven't had a reply to from BRI ATC of recent:

Dear BRI ATC,

I am an airline pilot often using your services at or
overhead BRS.
On your ATISs there are often "warnings" at the end of
the transmission. For instance: Gale Warning Current,
Snow Warning Current, Fog Warning Current, Frost Warning Current
Now I don't recall, or indeed none of my colleagues
do, having learnt about such "warnings" in our days at
college. Nor do we recall any older or indeed recent
NOTAMS that explain or confirm the existence of such
expressions.

Further to this. Could you also explain what are these
warnings meant to achieve. For instance are they there
to prevent someone from 'wanting' to come to BRS due
to the "warned" condition? Or just to inform them in
case they haven't bothered to check the weather before
taking off?

I have now been flying for almost 20 years
commercially, but have never come across this in any
other European Airport.

Please, if there's is anyone upstairs could you
explain to me so I can then pass it on to my
colleagues, as to what these messages are all about,
after all we might learn something we have missed out
on.

Regards

brain fade

28th Jan 2005, 09:08

Fool's
Thats a good Q. Especially given that they are oftimes giving 'Fog warning current' but you can see bleeding Cardiff from the 09 threshold!
They,ve stopped doing it now but it used to be the practice at BRS, when the wx was ****ty, (which it often is!), to make you state your 'souls on board' as you taxiied. As if they expected you were going to have a whoopsy. Needless to say the fire crews were 'stood to' during these high risk ops:{

I tell you, BRS is a funny place:rolleyes:

almost professional

28th Jan 2005, 09:20

Having the RFFS on standby in certain WX conditions is nothing strange, my guess is that Local orders require it-ours do in low viz especially
what I find strange is crew who tell you they have a problem-but then insist its not enough to warrant calling out the RFFS-that is the point I am on the phone!

Turn It Off

28th Jan 2005, 09:34

Bristol I guess are giving pilots a heads up that they have received a weather warning from the MET office and are using the atis to advise pilots that a weather warning is in force.

Might be a bit more useful if it said something more like " Gale warning in force westerly gusts of 60kts expected, Valid until xx".

TIO

Mike Rosewhich

28th Jan 2005, 10:10

Have a look at the UK AIP Gen 3. There’s some information there about warnings that Aerodrome Operators should disseminate.

I know it can be annoying when “windshear has been reported on final” appears on the ATIS all day when clearly it is no longer plausible, but I guess they’re just covering their backs.

There is also a good section there on the definition of Turbulence , which I believe is often confused with windshear.

Fool's Hole

28th Jan 2005, 11:45

Mike Rosewhich-

I suppose the point here is that no-one else is doing it, so it's not much to do with UK AIPs or any major bible, just call it Bristolism for now!

And anyway, for instance what about the fog warning, they are CATIII, so what's the big deal?

Sounds ALARMIST and very VERY RURAL!

Turn It Off-

Well yes maybe, but surely you don't need the WARNING bit at the end, since you have checked the weather and you know that strong winds may be dangerous etc......

I find it irritating and patronising, as they sound like they presume you have no idea what to expect.

DFC

28th Jan 2005, 12:20

I have come across such warnings as many airports and as was said previously, the Met Office issue them when appropriate.

Each AIP states when and to who they are issued.

However, they are in my experience issued to operators and handling agents etc because they are mainly of interest to aircraft parked on the ground. Aircraft in the air get TAF and METARS etc to give the appropriate actual and forecast weather.

Perhaps BRI are trying to save on distribution expenses by simply putting it on the ATIS. Do they also send paper copies to the local handling agent/flying club etc?

Regards,

DFC

Standard Noise

28th Jan 2005, 13:13

DFC - No, there's no money saving here, we send out the warnings by fax to the relevant agencies according to our distribution list, as soon as we receive them.
We then put it on the ATIS, after all it is there for the purpose of disseminating information. We are required to inform pilots of all relevant information pertaining to the airport including wx warnings which are issued by the met office. By putting this on the ATIS, pilots are informed of the warnings which are in force at the present time. Filling in all the blanks eg windspeed or depth of snow would only serve to elongate the ATIS transmission to such a point that you lot would accuse us of putting out messages which were too long to be dealing with on your undoubtedly very busy:rolleyes: flight decks.

Mike Rosewhich - On the subject of Windshear/Turbulence, I've found at the three units I've worked at , that many pilots haven't got the first damn clue how to differentiate between the two.

Fool's Hole - other than your briefing before you depart to come to Bristol, where else do you receive your met info from? Since the conditions are constantly changing up on the hill, during that little hour it takes you to get from Glasgow or Edinburgh or wherever you're coming from, we could be reporting something completely different than you were expecting. Now, since the CAA has a little bee in their bonnets about keeping the poor ickle lambs in the flying smartie tubes informed of the constantly changing met conditions, then that is what we must do. Now, I'm sure that the BIA management would be only too glad to save money rather than having to buy and maintain expensive ATIS equipment, but then that would mean us ATCO's would have to read out the wx to every Tom, Dick and Fool's Hole who came on frequency, and you would be up in arms that you couldn't get a word in edgeways and how bad the service was at BRS and how the ATCO didn't give you traffic info or avoiding action against that one that just missed you cos he was busy giving out the wx on the R/T to the horrible Ezy/Brt/Bee etc who was number 4 in the sequence.
As for being CATIII, not every a/c or pilot using BRS can land in CATIII conditions, so that warning lets those particular pilots know that they may have to hold or divert. Don't be so hard on those so obviously less fortunate than yourselves. Oh yes, and 09 isn't CATIII so if there's a strong 09 wind,It'll make no difference whether you can fly CATIII or not. Incidentally, I seem to remember in my days at Belfast City that one of the airlines did not let many FO's land or depart with a tailwind of even 1 knot. Thereby increasing the buggeration factor for us as we then had to play "runway roulette" in order to accomodate everyone. So it's not just ATC that has it's odd little rules!:hmm:

Look guys, as I said on another "Let's all attack the ATC team at BRS" thread the other day, we can only work with what we're given. We work within a set of rules laid down by the CAA and refined by our local unit instructions. If you don't like that answer, then you have two options:-
1 - You can make a written complaint about it to the CAA either yourself or through your higher management.
2 - Bitch about it on Pprune and nothing will get done save for annoying the ATC team at BRS.

There really is nothing worse that pilots who whine but aren't prepared to put pen to paper to express their concerns to the proper authority.

Clear as mud? Good.

brain fade

28th Jan 2005, 14:34

Standard
I think I missed the point you were surely trying to put in your post. Why do you ONLY get these 'warnings' at BRS? Go on -tell us! ;)

ATCOJ30

28th Jan 2005, 14:44

F-H: Don't want to retread too much of Standard Noise's (and others) witty reply but:

1. UK AIP GEN3-5-3 Para 4 "Aerodrome Warnings" and CAP493/MATS Part 1, Section 3, Ch1 Page 9 refers. We think we do it right but we'll look at what we do and see if there are changes to be made. Why does Muir Matheson's PAMOS ATIS input page have a "Met Warnings" section on it if it's not to be used, I wonder?

2. We have no desire to be patronising or irritating by putting MET warnings on the ATIS, I assure you. We do not intend to deter you from landing at Bristol or wish to be alarmist. If you divert, it costs us plenty in money, work and the goodwill of passengers and operators. We transmit the information and it is for you to make an informed decision on the effect of that information, along with all other available data. We also disseminate Warnings by phone call to various folk around the airport.

3. Not all pilots have an Ops Dept, Handling Agent and Engineering Department who make sure you have briefing data, Wx. charts, NOTAMs, Load Sheets, aeroplane suitably de-iced/anti iced, warm and cosy for you to step into and fly away. There are pilots who actually make use of the Warnings, we're told, such as the guy who needs to tie-down his Cessna overnight, when he hears the Gale Warning: the guy who needs to get up an hour early to make sure the engineers (or he) has deiced his aircraft properly, after hearing a Frost Warning. Or just the commercial pilot who hears a Bristol Fog Warning going out on the ATIS as he starts up for departure and wonders if he's going to get home on time after the return sector. High speed fog at Bristol is not uncommon.

4. We have Cat 3 ILS on RW27, Cat 1 on 09. Not all operators are Cat-3 capable here either, by any means.

5. There is a "big picture" that ATC are trained to recognise in this game. Sadly, I conclude, after 30 years of being an ATCO, that many pilots have tunnel-vision and are interested solely in their aircraft, their flight, at that time. A little harsh? Maybe...maybe not.

Brain-Fade. That location "Planet Claire" could be a give-away, 'cos we think we know that name well... Souls-on board is useful in the event of a "whoopsie" (your words), as I know only too well. I was on duty in the 'Gulf a couple of hours after a B727 crashed on the airport after going-round twice in a thunderstorm and getting zapped by a microburst on the third go-round. Not pretty, many dead, some survivors walked out of it and were still being rounded up hours later, in total shock. ATC having S-o-B may have saved a few minutes work and have been of use to the RFFS, when the Handling Agents were asked for an accurate manifest.

Do we expect pilots "to have a whoopsie" (your words again)? 'Sure do at some time, and that's why we are taught never to be complacent. You too, B-F? 'Been flying long? Incidentally, the use of the RFFS for Weather Standbys or in LVPs cannot be just a Bristol-ism, surely?

Last thing- We're not a "funny" or "rural" airport or ATSU. We take this job very, very seriously indeed. If you have a gripe, then go through the right channels to make your views known or come and see me anytime. Second floor of the Tower, turn left out of the lift...

brain fade

28th Jan 2005, 15:17

ATCO
Interesting to see how others see you tho isn't it?
Thanks for an interesting and informed reply.

Cheers BF

Allright my luvver!;)

ATCOJ30

28th Jan 2005, 16:54

Sure is, B-F, but let them comment from a position of accuracy and knowledge, not uninformed assumption.

DFC

28th Jan 2005, 21:26

Standard Noise,

We get the weather enroute via Volmet, ATIS and through various agencies the latest TAF may be obtained if one is issued after we departed. These days, ACARS or the telephone can be used! I am sure of what the weather will be for arrival and departure before initial descent even on short sectors.

The ground crew are not required to brief themselves on the actual and forecast weather proir to their shift or to be able to decode METAR and TAFs and the person who is the operator of an aircraft parked at the airport may be out of range of the ATIS, volmet etc. They are the people interested in frost warnings etc because that is the only way that they are given the information that they require.

The aerodrome operator is intersted in such warnings because they have to considder runway braking action checks perhaps in frost etc.

ATC engineers are intersted in wind and icing warnings because there is a wind limit which may require the radar to be parked and that speed is different when the radar is iced.

ATC engineers in general do not need to be able to decode the TAF but they do need the information. These are the types of people who need the aerodrome warning. Pilots are trained to recognise the symptoms and decode the metoffice data and predict the conditions.

So what I believe is being "complained" about is the duplication of information provided to pilots resulting in what pilots may perceive as an unnecessary extended ATIS message. That is how I interpreted this topic.

Regards,

DFC

Fool's Hole

29th Jan 2005, 09:11

DFC,

It seems that you have an absolutely identical understanding to mine on this "issue".

I appreciate the explanations and replies of Standard Noise and ATCOJ30.

However, as Brain Fade has asked above - the point of this thread is WHY ONLY AT BRS. If this was an issue as important as it is 'perceived' to be by the BRS ATCOs then surely it would be everywhere else too. Let's face it BRS is not the most extreme airport in Europe we all operate in/out of. None of the more "critical" airports have this warning on their ATISes.
Other airports have private pilots and small planes.

By posting the subject here I was hoping to find out the reason behind the difference between BRS and the rest of Europe/UK - The World.
At this stage though I still don't see what that difference is.

It's not a problem, we live with these messages and it doesn't cause the slightest of problems to us, only it may add a curious dimension to the BRS scene, by making us raise an eyebrow every time we hear the current warning that is 'current!'
It's a question of image I guesss.
And yes it still adds that "rural" flavour to the end of the message IMHO.

Spitoon

29th Jan 2005, 10:27

I can't give a definitive answer to Fool's basic question but I will re-iterate the point made by others that not all pilots are blessed with his foresight and the ATIS is there for the benefit of all pilots.

The original e-mail asked what was the point of the warning. Presumably, if you learn from the ATIS that there is a met warning in force and you don't know about it, then you are prompted to go and find out about the detail. Why do this? Possibly only the person who made the decision will know.

But in these days of Safety Management Systems you'd better get used to "rural" oddities. Under an SMS, which all ATC units now have to have, if there is an incident and it could have been prevented by putting a message on the ATIS that a met warning was current, then that message will probably have to be included. Anyone who makes the decision to remove the warning risks being the cause of another incident.

Molly-coddling? Maybe. But it's the way that ATC now has to work.

Perhaps BRS was just ahead of the game.

2 sheds

29th Jan 2005, 11:08

It is a fact that a number of regional airports, mainly - or, in the past, exclusively - staffed by "home grown" people develop some strange habits, but I am surprised that the originator of this thread has never heard of Meteorological Warnings. That said, it does, at first sight, seem a little unnecessary that reference is made to them on the ATIS, the function of which is to present immediately pertinent information, though I take Spitoon's point.

However - and this applies to a number of threads started on pprune - instead of agitating on a public forum, which results in a lot of "duff gen", why not write - yes, write - and in a slightly more formal, restrained manner to the Manager, ATS and get a response from the horse's mouth. Communication by e-mail is a little less than impressive if the topic requires a serious and formal response and if it was addressed to ATC generally, it might well have found its way to File 13! I think you will find MATS Bristol to be extremely competent, knowledgeable and enthusiastic that the unit should provide the best possible service.

Standard Noise

29th Jan 2005, 12:02

2 sheds - I agree, if the pilot community want to know answers to their questions, then all they have to do is write to our ATSM, he's only too happy to explain and take on board their concerns.
Sadly, many of them seem incapable of writing a letter although they seem very adept at typing here on pprune.

DFC - thank you for letting me know your other sources of info, but does that mean that we in ATC should not disseminate the info based on the fact that "ah to hell with it, they've had that info 4 or 5 times already, let's not bother to tell them"? The answer to that would be a resounding NO. Too often in the past, an incident has occurred and ATC has been asked what the wx was doing at the time and was the pilot aware of it. It would be very remiss of us not to make sure that the info was dissemiated. You might want to call it "back covering" but in this blame culture we all inhabit, ultimately, the powers that be and their lawyers don't care. Airlines would be the first to bleat if they thought their pilots had not been informed of the met situation.
As for the Aerodrome Operators (having worked at three units where ATC was "in house") and ATC engineers, I'm very well aware, as are all of us ATCO's, what they need to know met-wise.
But here's the thing, you don't have to listen to the whole "unnecessary extended ATIS message" if you don't want to. Nobody's spying on you.

Fool's Hole - Turning your last post on it's head with regards to 'WHY ONLY AT BRS?' I have two questions for you 'why not everywhere else?' Who's to say we at BRS are wrong here?
BTW, a "rural" flavour. Why, because we are in the SW of the UK? Or have I read too much into that remark?

Brain Fade - It's not only us at BRS that get gale/frost/fog warnings. The Met Office send them out to all airports, it's part of the deal. Maybe we are just more conscientious in disseminating them to other agencies than some other airports, chiefly for the reasons I spelt out to DFC.

One final point while I'm on a roll, last weekend, we had a snow/frost warning come through around tea time. When the early evening flights were going out, I gave each of them (at least those who would be returning after 2200) a 'heads up' on the warning by explaining briefly the main points (3cm snow expected/frost forming on surfaces/ temp drop to -2 by midnight). Why did I do it if I am not required to? Well, I thought it was possible the pilots may have missed the warnings due to timing and thought that prior knowledge may have been handy. Each pilot thanked me for the details and everyone was happy. Not one even said 'yeah, we saw that.' So how was I to know they already knew about it? And does it make me wrong for doing so? We in ATC have a 'duty of care' towards our customers, so is it really that bad if we disseminate all the information that we have to hand, especially if we don't know that the pilots have it?

Ranger 1

29th Jan 2005, 12:48

The CAA issued a NOTAL (Notice to Aerodrome Licence Holders) in early 1998 which may go some way into explaining why BRS issues some of these warnings.
Go to www.caa.co.uk then search for NOTAL 1/98 open the full file :ok:

ATCO1987

29th Jan 2005, 12:52

09 ILS CAT 1? Thought it had been upgraded to CAT II?

DFC

29th Jan 2005, 13:55

Standard Noise,

Yes we are being "spied upon" because firstly we write down the ATIS onto the plog and the paperwork is retained after flight and sampled by the ops staff........all standard stuff. But more importantly, we have a cockpit voice recorder and if we don't check the full ATIS and have an incident, that omission will be highlighted in the subsequent investigation.

It seems that you put statements like "Frost Warning Current", "Fog Warning Current" and "Wind Warning Current" on ther ATIS.

My question is if the full content of the warning is not transmitted on the ATIS, how many flights request the full content of the warning on R/T?

Regards,

DFC

Standard Noise

29th Jan 2005, 15:33

DFC - Conversely, if we do not transmit any 'relevant' information and there was to be an incident, some bright but non operational spark in a legal dept somewhere might try to insinuate that ATC was negligent in not disseminating the information in the first place and that the reliance on the idea that the pilot has probably had the information from another source could be classed as negligent.
Whether a pilot asks for further info is up to them. If I'm asked for the details, I will give them but as I said before, to put out the full details of a warning on the ATIS would only lead to your colleagues moaning about the ATIS message being excessively long.

As for how many flights ask for the full details, the answer is that I just don't know. I'm not in the seat 24/7 and since we don't record such requests, there is no available data.

2 sheds

29th Jan 2005, 19:01

Actually, ATC does not even have to claim the current popular bleat of "duty of care". All ATC units are required to provide a Flight Information Service - some of us would all do well to remind ourselves of the definition.

floatingharbour

30th Jan 2005, 12:17

Can't really add anything to the excellent replies of Standard Noise or ATCOJ30 but surely any information is better than no information?

If I was departing Bristol for some far flung destination then I think I would be grateful to have heard of a met warning on the ATIS advising me of some or other unclement weather that I might expect on my return. At least then I can prepare for all eventualities. Quite surprised that some pilots have not heard of met warnings anyway, surely there might be some holes in training/education that need to be addressed?

Fool's Hole

30th Jan 2005, 12:30

2 sheds:

However - and this applies to a number of threads started on pprune - instead of agitating on a public forum, which results in a lot of "duff gen", why not write - yes, write - and in a slightly more formal, restrained manner to the Manager, ATS and get a response from the horse's mouth. Communication by e-mail is a little less than impressive

FYI, I have actually emailed BRS ATC, via the BRS Airport website.
As there was no direct link, I was forced to email to one of the addresses therein for comment, whom which I have asked specifically to forward it on to ATC!!!

There was no reply to my email and that's why I thought I'd put it on the appropriate place on PPRUNE, days and days later.

I completely disagree with you that emails are not "impressive enough" as I do the majority of my communications by email.
What's there to be impressed over an email?
This is 2005 after all.
With regard to: "agitating on a public forum" what do you think PPRUNE is for?
It's a much better vehicle than any letter or email, as the replies can come from lots of different, well informed people, as opposed to just one person.

Spitoon,

BRS ahead? You may be right, I haven't thought like that, I must admit.

Cheers - FH

alterego

30th Jan 2005, 12:56

Floating Harbour

The thing is you should already have those warnings in your Met briefing notes - How do the ATS get them in the first place. Sometimes these warnings can take one pilot from the Active frequency for a long period of time whilst waiting for the ATIS weather. Only once you have this do you know what type of approach if any you can do.

Last night (In darkness) the warning was intense bird activity, surely not valid at the time I was listening to the ATIS.

What next 'Caution Mad Hungarian on approach to Cardiff'?

ATCO1987

30th Jan 2005, 13:30

Wouldnt bother trying to email Bristol Intl via the website in any way, they never get answered, dont even know if they get read!

Fool's Hole

31st Jan 2005, 08:33

Alterego,

That is VERY funny!!!

moist

15th Feb 2005, 11:40

10:15am 15 Feb - FROST WARNING given on Atis.
Actual temperature was 3 deg, forecast for the day, around 8-10 deg.
Clear skies, sun's out, yet FROST WARNING CURRENT.
Why, why, why oh why????????????

alterego

15th Feb 2005, 13:19

Errrr..........I did have to scrape the car windscreen this morning but it was clear and sunny at BRS this morning about 10.15.

Generally a good service from these guys/girls, so why don't you let them have their warnings? Apart from the odd time when you are busy and want to know what/if any approach you can fly, this does no harm.

If you really want to complain let's talk about crewing. Anyway you've only done half a day's work if you're already on here! I know so have I.

brain fade

15th Feb 2005, 13:20

Agree!
What are you meant to do anyway if it's 'Frost Warning Current'? Put a newspaper over the cockpit window before you go home for the night?:rolleyes:

alterego

15th Feb 2005, 13:55

You can't do that in low cost.

The only papers that get left onboard are the Sun. Management would do their nut if we left page 3 on the screen!

Planter

16th Feb 2005, 16:31

OK then, this morning 09:15 BRS ATis 3 degrees, sunny like hell, but NO FROST WARNING.
Now come on BRS do explain this one please, as I am getting drawn into this as well now.
I am slightly confused without the warning.

fireflybob

16th Feb 2005, 16:54

Reminds me a bit of when I first started airline flying and we operating to an airport in India. In the middle of the NOTAMs it said "Pilots to ECL" - the Captain asked me if I knew what this meant. When I replied in the negative he said "It means pilots to exercise caution on landing".

Then, he added "Dont we do that always?!"

av8boy

16th Feb 2005, 19:57

OK. Admittedly I’m coming to this late and from the other side of the pond, but I’m not especially liking what I’m seeing… You’re complaining because there’s too much info on the ATIS? If I’ve read this correctly, these guys are publishing the info on the ATIS because it has been provided to them and they believe they are obligated to make it available. So, there’s a bird warning after dark or a frost warning when you see no frost? Odds are that there are people in at the ATC facility making that same observation and wondering why the warning was posted. However, if they believe they are obligated to pass that info on, they pass it on. That’s what we PREFER to see as the default setting on this type of issue, right?

If you think the guys in this unit are stupid, then just say so and we can move on from there (is that what the “rural” comment was about?). And if you actually believe that there is no requirement for the info to be on the ATIS (or that putting it on the ATIS is prohibited), start contacting people on the way up the food chain and get it changed. However, the way this thread is being prosecuted can only serve to remove from some controllers who really seem to give a damn, the motivation to go above and beyond. I don’t see the point. :*

Standard Noise

17th Feb 2005, 10:53

Christ on a bike, I thought we'd cleared this one up a fortnight ago.

We only take the warnings off the ATIS when the period of validity runs out. Warnings are issued by the Met Office and unless they send out a message to cancel the warning, we leave it on until it is no longer valid.

Now for goodness sake, leave us to do our job and get on with flying your tin tubes! You don't see me criticising the way you fly, the fact that you seem unable to put the plane down on the TDZ makings rather than halfway along the runway, or when you block our frequency cos you haven't had the wit to press the right button before launching into your tiresome "Hi my name's Nigel Personality-Bypass and I'm your captain for today..." spiel.
We put the warnings out for your benefit. Get over it and move on!

av8boy

17th Feb 2005, 14:20

Um... Thought I was saying something along the same lines. Perhaps I need a class in writing more clearly... :(

moist

17th Feb 2005, 16:58

Today 300m >FOG WARNING CURRENT.<
Really?
Can't be surely.

Turn It Off

17th Feb 2005, 17:09

What about the when the Vis was more like 1200metres, and it was misty and pilots were leaving wondering what the weather was going to be like on the way back?

Fog warning current then vis is likely to drop below 1000m.

DFC

17th Feb 2005, 21:06

av8boy,

Give me bird warnings at any time please. Not just when it is dark!

---

Turn It Off,

As a pilot, the "fog warning is useless" to me. As a flight preparation issue, it ranks equal with the radio weather reports on the local music station - nice but not enough to be useful.

Before flight I will have received the appropriate TAFs and they will tell me what the forecast visibility is expected to be. If the forecast is for less than 1000m then I know the met office will issue a fog warning for people who don't read the TAFs - that does not include pilots who pre-flight properly.

Fog Warning - so what. Is is going to be 999m visibility or 20m visibility.

I want to know is it going to be fog enough for a visual approach (+800m) or for CAT1 or will it be LVPs and so on. Since all of those require RVR readings perhaps you get the idea.

---

Moist,

If there was a hard frost how long do you think it would take for the frost to melt from surface areas and aircraft in the shade if the OAT is only reaching +3? Remember that with an air temperature of +3, the ground temperature can be far less and with some windchill in the shade forget about the ice melting quickly.

Regards,

DFC

moist

19th Feb 2005, 10:32

DFC,

If there was a hard frost how long do you think it would take for the frost to melt from surface areas and aircraft in the shade if the OAT is only reaching +3? Remember that with an air temperature of +3, the ground temperature can be far less and with some windchill in the shade forget about the ice melting quickly.

The point I think of the thread is not the specific items that we all know and work with daily, but the dissimilarities between one ATC unit and all the others.

I personally don't care about these warnings, they don't bother me, but just curious enough why only BRS have adopted it, which is what I think the original thread starter meant when he/she started it in the first place.

DFC

5th Mar 2005, 21:10

Something I forgot to ask earlier;

When there is a sigmet in force that would affect traffic landing and departing from Bristol, is the content of that sigmet included in the ATIS?

Regards,

DFC

Fool's Hole

14th Apr 2005, 10:14

DFC, that would be too sensible mate.

As a matter of fact yesterday 13.4.05 there was a THUNDERSTORM WARNING CURRENT, very very frightening indeed.
OK some bubbly clouds yes, but they just couldn't wait to wheel out the next WARNING.

What is it with you BRS really!

Standard Noise

15th Apr 2005, 22:08

And "wheel" them out we merrily will, if nothing else, we can do it just to annoy the whiney beings amongst you. In fact, I might be tempted to put warnings up just to make sure you're all paying attention.:p

Ranger 1

15th Apr 2005, 23:00

Fool's hole; check out my post 29/1/05.
Thunderstorm Warnings issued at BRS aren't just for the benefit of aircrew, they are for also us on the ground here, over the years I have seen numerous things struck here by lightning, GPU'S Buildings, even the tower last year, along with Nav aidsl & aircraft.
I have been involved in some very near misses myself, next time you are trundling down 27/09 & notice the patchwork of asphalt, some if not most of this repair work was nessasary due to surface damage caused by lightning strikes :ok:
The risk here has been assessed in relation to Thunderstorm activity & it is deemed nessasary to operate a Shut down on the aprons, when there is thunderstorm activity in the vicinty.
Tea up!!:D

Spitoon

16th Apr 2005, 09:32

Ranger, I'm sure no one would doubt that it's important to many other than pilots but I think the question is, why are warnings that are relevant to, for instance, Ops people, put on the ATIS? Bear in mind that the ATIS is supposed to take some of the RT pressure off ATC by broacasting information to pilots that would otherwise have to be passed by the controller.

Ranger 1

16th Apr 2005, 20:38

I believe its put on the ATIS not just for the benefit of the commercial crews who receive it over the RT or at breifing, but also for GA & light aircraft pilots some of which could be considering a cross country flight for example & want to get the ATIS via the phone before hand, or even en route so they can plan ahead as to whether to fly into BRS or give the whole place a miss based on these warnings.
I have seen a few interesting approaches & landings from the ones who have departed BRS & on the return found the weather not to be as they thought it would be.:E
I suppose we could say nothing & sod the lot:ouch:
Check my post 29/01/05
Cheers :ok:

brain fade

16th Apr 2005, 22:21

Ranger.
You may as well 'do nothing and sod the lot' as you put it because thats what all the other airfields do and it is not repeat NOT a problem.:rolleyes:
Truth is, as an earlier poster said, the ATIS is there to save ATC the trouble of reading everyone the weather. If something short term but relevant needs to be passed on (say it looks like its about to clamp in with fog, or flocks of birds are seen or whatever), that should be passed by ATC on the VHF to warn folk that something unusual or unexpected is happening or may be about to happen.
To use the ATIS to broadcast 'warnings' about anything which may or may not happen is frankly lazy.
You only have to look at the number of times these 'warnings' are broadcast by ATIS when they are plainly wrong to see that the net effect is simply to cry 'wolf!'.
For example when we hear 'hail warning current' or 'thunderstorm warning current' on BRS ATIS does it mean 1.there is a TS overhead, or
2. there are some cells nearby or
3. there are a few Cu visible from the tower window
or what?
It's completely useless!

To summarise. Ill thought out 'warnings' that go on half the day, irespective of the conditions are worthless and are not trusted by those who listen to them. Do us all a favour and stop them.
I might add that suggestions that perhaps BRS have got this right and all the others have it wrong show breathtaking arrogance:ugh:

Bristol is an (up and coming) regional airport but IMHO it could manage without these silly warnings just like all the other airports do. :ok:

Sector Who

18th Apr 2005, 20:30

Essential Aearodrome Information should be put on the ATIS to prevent ATC having to read it out each time to each aircraft (go look at the MATS Part 1 on the CAA website if you want to check)

The Muir Matheson system in use at Bristol is also in use at most regional airports in the UK and would have similar functionality, whether the local ATC use these features is of course up to them (and the extent of weather conditions affecting the particular airport concerned) but you can be assured that it would be SRG approved and certified with the relevant safety cases considered and inclusion of Met warnings on the ATIS would be on the specific direction of the Met Office.

Furthermore, Bristol Airport does not have a Met Office, the nearest being in Cardiff (in the city not the airport) who use the METARs provided by observers at Bristol and other information to formulate forecasts and warnings. Therefore Bristol cannot be responsible for the specifics of the warnings, they are simply passing on potentially useful information as they are required to do. If you want clarification of any weather conditions present or forecast then the weather centre is only a phonecall away.

The ATIS message is still structured and concise even with warnings appended, if you're not interested then don't listen but please do lay off ATC for doing their job as directed.

brain fade

18th Apr 2005, 21:41

Hi sector
How come the 'warnings' come from Cardiff but are never found on Cardiff ATIS?

Ranger 1

18th Apr 2005, 22:14

I guess Sector Who, gave a clue to the answer of your question in paragraph 3 of his post.
With regard to "other airports don't & its not a problem repeat NOT a problem" in your earlier post it appears there was at least one case, which to the CAA to issue a Notice to Aerodrome Licence Holders.
The full datails are to be found at www.caasrg.co.uk then Search for notal 1/98 :ok:

Standard Noise

19th Apr 2005, 07:55

So tell me brain fade , why would weather warnings, which are specific to one airport, find themselves being broadcast on another airport's ATIS?:confused:
Sun over tha yard arm was it, too many rations of grog before we posted, perhaps? :rolleyes:

brain fade

19th Apr 2005, 08:23

Standard
I see my Brizzol has some way to go before it catches up with yours. I like the very nautical theme to your last.
I've re read Sector twos post more closely and agree that it does appear, to the casual observer, that either the sun or the grog got the better of me. Sadly it was neither but I respectfully refer you to my user name:ooh:
However, at the considerable risk of doing this to death, I suggest that you make a late new years resolution to either
1. Persuade all other airports to adopt your 'warnings':{ or
2. Chuck it.

Truth is, it just makes you all look silly.

If you need to give out a 'warning' and 'warning' is actually rather a strong word to use, it should be correct.
Putting the 'warnings' on te ATIS means they are frequently wrong.
Putting out 'warnings' of things which have stopped happening ( like fog). Which may not happen (like hail or TS) or that are bleeding obvious (pick one!) are daft!

If it needs a 'warning' then its serious. Get it right and pass it by voice, only when it's correct to do so. Crivvens, you find the time to come out with enough 'verbal' at BRS, a wee bit more wont tax you!

Gert lush my babber!;)

Standard Noise

19th Apr 2005, 10:10

mmmm, but all we put out is 'gale/thunderstorm/strong wind warning current'. Then if you want details, you need only ask. That way, it saves us using all our time giving warnings out on the r/t. Would you rather sit at A1 awaiting your clearance cos I'm giving all the inbounds the latest warnings? I'd prefer to keep the warnings on the ATIS and give you your airways more swiftly. That way, we get you into the wide blue yonder just that little bit quicker.

It was the pilot fraternity who requested that we switch to a GMC and TWR split because 133.85 was getting a bit too crowded on busy days. So it makes sense that we keep as many tx as poss off our frequency. Having the wx warnings on the ATIS helps us do that.
Look, I know my lovely rounded NI accent is just fabulous to listen to, but that doesn't mean I want to waste on weather warnings.

Right then, where's that bl00dy yard arm, I'm gasping!:}

brain fade

19th Apr 2005, 22:24

Standard
Hope you enjoyed yer grog my luvver
Shurely you've heard 'fog warning current', the other day it was 'hail warning current' there is also 'snow warning current' .........get my drift? I do/could go on.:bored:

Standard Noise

19th Apr 2005, 22:45

Wrong time of the year maybe, but as the jolly fat man says, 'ho, ho, ho.':p

brain fade

21st Apr 2005, 08:41

Right Standard
I'm giving you the last word on this sucker, but mark my words, sooner or later you lot will 'drop' your silly warnings of your own accord, and when you do, assuming I'm still alive, I'll be issuing an ' I told you so'.

ya boo sucks
:p

Standard Noise

21st Apr 2005, 16:14

To quote a fellow countryman.......................
Never! Never! Never! Never!

:} :}

Spitoon

21st Apr 2005, 21:17

Ranger, your sentiments are undoubtedly well meant but I must re-iterate that an ATIS broadcast is done for one thing alone and that's to take the pressure off ATC R/T frequencies. I'm not saying that the broadcasts are used for other things, simply that they are done for one purpose and the information they contain should be suited to that purpose (and that purpose only).

And yes, I've read NOTAL 1/98 but I'm afraid it doesn't support your argument. I don't see any reference to an ATIS - all it says is that information should be disseminated.

Ranger 1

21st Apr 2005, 23:36

I am well aware of the reason for the existance of ATIS, which was not mentioned specifically in the NOTAL which you correctly pointed out but, in Paragaph 2 of the NOTAL states "The purpose of this NOTAL is to draw the atention of aerodrome Licensees to the need to ensure regular Meteorological observations are made during periods appropriate to the needs of public transport flights using the airport"
It then mentions in paragraph 4 "The authority strongly recommends that all aerodrome Licensees & providers of ATC services where appropriate review the proceedures for the provision & dissemination of meteorological observations at their aerodromes". which if I am not wrong could mean the use of ATIS, NOTAM, RT.
I mentioned the existance of this document to try & explain why these so called this & that warnings may arise at BRS, giving rise to the title of this thread in the begining "BRI warning this & that"

brain fade

22nd Apr 2005, 21:39

Today it was 'Gale warning current' all bleeding day.
Did it get above 15 Kt?

Sorry Standard I really promise to shut up now, but i couldn't resist one last dig:E

I may as well point out that NO ONE has yet answered the original question of 'why only at BRS?':p

Standard Noise

22nd Apr 2005, 22:38

No, brain fade, don't shut up, we do so enjoy your ramblings.:rolleyes:
Anyhoo, twixt 12 and 13z, it was up to 20kts.

But you might want to ask some pilot torturers at other units why not. That might elicit a sensible answer that even a pilot could understand (as long as they use small words, naturally;) ).

Fool's Hole

23rd Apr 2005, 11:29

As I read all the above, I gather that I am not the only one that feels helpless in having to endure these warnings.
When I say endure I mean only at BRS.

The next thing nowadays is the "Threshold Elevation" just before you touch down for the millionth time somewhere! WHY?
There again WHY NOT in CDG, or AGP, or ALC, or PRG or BUD or....

There are other mind boggling things in Volmets all over, like cloud cover; broken at 23 thousand feet! Now that's gonna make the approach rather difficult!

Why don't you ATC people come together one rainy day all over Europe and sit down to agree one common way of presenting what's RELEVANT to us. Ditch the crap and just give us what we need. Short and sharp and to the point.
HOW??? By asking a few (hundred) of us what we need to hear perhaps?

Regards - Fool's Hole, NOT an a**e hole!

Standard Noise

23rd Apr 2005, 14:51

Fool's Hole - we've tried to get 'threshold elevation' put on the ATIS, but the nice inspectors at the
C AMPAIGN A gainst A viation won't let us do it, so we have to give it to you on each approach. Send your thoughts to them and see what reply you get, we've had a go, but to no avail!

brain fade

23rd Apr 2005, 17:15

Standard
Is it a requirement to pass the threshold elevation to a/c at all?
Again, most (all?) airports don't.

Re your 'pilot torturer' suggestion. Are you really suggesting that I ask controllers at airports where they dont do your silly warnings why you insist on them at Brizzol?

I think most folk would accept that as BRS is the ONLY airport which puts them out it would be quicker to ask you lot why you do it, rather than every other fecker why they don't!

Really tho, your 'yokel' warnings are a constant source of amusement rather than anything else, especially when they are plainly total bollocks, which is quite often. Any source of amusement is welcome.:=

Fool's Hole

23rd Apr 2005, 17:19

What the CAA and anyone (ATC?) out there in the "peripheries" need to do badly, is to go on day trips with us for at least 4 sectors.
That is in order for all to see just what is relevant in today's cockpit regarding any "outside" information that reaches us at any time.
See how we deal with the information and make your own judgement whether it's just silly and unnecessary, or indeed is it a good bit of info that helps the operation.
The CAA in particular have no real understanding of airline operations, they are just a bunch that are trying to make a living by what they do and g_d knows they can be awful at that.
But the real "doing" is being done by us, all the time.
Even without the CAA we would be able to carry on for ever, even without a Crewing department we would be able to share out the rosters more evenly between ourselves, fairly and squarely.

Enough said for today though.

055166k

23rd Apr 2005, 21:46

You have to understand that the CAA recognise two distinct classes of pilot:
The really big aeroplane important pilot who flies half-way round the world in a mega-jet and lands at Heathrow, and the "others".
The Heathrow jet-tropolis pilot can read and so will know the elevations from his/her charts.....the "others" are assumed not to be able to read, and despite flying into and out of the same airport day after day, week after week, need to be verbally informed of the elevation.
Funny thing though, I would have thought it should be the other way round.....but when there is a need to reduce R/T chat to the bare minimum, and to talk to foreign pilots from the other side of the planet, it is amazing what can be dispensed with.
Methinks time for a common-sense update to the "manual".

Standard Noise

25th Apr 2005, 15:45

brain fade - We have to pass the threshold elevation for QNH app's. I do know that one of the big two airport units north of the border were allowed to put this on their ATIS. Since we have a similar Metcom system, I asked if we would be allowed to do the same. The ATSM forwarded my question and backed it up with the evidence of our Scottish brethren. We were informed that, no, we cannot include this on the ATIS message. The Inspector for this region doesn't like it on the ATIS, presumably because, as 055166k has already stated, we have to provide info not just for you fantasically skilled and professional airline pilots:rolleyes: , but also for the weekend 'once a year' merchants. Oh, and if you don't ask my fellow pilot torturers at other airports, why they don't put warnings on their ATIS thingies, how will you know how they get round doing it?
Still, it's nice to know we keep you amused with our silly little ATIS. But tell me, when we're giving you tfc info or avoiding action in respect of those flying at 500kts through the Bath gap OHMSS, do you consider that to be a case "plainly total bollocks"?
I'd rather get you out of the way of a Tornado sightseeing over Bath, than be spending time giving a once a year merchant in his homebuilt 'Sellotape special' the ins and outs of a gale warning that we can't put on the ATIS for fear of offending your ears!!

Fool's hole - as I've said before, you need to put that suggestion to the CAA Inspectors (based at Manch) for our region, probably best doing it through your Chief Neddy. Pprune isn't really the place to try to influence CAA policy.

055166k - who is in charge of updating these days, last I heard, it was someone who's name rhymes with 'mutton', and as I remember, common sense wasn't exactly at the top of his list of priorities.

055166k

25th Apr 2005, 16:53

You've high-lighted a common problem; because here in the UK the "Authority" rides rough-shod over acceptable ICAO practices. They seem to think that this tiny island is so unique that practices and procedures that work perfectly well throughout the rest of the world are somehow inappropriate here.
Likewise the treatment of regional ATC units and their regular traffic. I reckon that low-fare multi-sector-day pilots exhibit a far higher standard of airmanship and ATC awareness than some of their main-line cousins who may do one landing per 10 hours as opposed to five landings or so.....what's more the lo-co is flying in the cauldron of the busiest, densest, and most demanding confusion of airspace anywhere.
One airport I was at required each and every vehicle movement to be positively controlled.....even though the drivers knew every inch of the airfield. Another airport was so busy and with a congested ground freq [and it was three times the size] that vehicles were regularly allowed to operate on own look-out.
My submission is that if a practice [such as no need to pass elevation] is safe at one airport and there has been no attributable accident or adverse evidence, then why can't that practice be adopted at all airports?
...Heathrow has so many exemptions and special procedures that one could be forgiven for thinking it was in a foreign country for all the commonality its practices have with other UK airfields.....and that smells wrong, wrong, wrong.

Whipping Boy's SATCO

25th Apr 2005, 17:29

Of course, if everyone flew their approaches on QFE, there wouldn't be any need to put the threshold elevation on the ATIS..................

;)

;)

;)

spekesoftly

25th Apr 2005, 18:17

Of course, if everyone flew their approaches on QFE, there wouldn't be any need to put the threshold elevation on the ATIS..................

True, but instead of transmitting the Threshold Elevation, the Controller is then required to Tx the QFE ! :p

Whipping Boy's SATCO

25th Apr 2005, 19:26

I'd much prefer to hear sweet nothings from a controller than some mumblings from a clone of Marvin the Paranoid Android!

brain fade

25th Apr 2005, 19:58

Standard
Please continue to help us miss fast jets etc. I'm not saying that you are incompetent at Bristol, just a bit wordy;) No need to get your standard ATC knickers in a twist!

But you still have not explained about the 'threshold elevation' bit. for info at most airports it's neither passed by voice OR found on the ATIS. It is on the charts however. So why don't you save your breath?

And re the 'yokel' warnings. They aren't found on the ATIS of every airport I know because, guess what? They don't need to be! Doh!

Re 'total bollocks' I thought I made it clear I was referring to the frequently erroneous content of the yokel warnings. ie 'Fog warning current' going on all bleeding day, last trace of fog left 6 hours ago.

Don't mind me tho' , really I don't mind, and it gives Brizzol a sort of twee, rustic charm. A certain individuality that is so often lacking these days. And it's funny too. So stick in!

On a more constructive note tho, why don't you put in for some ATC fam flights and see how it's done elsewhere. That's if you can bear to be parted from Brizzol!;)

Standard Noise

26th Apr 2005, 22:29

brain fade - I thought I had explained 'threshold elevation'. We put it into that last tx before we put you to twr because the powers that be at the Campaign Against Aviation say we have to. End of. Unless they have a change of heart, we will keep doing it. Why or how others get away with not doing it, I have no idea.

I'm not sure you got my point about the 'fast jet' bit. By putting the warnings on the ATIS, it also saves us having to give them out over the r/t to the weekend homebuilt merchants which would take up valuable r/t time. Time which is better served stopping you and the Queen's top guns meeting somewhere over Bath or Chippenham.

Maybe I'll let you know next time I'm on leave, and I'll arrange a fam flight when you're on duty. Should be interesting.:ok:

brain fade

27th Apr 2005, 14:48

Standard
If you come on a fam flight with yours truly, at least we'll have something to talk about!

Yes, I think I had missed your point about the jets. As you'll have realised by now I approve of minimising use of the RT.

You seem to be in denial about BRS ATC being the home of the repeated clearance or the unneccessary tx. Well I've tried (and failed) to convince you but it's true anyway, It might be more clear after a fam or two.

Tell me, std, is it just me or have BRS app recently started a policy of only passing one bit of instruction per tx? You know, saying 'abc123 turn left heading 090' then 'abc123 descend 2500'', then 'abc123 reduce speed 180 kt', rather than dishing out all 3 in the one tx. Seems to happening more and more and I simply wondered if it was a policy or just an idiosyncrasy?

Ta BF