Fully ready to push (honest mate)

[Bishop of Baku]

Enough already of this daft game.

Catch 22, you cant claim to be fully ready without a tug, and you cant have a tug until you are on the ‘push list’ near the end, but you cant get on the list until are ‘fully ready’.
We all play it but there must be a better way.

This week departures were suspended several times while CBs passed overhead and this soon built up a backlog approaching 40ish aircraft (according to delivery).
All of there guys were claiming to be fully ready, so when they were given push clearance there was then an embarrassing admission that they have no tug.

This results in tugs connecting, getting called off, disconnecting and tearing round the apron getting nothing done fast. I finally got pushed by the 4th guy to connect!

During the frequent times or chaos at LHR would it not be more sensible to drop the requirement for a tug to be ‘fully ready’ and have ATC send one to you when THEY are going to let you go, or is that too simple?

It seems that a touch of common sense and liaison could lower the workload for pilots, ATC, and tug crews during such times.

Bish

[Leftit2L8]

It's far too simple !

[PAXboy]

Non-Pilot speaking: The reduction in efficiency of having tugs connect and disconnect is so obvious that it makes one gasp. It sounds as if, when the situation is bad and back-logs have built up, the system makes it worse!

I realise, of course, that BAA are never going to buy more tugs and hire more staff, so talking about a new procedure is staggeringly obvious. With all the flight crews knowing that to call 'Full Ready' when they are not is going to exacerbate things and yet they have little choice but to do so as their Ops will want to know why they didn't try and claw up the ladder!

Talking is always the most difficult thing for management to do.

--------------------
"I tell you, we are here on Earth to fart around, and don't let anybody tell you any different." Kurt Vonnegut, Jr.

[NigelOnDraft]

that BAA are never going to buy more tugs and hire more staff, Tugs and Drivers are not part of BAA, nor under any form of control of ATC... They are provided by the airline (BA) or Handling Agents (most except BA)...

[Spearing Britney]

Apointed andling agents or the airline itself normally provide the ground equipment including tugs. So, much as I would like to, it is unfair to blame the BAA or perhaps even ATC as it is seems more of an airline generated problem.

[answer=42]

Talking is always the most difficult thing for management to do.

Not quite.

Listening is always the most difficult thing for management to do.

I speak as a manager.

[Gonzo]

A few times recently when we've gotten into heavy outbound delays at LHR we've got a/c to report "ready without a tug", abnd then keep them up to date on how long they can expect to be delayed, so they can 'order' a tug from company in good time. Or with BA one of our assistants would periodically phone up BA ops with the next ten to start in order, so that BA sent tugs to those next to start.

[Bishop of Baku]

Haven’t had this yet but its encouraging to know common sense is not to far below the surface.

[Max Angle]

Ive seen this procedure work very well at LHR on days with bad fog or snow delays. It's impossible for every aircraft waiting to start to have a tug hooked up, there are just not enough of them. ATC tell us we will be started in say 10-15 or 15-20 minutes and you can then liase with the handling company to get a tug sorted, problem solved.

[Engineer]

The bottom line is that you will be at the mercy of the handling agency concerned (non company aircraft). Depending on where you are in the good company list (ie good payer or not) will determine how well you are served :ok:

[Bishop of Baku]

Well if it were problem solved, why when things get a little busy (and when aren’t they at LHR) do things rapidly deteriorate into the fiasco described in my first post.

Perhaps the theory and good intentions are there but it rarely holds water in my experience.

[Gonzo]

Bishop of Baku, I can only speak for my own watch on the way Delivery is run. There are constant efforts to promote 'best practice' across the unit.

I'm not quite sure where the problems lie, but as has been described above, we as ATC have no control over where tugs go. We can tell the airlines when (approximately) their flights will be starting up, and hope they use that information wisely.

From ATC's point of view, you need to be ready to push now (including tug) when I chuck you to Ground, because when things are going crazy, I will only start you when I know you can push. If there's an opening in the K cul-de-sac, and you go to Ground without a tug and thus don't push for ten minutes, that's ten minutes wasted where another outbound in K could have pushed and taxied.

[cwatters]

In computer speak this problem is called "Thrashing" and it's well understood. It occurs when too many programs compete for resources. The computer spends all its time switching between the programs and doesn't actually manage to execute any of them.

Does this sound very familiar....
http://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/0,,sid9_gci214055,00.html
Thrashing
Thrashing is computer activity that makes little or no progress, usually because memory or other resources have become exhausted or too limited to perform needed operations. When this happens, a pattern typically develops in which a request is made of the operating system by a process or program, the operating system tries to find resources by taking them from some other process, which in turn makes new requests that can't be satisfied. In a virtual storage system (an operating system that manages its logical storage or memory in units called pages), thrashing is a condition in which excessive paging operations are taking place.

One stratergy for reducing thrashing is to allocate resources for minimum periods of time.

[747-436]

I know that one particular Airline at LHR has stack monitors for the inbound holds so they can judge the holding times etc.

For anyone who doesn't know they show the ATC flight strips that the controllers use (Someone correct me if info incorrect!)

Could something like this be used for the delivery position, are they layed out in order of when an A/C is going to be released to push back? Only been up the tower once in my life and that was in 2000 so not quite sure if they are layed out so they could be shown on a monitor somewhere.

Basically the idea is that Airline Ops departments at LHR have a monitor that shows the strips and they could watch progress of flights and order the tugs etc at a relevent time.

Would any LHR ATCOs like to comment on whether this would work? Would it make a difference with the planned electronic flight strips in the new tower?
Does anyone think ATC would want to release this sort of information? I read about a Eurocontrol project looking at ATC sharing information with Airlines and there were some interesting ideas in there.

[Gonzo]

It's technically possible I guess. However, who would pay for it?

As it stands at the moment we already get deluged by many operators phoning us to complain about us delaying startups. I'm not sure how keen LHR ATC would be to have to field calls such as: "You let Air France push back, why not us?" etc etc.......

With our new electronic strip system coming in the medium term, the airport environment as a whole is aiming towards 'Collaborative Decision Management', where all agencies have access to all pertinent information; delays, de-icing, tugs etc would all be in there.

[Bishop of Baku]

As a professional (how pompous is that?) it still smarts that I have to claim to have a tug in order to get a tug – sometimes. It’s a gamble, and when you get push clearance and you tug has bu99ered off, or not turned up, then you are the d1ck.
Don’t like it. There is too much other stuff to be dealing with.
However………….
LHR ATC there are no finer controllers in the world. Period.

Had to hold too often because president xxxxxxxev of Azerbaijan is within 50K of the airfield and if you didn’t arrive with 40 mins holding – tough. Amateur operations are the norm all to often at ‘the other end’.

LHR info structure busting at the seams, T5 completion eagerly awaited. In the mean time, lets all keep a sense of humour.

Bish (after too much real ale)

[Leezyjet]

If ATC could as the rule rather than the exception advise how long until push back in these delay situations, then this would give the handling companies time to send the tugs to the correct a/c, but would doing this mean much more work for ATC ?.

Also we in "company" are able to choose which a/c we want prioritising for p/back if 2 a/c are due off at roughly the same time and using same tug - we don't just pick one for the hell of it though, we look at multiple other factors first when making the decision.

But ultimately, Communication is the word - ATC advises F/deck of estimated push time, F/deck then advise Company/handling agent who can then better use the resources they have to ensure everyone is happy.

Simple really.

:)

[ChewyTheWookie]

Don't know what it's like now, but (according to the dispatcher I was talking to) a couple of months ago 75% of BA tug drivers were working at least one overtime shift a week to keep the operation going...

[Rollingthunder]

Used to love watching the DC9s reverse thrusting off the gates. Who needs tugs?. Haven't seen that in a while.

[WorkingHard]

Rolling Thunder, do you remember Aeroflot doing the same during a strike?

[Rollingthunder]

Nope, never got Aeroflot out here.

[WorkingHard]

Sorry RT - should have looked closer at where you're from. I was refering to Heathrow

[PAXboy]

Tugs and Drivers are not part of BAA, nor under any form of control of ATC... Ahh, thanks for the correction. It is obviously a too stupid question to ask, "Why not?" :rolleyes:
LHR info structure busting at the seams, T5 completion eagerly awaited. Cynically, I wonder if it will make any differance? Although the runways are at capacity, when they have another terminal, will they not try and squueze 'just a few more' and so compound the problem?

[Gonzo]

PAXboy,

Why not part of BAA or why not under ATC control?

LHR infrastructure is bursting at the seams, correct, and T5 is probably the cause of much of it. BAA just don't want to spend money on anything apart from T5, Britain's newest shopping mall.

It's such a crying shame.

[frangatang]

Nobody has spoken about the tugdrivers union,and dont mention letting the BAA run the tugs,have a look at the state of the bridges to the aircraft.Amok with litter,due to the BAA not cleaning the bloody things.But then again you need to introduce the arriving tourist to what they will see when they get outside!

[PAXboy]

Gonzo, on reflection of the information posted here, it would seem that only ATC really have the info. To relay that through the Carrier and the Service Agent (at least) seems silly. I suspect that the current system is one that has grown ad hoc from the earlier days and we now have the usual British mish-mash.

Originally, did each carrier do their own tug work, or was there always a pooling of tugs?

To reply to the person who mentioned 'power backs', this has been discussed in various forums on PPRuNe and the problem is that most a/c these days have low slung engine pods and the opportunity to pick up FOD is high. Further, even if they do not ingest the FOD - they are likely to throw it against/into someone.

Hhhmm, how about we line up the management of the Shopping Arcade (aka BAA) and then practice 'power backs' with a wide range of equipment? :E

[Gonzo]

PAXboy,

The whole of Heathrow and its entire operation is a British mish-mash! :}

To be honest, there are only two airlines who seem to have problems with tugs (or lack of) when we get into heavy delays, and they are BAW and BMA. All the other airlines seem to manage. And lo and behold BAW and BMA provide their own tugs and crews. We already have to cope with hours worth of delay created every week because BA don't provide enough tugs in the early morning during the T4 noise restriction period. But of course, it's far more economical to add five or ten minutes on to the published flight time than employ more tug drivers. Properly maintained tugs would also be a welcome change! The number of towing movements we have to stop because they're not showing the required lighting gets ridiculous sometimes.

I believe Virgin have their own tugs, as do Air France, United and American. Other airlines use Air France, United or one of two ground handling companies, Globe Ground and Plane Handling.

[Goldfish Jack]

Always enjoy the interpretations of the English language!

Anyone tell me the difference between "ready" and "fully ready". Surely if you are ready, you are fully ready, otherwise you would not be ready?

Rather like saying "cancel in toto" when you want to say "cancel"!!!

One pilot, two pilots, one cow, two cows, one lady, two ladies, one man, two men, one fish, two fish................

[BANANASBANANAS]

Off topic, so apologies but I couldn't resist adding to the previous post:

Or you could stand in front of a closed door and, quite "correctly" enquire "Is that door open?"

[747-436]

Back to my point about having some sort of feed from ATC to Airline Ops departments. Gonzo, I would think that once something like that was set up it wouldn't cost very much with all the equipment in place but I would guess NATS would want to charge Airlines a small fee for using the information?? Nothing comes for free these days!!

From an Airline Ops point of view, not allocating tugs though as someone else does that for us, it would make sense having some sort of feed so we know when our Aircraft are likely to depart during times of delay.

Would it not cut down on the workload for delivery if Airlines found out how long they were likely to have to wait from their Ops departments rather than bombarding delivery with requests like 'what number are we in the queue' etc etc.
Although would that make things more comlicated for ATC with Airline Ops departments guessing when their A/C are likely to move when ATC would have a much better idea??

[chippy63]

I don't know if it is true, but I was told that Spanish working practices mean that BA tug people do a very small number of pushbacks per shift. Like single figures. Can anyone clarify?

[Max Angle]

And lo and behold BAW and BMA provide their own tugs and crews. Aviance do all our ground handling at LHR, we used to have our own operation but the bosses in their infinite wisdom (and the need for another few million in the bank) sold it all off. The only reason it is mainly BA and us who have problems are the number of departures that are waiting to go at the same time once there has been a problem. If there are long and continuing delays in departures we could have 10-15 aircraft waiting to go and BA could have 30 or more, it's just not possible to have a tug and a pushback crew hooked up to every one.

The only people who really have any idea when a particular aircraft is going to be started are ATC so they need to give the crew on the aircraft or the airline's office some idea of time and order so that we can coordinate the tugs. As I said in another post I have seen it done very effectively at times and not at others which perhaps means that some watches have got it sussed and others have not.

[Bishop of Baku]

If ATC know aircraft x is ready without a tug and he will be given push in 5 mins then (the hypothetical) ‘tug central control’ should get an ATC request to send one, from the relevant agent.

We all tell ‘little white lies’ in order to get a tug and keep him, leading to aircraft further down the list having one while the guy next on the push list does not (even from the same airline).

Some of these ideas seem to be over-complicating the problem. Once the aircraft is crewed, fuelled, catered, and boarded with doors closed then ops have done there job, at least for departure and involving them in the scramble for a tug is unnecessary.

By the way, have you ever shouted for a tug, only to discover you nave a towbarless one under the nose?