SYD delays to increase without PRM

[duknweev]

Expect a blow-out in morning weekday holding.

PRM is being measured up for the coffin, and here are the nails:

Coffin nail 1) The manufacturer is withdrawing future support for the system.

Coffin nail 2) Airservices plans to move Sydney Approach to Melbourne, a project that specifically states that PRM cannot technically be moved and requires unspecified future technologies will replace it.

Coffin nail 3) PRM is staffed on an "emergency callout" basis by off-duty ATC staff. The newly voted certified agreement cuts payments for these shifts by around 25%. Off duty controllers will be much less likely to accept these shifts.

Airservices, we humbly await description of your mitigators...

[404 Titan]

Maybe it's time Macquarie Airport should consider suing ASA and their management if the movements per hour don’t live up to promises or expectations. I hear through very reliable sources that the Hong Kong Airport Authority is considering suing the HK CAD for shortfalls in movements per hour. Food for thought don’t you think. Might get some of these brain dead pen pushing management types who think up stupid and restrictive rules to pay attention to what the industry want especially if it costs them dollars and in the end their jobs.

[woftam]

Will we really notice any difference?
I can't remember the last PRM approach I did.
It appears it was buried a long time ago.
:confused:

[Hugh Jarse]

I must have missed your point ducknweev, because whenever there are PRM's in progress we get more delays - seemingly senseless vectoring around BIK, and vectoring onto around a 22 mile final:mad:

I reckon its about an extra 10 to 15 mins flying time:yuk:

IMHO, the best thing they can do is get rid of it...:E

[Capt Fathom]

I can't remember the last PRM approach I did.
I can't remember doing one!

[blueloo]

Apparently we did a PRM the other week, only it wasnt on the ATIS, and we werent told until established and cleared for the approach.....

[SM4 Pirate]

2) Project terminated indefinately... All consolidations are on hold. I hear the 'true' values in relocating them were explored. Yes doable, but cost recovery in 10+ years; just invest the $150M or so in bonds now and forget about it; that would make significantly more than the saving generated by the consolidations.

HJ, Yesterday we had Wx giving us a landing rate 187 seconds (or there abouts). With PRM this would have been somewhere near (127 seconds); so delays increased, I think most customers got 15 minutes each airborne.

The reason that you get more 'delays' when the PRM is on is because the CTMS rate is up to 55 arrivals per hour; when no PRM it's as low as 35 (less if it single runway too).

So more delays (significant) on the ground (strategic flow) and less tactical (airborne), because there aren't as many up there and we can be more flexible with the 'string of pearls'. But trust us when we say PRM increases capacity.

[4Greens]

There seems to be some confusion about PRM. It is a requirement for Instrument approaches, as 34L 34R are closer together than the ICAO Standard.

In VMC it is not required. Why it would be relocated to non parallel runways is a mystery.

[Capt Fathom]

4Greens,
For my benefit, could you translate that into English...thanks.

[Prop's ????]

Within the past 3 years, I have only carried out 2 PRM approaches into SYD.

On both occasions, we were vectored all over SYD, and placed onto 20nm finals. All this and we got visual at around 1,500ft.

MEL and SYD are having a lot of delays; funny thing is most days have been CAVOK?
:confused:

[Capn Bloggs]

Capt Fathom,

It is in English. Even I understand what 4greens said. Perhaps you want it translated in FNQ-speak? :p

[Duff Man]

4greens first point I suspect derives from the standard for independent parallel instument approaches. If the centreline spacing is between 1035 and 1525m, PRM (or similar) must be used. If the spacing is greater than 1525m, standard radar is sufficient. At least that's my interpretation of the standard. PRM pilot guide (http://www.airservicesaustralia.com/pilotcentre/projects/prm/pilotsguide.asp) has some more info. The relocation point may have been confusion about duknweev's comment about relocating the PRM operator consoles to Melbourne.

IVA's can't be used (easily) if the cloud base isn't above the highest IAF.

PRM approaches will appear to pilots to increase delays (they generally add around 20 track miles in the circuit) but the airport will actually be landing 10 more per hour than would otherwise be accommodated. The systemwide delays are reduced significantly as SM4 pointed out.

As far as flying the approach, PRM will only normally be used between 7 and 9 am Mon-Fri. And that may happen on average just once per week. Your chances of copping an arrival during PRM ops are very small. Even the approach controllers would only do it a handful of times a year each.

[4Greens]

Just a little more.

'Independent' approaches are allowed in VMC. Once instrument approaches are required then approaches have to be 'dependent'

This entails separation between an aircraft using 34L and another aircraft using 34R . PRM allows 'independent' approaches again. No PRM - long delays in instrument conditions.