Question for London ATC

[davecr]

Hello guys,

Just wondering why you want us to Squawk 2000 now before shutdown at LGW?? Does it even register if we switch it to 2000 and then immediately OFF?

Thanks! :ok:

[Defruiter]

I would imagine it's something to do with what I asked here:

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=258985

;)

[Fatfish]

Here's another. On climb on Dover SID from LHR, ATC clears to FL120 does the 6000ft ht restirction still apply? thks. :confused:

[eyeinthesky]

A clearance to FL120 cancels the 6000ft restriction. Unless the controller specifies that they still apply, it also cancels any stop-height restrictions. What it does not do is absolve you of your responsibility to ensure you comply with any 'xxxxft or above' restrictions which are there to ensure you remain inside controlled airspace.

The 250kt restriction to FL100 also still applies unless cancelled.

e.g: 'Climb FL120' means climb straight to FL 120, ensuring you meet and 'xxxx or above' restrictions on the way.
'Follow the SID vertical profile and climb FL120' would mean follow any stop heights and maintain 6000ft until reaching DVR, then climb FL120. I can't imagine a time when you would be issued with this out of Heathrow.
However, it is common when departing London City on a CLN SID to be told: "Climb to altitude 4000ft then further with the SID". This climbs you above the first check level (3000ft) but then ensures you follow future ones due to their interaction with other routes.

[Fatfish]

Many Thanks eyeinthesky :O

[eyeinthesky]

Like reading back a 4-digit code, the 'squawk ident' instruction is a mandatory readback item. Without it, how do we know that the target which just started flashing on the radar is you and not someone else who did it by mistake? But there is no need to recite the 4-digit code on an 'ident' response.

I'm sure others will give you the full list of mandatory readback items soon!

[055166k]

The comment you received was uncalled for. Sarcastic responses from ATC tend to stick in the mind. I hope the majority of us treat you with more respect; after all, you pay our wages and we are supposed to provide you with a service.
The number of true pro-aviation professionals in ATC is dwindling....the modern trend is moneymoneymoney, minimum service, minimum interest.
I wish pilots would be more willing to take note of time/frequency of such events; it is a simple process to run the tapes. It may result in service delivery improvements for all airspace users.

[Traffic is...]

In response to the above comment from 055166K, I think this seems like a bit of a sweeping generalisation to say that the 'modern trend' is for money and minimal service. It's certainly not what I find at the unit I work at. I'd suggest 'pulling tapes' isn't the way forward and certainly won't create a better atmosphere. If that's what you're finding at your unit and know it is happening, why don't you raise the issue so it can be dealt with?

[slip and turn]

To quote 055166k fully, what he actually said was "the modern trend is moneymoneymoney, minimum service, minimum interest."

Now as you all know, I am not in the business, but that first bit is the flavour portrayed too often in these parts, and as such it appears to trangress the boundaries of any particular unit.

I think we'd all prefer if there were absolutely no hint of it anywhere except in sober tones ...

To illustrate my point, I think that some of the flavour in the ATC parts tends much like some of what is seen in the (assumed) PP parts, but the part that springs to mind is not Terms and Endearment, but Flagrant Harbour....

But as always, I might have got hold of the smelly end of the stick ... :hmm:

[055166k]

Thanks for that. My observations are nearly always meant to stimulate debate [read the red note].
ATC has gradually evolved with the changing times and attitudes, to say nothing of the relentless growth in traffic. From the last half dozen or so college intakes that have been posted to London ACC Swanwick, I did not find anyone that had joined because of an aviation interest. Money was the biggest draw by far. The majority had degrees, and of those the majority expected to control for 5 or 6 years and then progress up the career ladder. The problem is that 40-year job security in the absence of a contract system is gradually filling the organisation with layer upon layer of management coupled with an inexorable rise in associated departments. NATS deserves an award for department creativity.
Evidence? If NATS is so efficient why are the route charges amongst the highest?
To move the metal we constantly handle far in excess of sector capacity; this is just about possible using a sausage-machine quantity-not-quality methodology......but just occassionally a controller might become touchy after a prolonged beating......and let slip an uncharacteristic comment or tone of voice. No excuse.....but understandable. The "tape replay" protects the controller and pilot in equal measure.