LIFFY - Again

[javelin]

So, the block standing agreement is FL270 at LIFFY.

Why are we being asked occasionally to be FL270 - 10 before LIFFY ?

I don't want to be so low and I am sure the tree huggers would be delighted to hear that it costs us 300kgs per descent to do it .

If, and only if, it mitigates holding at MIRSI, it may, may be worth it - but please Shannon, stick to the BSA, don't make up your own sub rules......... please :sad:

[ZOOKER]

It ensures a nice, long, cosy sleep for sector 7. :E

[DTY/LKS]

There could be a million and one reasons why the Shannon Controller amended the normal SA. He wouldn't have been doing it for fun or so that you burn more fuel. He probably did it to ensure separation against other traffic, that may not normally have been there. Who knows, probably only that controller.

[Blockla]

If you get an aircraft turning at BAGSO (EX EGCC or EGGP etc) (West Bound) going to LASNO/CRK/OMOKO/BEDRA etc; getting the East Bounder against him down a little prior to LIFFY is a significant advantage to safety.:}

Additionally recent experiences have highlighted that giving the exact 'point' often relates in a please explain when the aircraft doesn't make the level by the point.

I tend to use 5 before to avoid the conversations with the boss...

[Dee Mac]

I hate to tell you, but tree hugging isn't even on my lists of things to consider, nor does anyones profit enter into my thinking. I do this in certain areas where I think adjacent traffic makes it even safer if I get my traffic down earlier.

[javelin]

I appreciate the traffic case, it just seems to be a case of certain controllers do, some don't and when I ask not to do it, 90% of the time they say - fine, be level at LIFFY.

Now, when they hand me to MAN - if MAN give me further clearance without condition - the restriction comes out of the box and I may cross at 275 or so.

Howls of protest no doubt but as we sit on both sides of our respective fences - I want to save fuel (no, I don't feel pressured nor fly min fuel) and make the descent more efficient.

Also, why do we never get this approaching GIBSO........... ?

Let the debate continue :ok:

[Arty-Ziff]

Javelin...

The controllers aren't making up rules just for the sake of it. You're correct, the SA is 270 by LIFFY, but if they want you level 10 before, then there's a reason for it. It is not upto you to question the controllers decision. Standing agreements are for the controllers' use, not the pilots.
There are a million different reasons why he might want you level 10 before; they may be dropping a Midlands inbound to FL280 on top of you. In order to make sure that that a/c makes 280 by LIFFY, its necessary for you to be 270 level 10 before. Or as has previously been mentioned, 270 10 before may be so that they can give a turn off BAGSO for something climbing off manch or liverpool.

Not having a dig at you, but you're not the only aircraft in the sky, and as I've already said, the guy at Shannon isn't making things up for the sake of it. Might I suggest a liason trip to Manch or Shannon so you can see what is going on from our point of view?

[Blockla]

Now, when they hand me to MAN - if MAN give me further clearance without condition - the restriction comes out of the box and I may cross at 275 or so. So that SNN can give you over to MAN before LIFFY you maybe getting this 10NM LIFFY Restriction, cause maybe they anticipate on transfer you are going to reduce your rate of descent...?

Effectively to MAN this requirement is transparent, they probably know of it (in the back of their minds somewhere), as it keeps you out of LON SEC 4 and SEC 7, but not necessarily that you are 'doing it now'. Perhaps as a result of a/c busting this restriction without 'being at fault' some controllers have taken a more conservative approach?

[FUN.LEVER.FORWARD]

As you approach LIFFY your flight plan data is sent electronically to Manchester ACC if your ADES is EGCC, EGGP, EGNR, EGBB, EGBE, EGNX, EGNH, EGNO, EGNM, and EGCN. This 'ACT' message states that you will be F270 at LIFFY. London ACC sectors 4 and 7 who operate above Manchester ACC above F285 do not receive this ACT message and thus will have no information on your flight at all. Strictly speaking we are not permitted to place an aircraft within 2.5nm of the boundary between two FIRs without prior coordination. Therefore we cannot have an aircraft within 2.5nm of LIFFY above F280. This doesn't really pose a problem if you are approaching LIFFY from the West, however it can get close if you are aproaching from the South. I will routinely give the 'level 5nm before LIFFY' for this reason. It also only takes one aircraft to somehow not make the F270 requirement to ruin your day, so it's also a case of once bitten, twice shy.
Also as Blockla has said we get aircraft crossing BAGSO at F280 making sharp left turns to the South. This is when you will likely get a F270 10nm or more prior to LIFFY if approaching from the West.

[divingduck]

As someone said before, you may also get it when you are not the only a/c on the way to LIFFY.
I have in the past given 260 with 20 to run, 270 with 10 to run and 280 by LIFFY, with 3 all there at the same time.

Basically we do it for controller amusement, nothing more:ok:

[Medway Control]

Javelin
As a controller myself, not in this area of the world admittedly, but the London TMA, I need to be a little honest with you. We dont hand out level restrictions for the sake of it, we hand them out because they are necessary. And the great thing about a Radar Control Service is that we are in control. If Shannon want you to be level 10 before Liffy, they want it for a reason, so do it. Fuel is important, but first priority is safety. WE are taught at ATC college three priorities, safelyorderly and efficiently. Safe is first! If you want to see why they restrict you, then visit the centre, otherwise just do it! standing agreements are not there for the benefit of pilots or descent planning, they are there to simplify the control system. If i want to amend a SA, I will. Because I am in control. They are amended every day in the London TMA, to move traffic. WE try and help inbounds and outbounds, slowing them back to holding speed etc as soon as we can, because we know the economic situation at the moment, but sometimes we just dont care that its gonna use x kgs of fuel more, all we care about is that you will hit the company traffic coming the opposite direction.
You are a pilot, we are atc. we dont tell you how to fly your plane do we?

[Blockla]

... that it costs us 300kgs per descent to do it .
How is this calculated? Just interested...

[need to know]

Normally traffic is to be transferred to the receiving centre in level flight. This normally takes place up to 3 mins from the boundary. And so the traffic should ideally be in level flight at the level in the ACT. Generally people do their best and use the cross LIFFY instruction but unforunately there has been quite a few occasions were the instruction to cross LIFFY hasn't really been followed and aircraft can go sailing through Sector 7 causing some late coordination with London.

The cross 5 or 10 before at the level builds in a bit of protection.

[BOAC]

I see this is 'up' again:). I very much see the ATC point (I'll even forgive Medway:)), and I think it essential to get level us 'before', so now that all our OPS depts have built in the 270 LIFFY into the fuel plan (they have, haven't they....:ugh:) it's up to us to add 'the extra'. I cannot see 300kg, J - that is between 9 and 12000kg per hour DIFFERENCE at 270 as opposed to cruise. What on earth are you flying? More like 20kg?

[The Jolly Roger]

Javelin....

It doesn't happen often enough in the ATC Forum that Pilots ask questions. I'm not going to add to the answers to your question but I do want to say something of your tone: don't take it the wrong way, but it struck me as a little "snotty"!!!

Controllers generally don't make up their own rules. We tend to more or less stick to the "book". There are times that we need to bend the rules. Pilots never have the full traffic picture. If you would like to quiery an instruction, by all means ask. Most of us will explain if we have the time.

I'm sure FL270 10nm before LIFFY doesn't always happen. But when it does, be rest assured that someone is lookin out to protect your ass from the unspeakable. The skies are getting busier and unfortunately, sometimes economy goes down the pan.

So next time you want to ask question, or in your case pass a remark, do so politely. Remember who's watchin your ass!!!! :ok:

By the way, I have worked in Ireland and I'm familiar with the airspace. The controllers there are top notch and I understand why they need to give such an instruction regularly.

Now I'm off back to the beach.....:cool:

[Ceannairceach]

I don't say this often, but I'd like to hear more from Zooker please. That genuinely gave me a much needed laugh, having been ex-S7 at one time or another :E

[javelin]

Ooooo, Fab,


Now

Taking it from the bottom, so to speak.

Jolly Roger - no, I am not being snotty, just wanting to know the answers....

I always ask politely - you guys in SNN will recognise me because I always sign off with 'good luck'.

BOAC - the 300kgs is the difference between an unrestricted descent and 270 LIFFY.

Need to know - our aeroplane will arrive at a constraint at the level, at the mile (A330). If we programme the BSA, it will do it - what irritates is when we plan what our flight plan says and then get something different a minute before TOD. You plan, we plan.........

Medway - CRM :E

Fun Lever - probably the best reply yet - I can understand your thinking, however the front end and the controlling end need to talk and fly together a bit more often to enable a better understanding of what is going on.

In the 'good old days' I used to fly lots of MAN and LBA controllers on fam flights. Sadly with restrictions and union agreements they are not happening any more - shame really because we then see and talk about each others 'bees' and hopefully sort out these problems.

Gents (ladies) I post to elicit reaction and debate - I am one of the good guys - honest - and do work with ATC, however there are certain things that irritate because they appear to be dictated by agreements established by committee.

Feel free to PM and have a chat - heaven forbid - organise a fam flight - we don't bite :E

[Blockla]

BOAC - the 300kgs is the difference between an unrestricted descent and 270 LIFFY. So the 300kg isn't the difference between 270x10 LIFFY and 270 X LIFFY? You certainly implied that in your opening post...:}

[Don't Tell Him Pike]

Sadly with restrictions and union agreements they are not happening any more

I can only assume that's your union, as ours has no objection.

[BOAC]

Javelin - no, you certainly not say that before (#1)! Regarding the SA's, we thrashed this out ages ago. We have it, we live with it, I presume you have obtained a copy of these SAs and told your Flt Planning bods? I did, (thanks to a PPruning controller). IF they have adjusted your PLOG fuel, end of story? If not, you know about it, so you do it, and I recommend you annotate your PLOG with the 'extra' to drum it home and cover your arse.

[5milesbaby]

Although not very often, it has been used at GIBSO too. GIBSO though is a totally different place so cannot be compared with the LIFFY question.

You want to look at the Norwich restrictions if coming in through RATUK, or even worse, try flying to half of the French airfields from the London TMA - over 60 of them have level caps imposed and if we followed their rules, then no aircraft would enter the UK FIR above FL270 if their destination is within England or Wales, including from the South and South-West to places such at Newcastle.

In an ideal world every aircraft would fly the perfect great circle route and optimum cruise and climb/descent profiles, unfortunately for you (and very fortunate for my employment status) too many want to at the same time in a very small bit of air so something has to give and routes get capped. Its all just safety and expedition, without it, the restrictions would be immense.

[ZOOKER]

Ceannairceach,
3+4+7 = Well, - just how much Horlicks can the human body actually take? :}

[54north15west]

Cos rarely when you give a PD for a desent is the aircraft at the level when you want him to be..Putting a restriction on the aircraft to be level ensures that you will have the required seperation on transfer to MACC..

[DFC]

Agreed levels / letters of agreement / standing agreements are internal ATC agreements for the use of ATC. Just because a pilot happens to know that Shannon and MACC have an agreement that certain aircraft will be descended by Shannon to FL270 by Liffy does not mean that ATC are not at liberty to do something different. It is nice to know the agreements for planning purposes but not essential.

The extra fuel burn between getting cleared to a level at Liffy and being cleared to the level 10 or 20nm before would only be a fraction of the contingency fuel that is required to be carried for these very reasons.

However, I think that it does highlight a few problems. If the agreement is to be level at liffy then ATC have to expect that the pilot will comply. To put in an arbitary 10nm extra becuse they don't trust the pilot would cause mayhem if applied elsewhere.

Traffic both eastbound and westbound at Liffy are known to the Shannon controller. They know if there will be a westbound conflicting traffic long before the eastbound is required to descend. There is nothing preventing radar headings to be used to resolve the conflict.

I would be very surprised that it is impossible under the agreement to have an aircraft transferred to MACC on a heading against other traffic. The normal situation would be that MACC would not be able to take the asircraft off the heading until they have control of that traffic.

Of course, in relation to the last point, some posters here have highlighted a misunderstanding regarding the difference between transfer of communication and trasnfer of control.

Regards,

DFC

[divingduck]

How about just once, when the controller gives you a restriction or requirement, you just do it without all the angst that is appearing on these pages? I mean 10 miles isn't going to send you to the wall!!
We could yet again go into the fact that there are a/c climbing out of Manchester/Liverpool etc on non laterally separated routes, the cross with these are generally on or about the boundary, a/c are not released until they pass the boundary (eastbound), a/c westbound who are slow climbers or good climbers so coord is needed with several adjacent units to get further climb...all the while the guys are climbing out of EGAA etc and descending into EGAA yada yada yada.
A little knowledge is a dangerous thing, just imagine how dangerous a lot of knowledge is!
As I said, when the instruction is given, just read it back and do it, it isn't really all that hard.

[The Jolly Roger]

Can you pleez zay again....JAI574....:ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh:

hehehehe.....:ok:

[javelin]

As with so many of the ongoing restrictions that are placed on us - complying isn't a problem and yes, I can easily comply with at or 10 before and yes, our planning chaps have included it in the PLOGS. The fact is though that every aeroplane that goes through that sector is burning tens or hundreds of kilos of fuel unnecessarily - every descent, every hour, every day.

The main reason for starting the thread - and thanks to all who have replied - was to restate that we need some consistency and we need better communication from both sides to establish whether a restriction is efficient or whether by changing it slightly, arrival delays and holding would still be reduced (the original reason for the BSA).

If it was felt that altering the BSA's would re introduce terminal holding, then of course they make commercial sense.

Next round gents (or ladies) :ok:

Oh, thread drift - thanks to GLA and PIK today and yesterday for the 7 diversions and emergency landings I did - fantastic job fellas :E T'was a busy sim and such a shame we can't get more ATC folk in observing/helping.

[BOAC]

Jav - I think you know I agree totally with you, but our 'beating of the gums' is not going to change things. Until ATC can get the co-ordination of sectors better organised with whizz-bang kit so they do NOT need 'blocked' levels, I think the only pressure you will be able to bring to bear is to fire up someone in your company who counts beans and point out the cost to his/her budget.

To be fair, it is not just UK - inbound GVA from the UK, over the Alps to MXP and NCE and others - early ToD's for ATC sectorisation.

Good to see you had an easy Sim......did you get dizzy?:)

[BwatchGRUNT]

Javelin - you think that you are the only jockey who flies through irish airspace or even Londons for that matter that signs off with 'good luck' that just about sums up your awareness of the ATC system!!

[DFC]

We could yet again go into the fact that there are a/c climbing out of Manchester/Liverpool etc on non laterally separated routes, the cross with these are generally on or about the boundary, a/c are not released until they pass the boundary (eastbound),


Sounds like a response received to a similar question in the 1960's.

When are you guy's going to get that radar thing working and stop having to provide procedural solutions?

Does the letter of agreement between Shannon and Manchester not include provision for aircraft to be on a heading etc etc?

Just to clarify - I don't think that there is a valid complaint but the answers given are not helping.

Regards,

DFC

[divingduck]

Sorry about the replies...
The non laterally separated tracks are on the Manchester side of the fence, not the Irish side.
As for the reach by 10 miles prior to LIFFY, actually, the a/c are supposed to be level 3 minutes or 20 miles before LIFFY to comply with to the letter of the letter of agreement.
Soooo, the guys who give you reach by 10 prior are actually doing you a favour.
Yes we can hand off a/c to Manchester on headings...but there is the thorny issue of the Sector 5 boundary not that far away from LIFFY to the south, and if you parallel to the North, oops, there's BAGSO and the stuff coming the other way.
It just so happens that it is a complex piece of airspace...They happen all over the place, and sometimes things just don't flow as nicely as everyone would like. Most a/c i have asked who want a "green" descent would prefer to be at F300 at LIFFY...so if you can get London/Manchester to change their vertical sector boundaries a lot of these issues go away.

Jolly :} "IAC995 I require a readback of that last instruction"..."Roger"

[The Jolly Roger]

When are you guy's going to get that radar thing working and stop having to provide procedural solutions?

Does the letter of agreement between Shannon and Manchester not include provision for aircraft to be on a heading etc etc?

Just to clarify - I don't think that there is a valid complaint but the answers given are not helping


DFC....What the hell is your problem? Have you not read the previous threads? They're all valid answers you ****!

Just goes to show how intricate your understanding of Radar is...:8

I'll give you the most valid answer yet...its to miss the traffic coming head on at you!!! Now go suck your thumb.....

Jeeeez....sometimes.....:ugh:

[DFC]

As for the reach by 10 miles prior to LIFFY, actually, the a/c are supposed to be level 3 minutes or 20 miles before LIFFY to comply with to the letter of the letter of agreement.
Soooo, the guys who give you reach by 10 prior are actually doing you a favour.



Had the fact that the agreement was as you say and not 270 level Liffy then this would have been a very short discussion.

Regards,

DFC

[Arty-Ziff]

Javelin, by the sounds of your replies, it only seems more and more evident that you have no idea what goes on from the ATC side of things.
ATC is not a game of "consistency". If it were, then we could simply program all the rules into a computer, and let it do the job for us. And that's exactly why computers aren't, and never will do the job, because situations change on a second by second basis, and only a controller has the ability to take all the factors into account and decide "you know what, it would be better for me if this guy was level 10 miles before liffy."

The bottom line is as has been mentioned many times in the previous posts; they're doing it for a reason, not just to p*ss you off or to make you burn more fuel. So go and visit a centre, and you'll walk away feeling a prat for ever having bought it up.

[Blockla]

Arty-Z,

To be fair, it was just a question, albeit with interpretable tone... Some controllers do unfortunately apply a common process to a given situation, some will always do AA X ZZ etc; but if it works etc. what's the 'real' issue.

As DD has pointed out as this is a 'boundary' LOA not an internal one, technically the restriction is either 3 mins prior of 20NM prior to the boundary not by the point. The LOA states below FL280 or lower, nothing stopping us using FL250 etc at time too, which I have seen used; 270 is common as it's the Eastbound level.

LIFFY is an ugly little convergence point, traffic out of Dublin East bound looking for higher, Traffic West bound not wanting to go as far North as BAGSO if they can avoid it, Eastbound traffic Looking to stay high even though they want to land in various parts of Mid to Northern England, Overflying traffic EX Ocean, Shannon, Cork, Kerry, Knock etc all using the same airway; which crosses with anything from Belfast, Scotland, Sweden, Norway, etc southbound combining with the stuff through BAGSO Westbound and often turning to the south.

The LOAs are set up to significantly reduce the 'complexities' in everyone getting what they want; keep a standard safe concept in mind at all times; keep it simple stupid; the downside is that almost no-one gets what they want; but that applies to many facets of life.

There are 6 ATC units involved with this sector boundary (DUB, SNN, LON 4 5 7, MACC), which potentially could mean 5 phone calls to step outside the LOA, or none if you comply with it; hence we tend to comply with it pretty religiously.

[javelin]

Arty, I do, have, will continue to visit centres, towers and have had a very educational and pleasant tour of Swanwick. I have sat on airspace use groups and been on the radar sim at MAN - all very interesting and educational.

I think the discussion is done.

The ATC folk have explained quite well the reasons for the restriction and I doubt very much if any lobbying to our management is going to change anything.

I will politely shut up.

However, if you are working the sector and I ask to be level at LIFFY, cut me some slack now and again - I will do it - promise :E

BOAC - yes, somewhat dazed and confused as Pete would say at the end of it :ok:

[5milesbaby]

BOAC:
Until ATC can get the co-ordination of sectors better organised with whizz-bang kit so they do NOT need 'blocked' levels
I know what you are saying, but it'll never happen, and if/when traffic movements begin to rise again, they will only get worse and more will be introduced. Without these restrictions more co-ordinations are needed manually, making the job very time consuming, separations difficult to achieve with lesser knowledge of what other tracks are doing, so heavy flow restrictions causing delays and then subsequent cancellations on the later rotations. Burning an extra tonne of fuel has to be far better than cancelling an entire return flight.