Beijing Delay

[efast]

I noticed Beijing always had delays since the 2000s, long queues before the rwy was common and now even longer after the Olympics.

I understand the traffic increase, but why start a queue when you can let them wait at the gate?

I was flying out at 4:20pm on a Friday and the pilot announced we were number 10 in the queue, or around 25 minutes wait, both engines running.

And Chinese ATC seems too safe, you see 5 planes waiting for around 2 minutes before one plane lands. I can really see during that gap at least one jet could have taken off.

I tried to get an answer from a Air China 777 pilot, and he just told me Beijing has gone busier and thus the wait.

[jackieofalltrades]

why start a queue when you can let them wait at the gate?

There are a number of reasons, including that gate might be needed for another aircraft that's just arrived, and it's impossible to predict the exact taxi time for every aircraft to arrive at the runway with no other there waiting for takeoff. That could also incurr more delays. If the Tower controller has a number of aircraft waiting for departure he can clear them for take off much quicker than if he's waiting for them to arrive at the runway holding point. Thus utilising the runway more efficiently.

the pilot announced we were number 10 in the queue, or around 25 minutes wait, both engines running
10 in a queue isn't that big a deal. Very common at busy airports like Heathrow, Atlanta, Paris, JFK etc

you see 5 planes waiting for around 2 minutes before one plane lands. I can really see during that gap at least one jet could have taken off.

There are strict rules about separation times between one aircraft landing and another one taking off. These are larger if the aircraft is a heavy (eg B777, B747, A330 etc). What might be perceived as a gap to the average traveling passenger isn't really one for the controller in the tower.

[efast]

At the time of departure there are plenty of free gates. 50% not used at Terminal 3C

There were already six aircraft on hold, and ground is putting 4 more to the queue on rwy36R. Tower already knows there will be 3 more incoming traffic with more delay for T/O traffic. To me the last four should wait at gate, because the last one will have to wait at least 30 minutes with engines on.

From my observations at Heathrow, JFK, Sydney, LAX, Beijing runs things at a much slower pace. Usually at airport mentioned above on a clear day with low winds you see one aircraft clears the runway and within 30 seconds will be another one landing. At Peking is often 120 seconds or longer, and they were for all sizes for jets.

[caucatc]

efast:
I am an approch controller in Beijing ,I agree with jackieofalltrades a lot ,there are several things that you do not know ,but we need to think about ,let's say you why not let a aircraft take off even if there is a 2 min gap , I can add two more reasons here 1.Due to separation en-route , even if that aircraft take off ,he still needs to hold at somewhere for a while ,then why not wait on the ground ? 2.Due to overfly aircraft to Tianjin ,if there is one aircraft fly to Tianjin via approach airspace, and there is one aircraft take off at this monent ,there could be a conflict ,the overfly aircraft needs to descend ,but departure aircraft needs to climb ,there is not enough spearation at some time .
You can not think Beijing airport as what it used to be anymore ,busy airports have similar difficulties,like a AirChina land on runway 36L ,but it takes about 20minutes to taxi to its arpon ,so many pilots feel angry about that ,but think about the JFK , Atlanta , I do not think that is a problem there ,because they have become busy airports for such a long time ,if I let AirChina land on 01 ,then we can only have one runway to use ,that is not a good way to expedite flowment ,and not safe to make so many converging conflicts ourselves ,furthermore ,hold on the ground is prior than hold in the sky.

[efast]

i understand instead of holding in air the ground is better, but let the planes without conflicts take off first. If every plane taking off is in conflict with someone landing in Tianjing, sounds like the SID/STAR at both airports needs modification to make more space.

and speaking of rwy 01, why didn't Peking label them as 36L, C and R? or is it easier to be 36L/R and 01 to avoid confusion.

[caucatc]

Again ,restrictions ,we wanna change of SID or STAR also ,but can not do that as we wish .
I am not sure the reason of runway number ,but I think there could be two reasons :1.if change to 36L/C/R ,then need to change 36R to 36C ,I think that could make confusion also.2.We are gonna to have the 4th paralleled runway , then 01L and 01R is better ,do not need to change a lot ,save time and money.
I do not know why you said it could be confusion ,if you get the wrong runway number ,every runway number could be confused.

[efast]

the SID and STAR needs to be revised for safety and efficiency. The air force has to remove restrictions on commercial airspace.

Good to see the 4th runway is being added, but how far will it be next to rwy01? i would imagine even longer taxi times for the new rwy.

[caucatc]

Don't say "have to " here ,you and us have no right to say that .
Not sure about the details of the 4th runway ,but it is good to hear that you are ready for a longer taxi .

[carl baker]

Why do you state we cannot complain caucatc? Only through identifying, and ACCEPTING, there is a problem can a need for change be made.

The runway useage rates in Beijing (and throughout all of China) are very slow. You don't use "after landing traffic, line up behind", and you do not have "clear for immediate take off" type procedures. Much more use can be made of the existing infrastructure.

I DO understand that the airspace system seems to be the reason for all this mess, and you can build as many runways as you like but that will not fix the delays one bit.

A complete overhaul of your airspace mangement (routes, separation standards, weather in the vicinity) is required. A compelling case needs to be presented to the powers that be that this cannot continue...the system is broken and overloaded.

[caucatc]

You don't use "after landing traffic, line up behind", and you do not have "clear for immediate take off" type procedures.
Good question ,we used to use that before ,but SOME made a mistake just line up in front of the landing traffic ,"immediate take off " do you know the definitation of "immediate" ? How fast is immediate ? What if pilot think it is already fast enough but it is too slow and made a landing aircraft go around ? Of course we know that ,it is just because several incidents happened ,we canceled that for safety .
Airspace evaluation ,yes ,we are doing that now ,again ,it takes time !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!