Dubai Approach, what is going on?

[Kattar Kid]

A friend in Abu Dhabi and some pilots I know told me that Dubai is having problems with their "too much" vectoring?
Are they short of ATCOs?

[Tower Ranger]

Don`t tell me you`ve forgotten the answers you got to a similar post in 2006? Short of airspace and full of restrictions.

[throw a dyce]

Maybe they need some over 45's to show them how to do it...:}

[On the beach]

Maybe they need an over 60?

Oh no, on second thoughts been there done that already.

As I was told many years ago, "Remember lad, speed control is no substitute for good vectoring". Yeah, right!!!! :D

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

Maybe the pilots ought to go and visit the facility and spend a couple of hours there...

[rennaps]

The entire airspace and route structure in the UAE needs a total re-work. :ugh:
I think it is only going to get worse when Al Maktoum airport tries to live up to expectations.

[olster]

As a loanee to a local airline (737-800 -guess) my experiences of Dubai ATC is generally disappointing.Coming from the UK where we don't get much right these days -ATC being an honourable exception -my experiences at the hands of the local controllers has not been comparable.

To the Dubai approach controller who berated us last Saturday may I inform you of the following.A long day for us,this was the fourth sector.The second inbound to DXB involved a go -around due debris on the runway.The subsequent go -around uneventful except for seemingly random heading and speed changes culminating in an arrival 20 mins later.The fourth sector on return from Kuwait involved 45 mins holding @ Desdi.The term EAT is misleading as Desdi is a long way from touchdown.Due to local experience I persuaded the new captain that I was training to carry extra fuel and this proved to be beneficial as we neared Dubai.However when we eventually left the hold we then experienced some more haphazard vectoring plus cleared for the approach.The instruction given from approximately 14 miles was 180 to 10 plus 160 to 4 -standard stuff.It then became apparent that we were closing to 3 miles behind an exec jet- himself 6 miles behind a heavy.

There was no alternative but to slow down ourselves for reasons I will explain.My co-captain from the sub -continent was not a native English speaker plus unfamiliar with local procedure -I was the handling pilot btw.The approach controller then told us that we should inform him before we slow down and despite the volume of traffic felt compelled to add that 'you are not the only aircraft in the sky' plus some sarcastic remark referenced to 'doing his job'.What I could have said is that if we hadn't slowed down we would have gone around for the second time -1 hour 30 into discretion and that the next call would be 'mayday' due low fuel.My advice:do not use non -standard and conversational language over an ATC frequency.While I appreciate the workload at DXB is significant at times we also have issues and challenges courtesy of what passes for a system.I was going to put in an ASR but really couldn't be bothered as we had already submitted one from the earlier go -around (plus discretion and training reports).I obtained the DXB ATC standards officer tel number from our safety dept but no reply so far.Be professional guys despite the stressors.

[Guy D'ageradar]

There was no alternative but to slow down ourselves for reasons I will explain.

Maybe if you had advised no longer able to comply with the aforementioned speed restrictions (which, I assume, you had read back and thus accepted), there would have been no excuse for any "sarcastic remark" and the whole situation would have been avoided! Then again, I guess it doesn't bother you that the following traffic has to go around due to your non-compliance with an atc clearance. :ugh:

At the same time, I do concede that putting you a bare 3 miles behind the preceding traffic AFTER having gone around was probably not the best way of handling things!

[Number2]

Less vectoring = more holding = another forum complaining.

Too many aircraft arriving at once. What can you do?

[Rule3]

Don't they land 2.5nm apart at Heathrow.:confused:

[Vercingetorix]

olster
Dubai APP does a good job given the constraints/diktats/orders imposed on them by the GCAA in the manifestation of the "Gruesome twosome" aka the pot bellied Danish cartoon character and his muppet, the DANS.
The procedures for release inbound via DESDI were devised by these two and under their rule Dubai has little autonomy.
It may be worth a missive to the GCAA Regulatory dept.

Cheers:ok:

[Minesthechevy]

Rule 3 - Yes they do, but only when the arrivals man feels like taking it easy.:8

'Whaddya mean, tight, I had room to squeeze one off there; it was a bigger gap than management credibility'.

[Tower Ranger]

I`ll try not to bore you but let me briefly give you some reasons why the arrival spacing at Dubai appears to be so much more than at places like LHR.

Dubai`s two rwy`s are too close together to be operated independantly, departures must be rolling in the gap between an inbound touching down and the next one reaching two miles final. Hence the standard minimum gap irespective of wake minima is set at 5 miles although occasinally at peak periods we work down to vortex minima.

The 5 miles is measured when the first inbound is at 4nm final hence the second at 9 miles. This gap naturally decreases as the first reduces below 160kt and doesn`t really leave much of a departure window for the other rwy. We are not permitted to use "Land After" procedures or reduced rwy separations at night and in several other cases including when the tailwind component exceeds 5knts at any time of day. Any smaller gap between inbounds will cause delays to outbounds so it has to be balanced according to the inbound or outbound flow.

These factors themselves are fairly restrictive but add into that aircraft with the same exit gate having to be streamed 10nm in trail for all gates and the amount of flow control at night through some gates and it is pretty easy to see how delays can build up both on arrival and departure.

Anyone who has been through DXB at peak periods will be pretty aware of the traffic level and whilst we are not working to the flow capacity of other major airports in movements/hour we are working to the limits of what we are allowed to do without being removed from duty.

Any Dubai based drivers that want to see the world from our side of the fence will be very welcome to come for a visit.

[eastern wiseguy]

I`ll try not to bore you

Waaaay too late for that !!:p:p

[Brian 48nav]

We've just got in from our new local in rural Herefordshire, having had a lovely pint of real warm beer with fish and chips, and this local at the bar said his daughter is an ATCO at Dubai, apparently ex LL, but Dad was a bit confused about the difference between Twr and Radar.Obviously not the Hanbury off-spring! Her name is C*****e.

[Aeroflop]

Don't they land 2.5nm apart at Heathrow.

The sad thing is, some of these guys come from these here parts...whats happened???

Maybe if you had advised no longer able to comply with the aforementioned speed restrictions (which, I assume, you had read back and thus accepted), there would have been no excuse for any "sarcastic remark" and the whole situation would have been avoided! Then again, I guess it doesn't bother you that the following traffic has to go around due to your non-compliance with an atc clearance.

Nothing to do with crap vectoring then ha??? I'm sick to the teeth of seeing poor approach controlling at DXB. Pilots are blaming the ACC for the delays because we control the holds....I think the pilots should be at the ACC, not at DXB to get the real picture!

A friend in Abu Dhabi and some pilots I know told me that Dubai is having problems with their "too much" vectoring?
Are they short of ATCOs?

....no. Just short of some good atco's!!

Dubai APP does a good job given the constraints/diktats/orders imposed on them by the GCAA in the manifestation of the "Gruesome twosome" aka the pot bellied Danish cartoon character and his muppet, the DANS.

....in fairness. The ACC has been trying to push AMAN on DXB for over a year now without much response. AMAN might not be perfect but at least its a start!

Dubai`s two rwy`s are too close together to be operated independantly,

....not true. Have a look at some of the ops in the US. Quite impressive!

[cossack]

Dubai`s two rwy`s are too close together to be operated independantly,
They are by the rules that the controllers there have to work to.
....not true. Have a look at some of the ops in the US. Quite impressive!
Rules in the US (and Canada for that matter) would allow the runway layout at Dubai to be operated independently in weather conditions as low as 3SM (5km) visibility or 1000 foot ceiling. When weather is below these limits then we would revert to the same "2 miles and rolling" standard employed in all weather conditions in Dubai. That's when N. American airports look like delay machines.

[Tower Ranger]

Maybe I should have been more specific by saying that because of the proximity of the runways the rules are that we have to operate them independently, although I would imagine most readers had already worked that out all by themselves. Because of this and the other restrictions we just cannot legally run it any tighter at present no matter how much we want to.

I`m sure Aeroflop follows the rules that apply at the ACC which strangle the outbound traffic flow from Dubai but we are fully aware that those restrictions are not caused by the ACC controllers.

Short of good Controllers? I don`t think so but please feel free to come and show us how its done A.

[Guy D'ageradar]

We've just got in from our new local in rural Herefordshire, having had a lovely pint of real warm beer with fish and chips, and this local at the bar said his daughter is an ATCO at Dubai, apparently ex LL, but Dad was a bit confused about the difference between Twr and Radar.Obviously not the Hanbury off-spring! Her name is C*****e.

Hope she wasn't pulling a sickie when she was spotted posing for the TV cameras at the gp this weekend - in a marshall's outfit!

[Aeroflop]

Because of this and the other restrictions we just cannot legally run it any tighter at present no matter how much we want to.

So I take it that NO measures are been taken to improve the restrictions and bring them into line with modern day ATC?

[Tower Ranger]

Of course improvements are being introduced but i`m sure you`ve been here long enough to know just how long it takes to get regulatory approval for any major changes to be granted and it`ll be another six months before the next significant step.
However when Dubai make improvements it seems that restrictions from other units are introduced to negate them. It was a rather strange co-incidence that the week that DXB brought in reduced landing and departure separations the spacing required through the gates increased to 10 miles in trail which causes significant delays for the morning Ranbi outbounds. Don`t even mention Muscat flow control.
Any improvements at DXB have to be linked to improvements in procedures further down the line as easy as it is for ACC to give DXB more inbounds than we can handle it is equally easy for DXB to give ACC more outbounds than they can deal with. We try to arrange our outbound flow to match your limits and you have to match our limits, its just that simple.

Brian, she`s ex-KK

[Kiwitraveller]

There is a link to a decent and detailed presentation that sets out some of the challenges and solutions in Mid East airspace. Its a regional and political issue - a mini version of the European problem. A lot of people are working the problems to find solutions. Its neither an atco nor a pilot generated problem.

This is a good web site to follow and understand - See this blog and click the link that says "here" CANSO - The Global Voice of ATM (http://www.canso.org/cms/showpage.aspx?id=1899)

Katie

[Vercingetorix]

The CANSO blog is interesting, especially the opening comment:

AIRSPACE. An infinite asset, however, it's limited by it's use for non aviation purposes.

WTF?

[Kiwitraveller]

Non aviation use of airspace>>>

Restrictions around naval bases, army bases, palaces, nuclear powerstations, for example, and larger areas used for practice missile firing, then of course the. war zone issue.

Oh and very tall buildings like the Burj, which impact use of airspace.

[halas]

I enjoyed the vectors yesterday afternoon. The vis was fantastic and got to see parts of the UAE l hadn't seen before :8

It looked exactly like ALL the parts l have seen before!

halas

[Aeroflop]

It was a rather strange co-incidence that the week that DXB brought in reduced landing and departure separations the spacing required through the gates increased to 10 miles in trail which causes significant delays for the morning Ranbi outbounds.Not strange at all my friend. The ACC has been telling OMDB to put 10nm in trail spacing between departures at RANBI for as long as I can remember. Besides 10nm is reasonable seen as we find ourselves having 20+ airplanes on frequency during the morning rush on Central. Not kosher!!! You can get used to more spacing if that trend continues!

Secondly, unless I'm wrong, the reduced landing spacing requirements (if you can call them "requirements"), have been in place for the past 9 months on a trial basis. They've only mae them permanent in the last AIP amendment.

Yeah, regulatory approval takes time. In fact, thats good. At least Dubai are applying for approval rather than just going ahead and implementing the changes. (Which seem to be the norm around some parts!). But whats the story with the AMAN? One minute its all go, the next its halted again. As I said, its not perfect but its an attempt to start something right!:uhoh:

[Vercingetorix]

Kiwitraveller

The Burj is, or should be, covered by what is referred to as Annex 14 surfaces. The others referred to: naval bases, army bases, palaces (yes, I know the Sharjah Sheikh's gets in the way of Dubai), nuclear powerstations, for example, and larger areas used for practice missile firing, do not exactly take up an awful lot of terrain/airspace.
The war zone issue could be better handled.

One of the biggest constraints in the Mid East is the route structure via Saudi and the kink/bottle neck in Syria. When these and a few other associated countries actually get up to full modern standards and practices there will be a better traffic flow.
I see no mention of the neighbour to the north, Iran, and it's unilateral approach to ATC/ATM! This impacts on the war zone.

With proper implementation of Flow Control procedures, both inbounds, outbounds, and overflights together with fully integrated regional centres with associated handover coordination there is much that can be done before 'saturation point' is reached in 2015. The use of the term 'saturation point' in the CANSO blog is incorrect as that would mean every aircraft traveling throughout the region with Min Sep 24/7. Hardly likely!!

The CANSO report looks like ATC by Excel (Wonder who wrote it? It seems to have a certain Danish je ne c'est quoi). Unfortunately, with the GCAA ANS working in it's current fashion not much progress will be made except to continue to stumble along in the darkness.

Cheers:ok:

P.S. as mentioned before Dubai does a good job

[rennaps]

The Burj is definitely not covered by the Annex 14 surfaces.
That is why all the Dubai SIDs fly around it and why the radar vectoring altitude above it is 4000 ft

[Vercingetorix]

rennaps
The Burj is definitely not covered by the Annex 14 surfaces.
That is why all the Dubai SIDs fly around it and why the radar vectoring altitude above it is 4000 ft

That's another blot on the GCAA copy book then. The GCAA in the shape of the Dane did do a bit of slight of hand stuff by subbing out to Dubai to do it's own Annex 14 stuff. A game of Danish 'pass the parcel'.
However, the Annex 14 buck does actually stop with the GCAA.

As has been mentioned before the Dane is not PANS OPs qualified and the GCAA regulations were rewritten to allow him to exercise his 'skill' at this 'Black Art'.

He played the same "pass the parcel' game when he introduced the first eastbound flow rate into Muscat FIR getting Dubai to police the departure rate rather than install a proper flow unit at the ACC.


Cheers:ok:

[choclit runway]

Tower ranger and brian,

she is actually ex - SS.

Aeroflop,

You are full of sh*t!

[Russell Kaymer]

The comments re: Departure Flows show the typical TMA mentality of the world ending at 30 miles. The Muscat flow is for a number of reasons including that those aircraft are transiting into procedural airspace. The Ranbi flow requirements are not for the Ranbi departures but are to give the ACC a fighting chance to get the rest of the traffic that does not originate in Dubai into the mix. AUH departures, OBBI arrivals descending on top, OTBD and Al Udeid descending on top and crossing all going out through the same single point at Balus as well as AUH arrivals from Tehran crossing the lot.

It is a complete waste of time for any of the controllers from various units to blame the other. Everyone is playing to their rules and noone is making it easy for themselves while making iot hard for the next guy on purpose. The problems are the same that are found throughout the whole reigon not just in Aviation.

[Tower Ranger]

Choclit, we`re both half right, ex KK n SS.

[Rule3]

Imagine if she was ex KKK and SS.:ooh:

[Guy D'ageradar]

Aeroflop

Not strange at all my friend. The ACC has been telling OMDB to put 10nm in trail spacing between departures at RANBI for as long as I can remember. Besides 10nm is reasonable seen as we find ourselves having 20+ airplanes on frequency during the morning rush on Central. Not kosher!!!

Maybe it's about time you read the LOA then, which STILL states that the outbound flow is 5 miles and parallel headings OK - without coordination, hence the 3 times daily calls to impose "exceptional" flow control measures on Dubai outbounds. :D

Of course, the LOA could be re-negotiated to limit Dubai outbounds due to lack of the concerned UAE sector's capacity but that is politically unacceptable and the blame would then shift down the road - also politically unacceptable. :ugh:

[Number2]

I am sure everyone could start 'slinging mud' about lack of capacity but that wouldn't achieve much.

[falconeasydriver]

Choclit, we`re both half right, ex KK n SS.


I knew I'd heard that voice elsewhere (ex KK based)

I believe she may have been responsible one Saturday evening for a comment on GND at KK "Easy***, just go down on Juliet....." :E:ok::}

[Nimmer]

No she never worked in the tower, radar only at EGKK. Tower at EGSS.

very interesting that the airspace problems at Dubai are raised every couple of years. It is a crock of sh*t, but nothing will change until the Dubai and Abu Dhabi governments start to love each other!!!

For instance I can never understand why the UAE centre and Dubai approach are not in the same centre. Why don't dubai approach control the holds at low level, like EGLL, EGKK and EGSS. A well organised hold is so much better than vectors all over the sky. FLOW CONTROL, now there is an idea.

Departure runway slots?????

All these ideas have been mentioned in the past, with all the good woldwide ex pat experience in both places it should be one of the best ATC systems in the world!!! Why isn't it???

Ask the great Dane.

[Vercingetorix]

Nimmer
The idea of releasing traffic into the HOLDs as in the EGLL, EGKK, EGSS, procedures was put to the notso great Dane. To mention it a second time was instant dismissal. Neither he, nor his training office sidekick of the time, understood the concept nor were they interested in it as they knew best with their collective experience from, respectively Copenhagen and J'burg in '89 and '92.

The reason that the ACC and OMDB APP are still separate entities is that Dubai were smart enough to understand the notso great Dane for what he was and they declined to be drawn into his empire building in a subordinate role. After all, their ATM planners are good at their job whilst the Dane is not.

As you say, with all the good worldwide ex pat experience in both places it should be one of the best ATC systems in the world!!! The notso great Dane and his muppet the DANS are the stumbling block to progress.

Ask the great Dane

If anyone at the ACC did so it would be an automatic departure on the next available Etihad flight.

:ok:

[Gonzo]

Is OMDB Approach co-located at the tower?

[Short Approach?]

Is OMDB Approach co-located at the tower?

In the basement at the moment looking to move to a new location in OMDW after some time. (05/2011)

[Gonzo]

Shame. Taking the aiport approach units away from the airports in London was one of the worst things ever to happen.

[Crazy Voyager]

Just out of intrest (as always with my posts from someone who isn't an ATC, just hoping to become one). What are the pros/cons with having approach at the airports? I belive (from reading reports off the internet:8) that for example at LFPG departure and approach controllers are located at the airport (perhaps even in the VRC?). But at the London airports we know this isn't the case, what are (in your opinions, the ATCs) the pros and cons of the various arrangments?

[Gonzo]

Major impact is a growing disconnect between the Approach unit and the Tower, lack of appreciation of the radar task by tower ATCOs and vice versa. I'm willing to be corrected, but I don't think it's brought about any improvements in service/safety that are dependent upon the Approach task being in Terminal Control.

[throw a dyce]

It probably depends on experience.There must be a lot of controllers at the London airports and TC who have never validated the other rating.You can be single validation,but have held the other validation elsewhere,and it's easy to appreciate the other persons problems.
Interesting that Dubai is streaming now,and recruiting people from the London airports.Are they recruiting people who have validated both,or just single validation.:hmm:

[Gonzo]

Obviously there are differences between those in the tower who have held radar validations in the past, those who have at least done the Approach Radar course and never validated, and those who have never even done the Approach Radar course, but the issues we've seen span all three groups. In some cases having a little (possibly out of date) knowledge is worse then none at all, in others it helps a great deal. I'm sure it's the same for TC in the reverse.

[throw a dyce]

Am I right in thinking that you have to have 4 or 5 years validated experience of Tower,and Approach Radar to be suitable for Dubai.That used to be the requirement,unless the goal posts have moved.:uhoh:

[Crazy Voyager]

How common is it in the UK to have several validations? If I compare to Sweden, here everyone has approach validation, then you on top of that have tower or Area aswell (this is due to the fact that both our ACCs provide approach services and many towers provide approach service).

Do you belive that having a double validation increases the efficency of the work since coordination etc becomes easier when you have been on both sides? And how does it work if someone is double validated and is, say working tower, can that person have more allowance when it comes to giving headings etc (since they have a validation on approach it would be reasonable that they would know what headings can be given etc) or is that all regulated in the MATSp2 for each unit (Air is allowed to vector in these sectors etc but not above bla bla altitude and so on)?

[Guy D'ageradar]

Am I right in thinking that you have to have 4 or 5 years validated experience of Tower,and Approach Radar to be suitable for Dubai.

I'm pretty sure the goalposts have, at least, been split.

Speaking for my watch, almost all of the approach guys have previous tower validations, some of them here. For the tower guys, I'm not sure whether many have ever worked approach but some certainly show a great deal more understanding of what's going on than others! THAT is the undisputed benefit of dual validations - each is able to understand not just what but why the other is doing as he does.

As Gonzo says, one of the worst things to happen to a tower/approach unit. :(

[aclark79]

As a pilot new to the UAE and Abu Dhabi specifically, is it possible to come for a tower/approach facilities tour? I'll be spending most of my time in Saudi, but it would be nice to see the facilities here.

Thanks!