Perth Airport

[Chadzat]

.......is a disgrace.

All it has taken is a 'pothole' in RW06/24 to cause HUGE disruption on the busiest day of the week. This pavement damage occurred yesterday early afternoon from what i have been told. Why could this not have been fixed overnight? No work was being done before the 'big rush' at 6 am this morning!

Not that it will ever happen but WAC needs to take a hard look at what is becoming a farce of an airport. This morning was 28 minutes from start up to wheels up. That is on op of the 16 minute delay past scheduled ETD due to no taxi-slots being available. :ugh: This is another gripe, when you know there is only 1 runway in operation why keep the same number of taxi-slots per 10 minute bracket? We were number 8.....yes 8 at the hold point/taxiway A1. It was like being at Heathrow when there is snow and fog around!

I dont expect any answers to this, just needed to vent as its becoming increasingly frustrating to be at work in the mornings! :ok:

[piston broke again]

Vent heard...
28 minutes is a lot but it's still nothing compared with stupidity at melb airport. At least 45 mins wait due single runway ops on 16. And while they're at it, the shut down almost half of it down in the middle of the night when cloud is forcast BKN008. So no one gets in! Intelligence of the situation is staggering.

[beaver_rotate]

YUP!!! I've seen better organisation in Port Morbid, truly.

One day last week, we missed our slot by 14 mins (whilst waiting for a tug).

We called up on ground for pushback and they said "you've missed your slot time - the next available is 40-50 mins from now". Our response was "ahh no i'm sorry we were given XXX slot on Clearance Delivery".... suckers!

Do they not realise they have 2 runways??

Also what's with the new rule where you cannot call up for a slot until 30 mins before??

Just one more thing you have to choreograph on a turnaround. Make the place a f***ing CTAF and be done with it.
:ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh:

[Capn Bloggs]

Geez beaver you'd have to Gen Y or I with a post like that.

One day last week, we missed our slot by 14 mins (whilst waiting for a tug).

We called up on ground for pushback and they said "you've missed your slot time - the next available is 40-50 mins from now". Our response was "ahh no i'm sorry we were given XXX slot on Clearance Delivery".... suckers!

You missed your slot time by 14 minutes because of your own problems, then you call ATC suckers? Please explain?

Do they not realise they have 2 runways??
Next time you look at your Jepps, please note whilst there are two runways, they cross. You could have ten runways all crossing in the middle; are you suggesting the departure rate would be much better than only one runway?

Also what's with the new rule where you cannot call up for a slot until 30 mins before??
That's to stop selfish buggers calling up two hours before for a slot. If you have a better system, then send it along to Wally. Maybe we should have an "out of the hat" system?

Just one more thing you have to choreograph on a turnaround
Pull up on blocks, do the parking checklist and get the effo to ask for a taxi slot. Surely that isn't too hard?

Make the place a f***ing CTAF and be done with it.
Go for it. :cool:

Finally and at last, taxiway Alpha through to Delta! Excellent! :ok: :ok: :D

[Chadzat]

Finally and at last, taxiway Alpha through to Delta! Excellent!

Oh and Bloggs, it'd be nice if you guys stopped stealing our bays too! :ok:

Are they building the Oswals new place over between gates 8-11 or something!?

[Capn Bloggs]

it'd be nice if you guys stopped stealing our bays too!

We're keeping them warm for when we kick you riff-raff over to the other side and move in for good! :E

"Has anybody seen my Fokker?" "Yeh, wayyyy over there". :}

Are they building the Oswals new place over between gates 8-11 or something!?
Some serious concrete blocks free to a good home! :D

[Hoofharted]

What a bunch of parochial country bumpkins. 28 minutes - what a pussy!

Over this end of town we get 3 hour delays and think nothing of it. Next time you call up after 3 hours on the bay with the door shut and the aero-bridge (do you know what they are?) retracted and get "waaaaaaaah deray undetermin" then you can have a whinge.

Backarsed country folk - sooooooweeeeee (is that banjos I can hear?) :}:ok::}

[Monopole]

The problem with being unable to request a slot time outside of 30 mins is that if you stick to the current system, when you do request a taxi slot the "next availbale slot" is alway 20 to 30 mins after schedule :ugh::ugh:.

I have found ATC are usually fairly accomodating when requesting an early push back. Also been nastily chipped too :{:{:{

Are they building the Oswals new place over between gates 8-11 or something!? I dont think Oswal is having anything being built at the moment. Nice Bentley for sale too. Going cheap with an expected price tag of only $217,000 :ok:

[missy]

CDM with slot compliance will fix it.

[Capn Bloggs]

Missy,
CDM with slot compliance will fix it.
I'm not sure about that. My understanding is that CDM only applies to inbound traffic, so unless crews delay their departure out of Perth to make good their later departure times from the outports, the current situation will remain. Delaying departures outbound just won't happen.

[max1]

Bloggs,
CDM will involve absobing delays on the ground at your outbound port. Your company will also have input into which flights they would prefer to delay.
Have a google on Metron Harmony
From an ATC perspective I'm hoping for some common sense. The PMQ-SY jet flight departs with a 37 minute flight time to enter the hold with 55 minute delay after 18 minutes of actual flying time. Waste of the pilots, passengers and airlines time.

[Capn Bloggs]

Max,
From an ATC perspective I'm hoping for some common sense. The PMQ-SY jet flight departs with a 37 minute flight time to enter the hold with 55 minute delay after 18 minutes of actual flying time.
That is crazy. Wouldn't happen over here. You get a slot time before takeoff coming inbound and it's honoured.

Re Metron, agreed it will fix the inbound holding. Can't wait to be growled-at by Broooome tower "You're not compliant, Bloggs!". Chadzat though is complaining about the taxi slot system trying to get away from Perth.

[Keg]

Do they not realise they have 2 runways??


Yes but only a finite amount of non-radar airspace with a bunch of aircraft all launching into it and heading mostly in the same direction. I've no doubt that PH TWR can launch the aircraft much more quickly than they do.

As for 28 minutes from start up to airborne. Pfft. Obviously got the 'short wait'.

[FOD-Boss]

All it has taken is a 'pothole' in RW06/24 to cause HUGE disruption on the busiest day of the week. This pavement damage occurred yesterday early afternoon from what i have been told. Why could this not have been fixed overnight? No work was being done before the 'big rush' at 6 am this morning!

A refueller mate of mine over there reckons that it was repaired overnight that night, between about 1am and 4am, after the east coast redeye rush and majority of the internationals had been and gone. Unfortunately for you guys, if the repair was made with asphalt, this material typically requires some curing time before it can be safely returned to normal service and so I imagine this would have been the reason you all needed to use the long runway.

[flightfocus]

.......is a disgrace.

All it has taken is a 'pothole' in RW06/24 to cause HUGE disruption on the busiest day of the week. This pavement damage occurred yesterday early afternoon from what i have been told. Why could this not have been fixed overnight? No work was being done before the 'big rush' at 6 am this morning!


You wait until the real works start in a few weeks. Once they finish finally fixing Twy W, you are going to loose Rwy06/24 for a few weeks while the other catch up works take place.

By now you should have noticed the fence around the old Twr signalling its imminent demise. :eek:

By the way if anyone has a better idea to manage to manage the taxi slot times lets hear it!!

[airdualbleedfault]

This is Perth WA we are talking about right ?

With the delays, slot times etc people are talking about you would think it was JFK, PEK or something more like a real airport ;)

[Icarus2001]

By the way if anyone has a better idea to manage to manage the taxi slot times lets hear it! A good start would be to use runway 24 for departures. I know, noise abatement. Well design a SID that says at 500' you make a max rate, min speed climbing right turn.

Second. Slots appear useless if you still have a 28 minute delay. Would be easier to call ready to start and work from there. It cannot be a worse outcome than what happens at present.

[neville_nobody]

Or just build a decent airport with a paraellel runway.

[JetRacer]

But that would take money Neville :ugh: :rolleyes:

I remember when at Adelaide airport you walked across the tarmac, and that was 2001!

How things change, this is the latest I see from Australian Aviation:
Adelaide launches airport building program | Australian Aviation Magazine (http://australianaviation.com.au/2011/02/adelaide-launches-airport-building-program/).

Pity the owners of Perth airport cant spend some money on a new runway, but then at least a new terminal with new shops and people stuck in them because of delays makes more money for Westralia Airport Corporation I guess.:{

[neville_nobody]

It was discussed on here a while ago but don't forget that the Perth master plan is predicting growth over the next 10 years with no change in infrastructure. If the airport is at capacity now, who knows how long you will be waiting for in 10 years time.

I think the only good thing a Carbon Tax might do for aviation is put some pressure on the government to actually build some decent aviation infrastructure and services. It will no longer be acceptable to sit in traffic induced holding patterns or be number 28 for takeoff if your fuel burn is being taxed into oblivion.

[flyingfox]

.... meanwhile, over at the mining terminals, the vehicle traffic trying to leave the airport can back up for 800 meters (and around 15 minutes) for want of a simple traffic roundabout. Imagine the joy this causes taxi drivers (amongst others) to be imprisoned this way at the peak hours of their business! WAC don't give a stuff!! Meanwhile they continue building their third rate and inconveniently located GA terminal and hope the customers will wait meekly in traffic jams all over the airport. Their idea of infrastructure is 1000 hectares of remote and expensive parking bays and a bus to the terminal for only the most farthest flung of these. Their long term planning isn't about aviation. It's about getting everyone off that beautiful real estate at the present domestic terminal. Whoopee! ...money for nothing and your chicks for free....

[iskyfly]

Slightly off topic;

I recently went back to Perth after 20+ years of being overseas. I remember when taking trips from Perth as a kid there was a an outdoor area, between the terminal and the aircraft, where black swans use to be. What happened to that? Which terminal was that in? At the time I only remember there being one terminal...

Thanks!

[FGD135]

How's the parallel runway coming along?

Is it going ahead, or have WAC decided they are more interested in the revenue that would flow from the commercial utilisation of the land than the expense that would flow from building the third runway?

[flightfocus]

A good start would be to use runway 24 for departures. I know, noise abatement. Well design a SID that says at 500' you make a max rate, min speed climbing right turn.

Icarus2001, your logic and thinking are good - sadly with the politicisation of aviation in this country it would be almost impossible to get through the NIMBY noise nazis'. Remember the vocal minority that were at it when WARP was introduced?

Associated with that a federal politician is STILL lobbying to get the GURAK/KEELS etc SIDS of Rwy 03 changed so it does not fly over all the McMansions out the the north west. :mad:

As an aside there are still problems with the crossing runway departures. On 03/06 any non standard departure off 03 ie: MEMUP,NSM etc has to be separated by the tower with normal 06 departures. You also have a big issue with the bucket load of RAVONS that all want to go at the same time :ugh:

You all should know that even among the turboprops you have faster following ie: Bras behind a Dash 8 :E They all maintain track until about 10nm upwind. Then you throw in a PA31 and if he can't be vectored it does get a bit clogged up. These need to be spaced at departure time, hence you get the "back track line up" even though you requested the H intersection.

But thankfully there is plenty of space to park the car. And once WAC is done eradicating those pesky trees we should not have any trouble with birds either :{

However on a serious note, I think all the unhappy delayed pilots should put pressure on your employers to bring pressure to bear on WAC. They are only getting away with this because industry is letting them. :sad:

[Van Gough]

I recently went back to Perth after 20+ years of being overseas. I remember when taking trips from Perth as a kid there was a an outdoor area, between the terminal and the aircraft, where black swans use to be. What happened to that? Which terminal was that in? At the time I only remember there being one terminal...

Thanks!

That would have been the domestic terminal. The swans where somewhere round about the bit that now joins Virgin etc to Qantas near where the cafe is? Somewhere in that region anyway...:ok:

[Monopole]

It took two years to build the link road. I wont be holding my breath for a new runway.

As for Terninal WA :confused::confused::confused::confused::confused::confused:

Fancy building a new apron area, only to have to rip it all back up again because someone forgot to lay the underground fuel lines first.

[Capn Bloggs]

http://i521.photobucket.com/albums/w334/capnbloggs/swans.gif http://i521.photobucket.com/albums/w334/capnbloggs/oldterminal.gif

Swans somewhere near the cross:

http://i521.photobucket.com/albums/w334/capnbloggs/terminalnow.gif

[halfforwardflank]

...and where are all the recently announced Qantas 747/A330 domestic flights going to park? Only bays 12, 13, 14 are suitable. And you thought there were delays getting on to the bays now! Hope all the taxiway works are finished before they start.

[topend3]

all the recently announced Qantas 747/A330 domestic flights going to park

6 per week 747 only...

[flightfocus]

6 per week 747 only...

Yes between YPPH & YSSY, but they are also upgrading the YBBN service to an A330 in addition to the existing A330 services between YMML & YSSY.

Don't forget that Virgin "whatever we are going to be called" are introducing A330 services between YMML & YSSY as well. :eek: Plus they have already announced they are getting additional aircraft over and above the first 2.

halfforwardflank is correct, delays aplenty coming up - for both taxiing and bays. Bring a good book and pretend your at a big international airport. :8

Qantas Perth Flights With Skybed (http://www.theage.com.au/travel/travel-news/qantas-puts-747-jumbos-on-domestic-route-20110216-1aweh.html)

[westausatc]

Perth is hamstrung by two organisations - the RAAF and WAC, with a bit of noise abatement NIMBY-ism thrown in. Fix one of them and life will be better but if you can fix them all, Perth will be able to work like a real airport.

While PEA takes up the useful 50-odd degree arc to the north of the airport, departure and arrival routes will be congested through the arc from about 030 to 130 (from memory - it's been over six months now!) except for the GURAK dep. Obviously, the more congested you make airspace, the harder it is to get the same amount of traffic through.

From my experience, believe it or not, it is not the procedural sectors that limit the departure rate - all that happens is aircraft get shafted for levels but not for departure timing. It is that departures have to hand off an acceptable situation to West Radar (the first ML Centre dudes).Departures can use 3nm between paints, West Radar needs 5nm, so departures is happy to hand off 4-5nm with no closing but there is NO way any West Radar controller will accept that. I was personally happy with 7-8nm and opening but that still means that departures needs to get an extra few miles (normally through speed control) before handing off. Having to get this extra space means that departures can't achieve the same through-put as in the perfect situation but the only remedy for that is for the inner enroute sector to get approval to use 3nm radar separation. This will not happen in any of our lifetimes. If I am wrong, I will fly to Paris and eat a croissant! :ok:

WAC could come to the party by building a parallel runway, which would help but it's not the silver bullet. Yes, it would help hugely with arrival rates (provided it is done properly) but there would be only a small improvement with departure rates. Jet on a GURAK followed by prop on RAVON - jet's airborne and 6000ft away, launch the prop. Parallel runways will be of only minor help here - the extra time spent taxiing in the prop will outweigh the time 'saved.' It will help when the situation is reversed but then I have also seen some nice work by departures controllers to alleviate this problem in the morning for the tower controller. When the fleet of B71's and F100's generally get away before a prop is fired up, this may have saved 5-8 minutes on the 28 minute delay. WAC is not going to care about this - they won't be able to charge enough extra to make the investment worthwhile on this end of the flight.

The noise complainers are a pain because they stop R24 departures. But whether this would save a huge amount, I am not sure. R24 would only be useful (for saving time) for GURAK and BURGU departures - anything else would probably require cross-overs with the other departing traffic - and I am not sure how many aircraft for those SIDs would use R24 on a daily basis.

While the airspace I work now is far more complex than what I worked in Oz, I am glad that I don't have to put up with the mess that Perth is and it is only going to get worse!

[halfforwardflank]

SYD - PER 6 x 747's plus 5 x A330's. I am not sure if these are all additional flights or just added capacity.

MEL - PER 3 additional A330's

BNE - PER 7 additional A330's plus upgrading 6 round trips to wide body (767?)

[topend3]

Qantas announces fleet expansion, boosts Network | Australian Aviation Magazine (http://australianaviation.com.au/2011/02/qantas-announces-fleet-expansion-boosts-network/)

more F100s and 717s to come

[Capn Bloggs]

Bloody Hell! The world's going mad! :eek:

There'll soon be F@kkers in your 12, 3, 6 and 9 o'clock! :}

Maybe the double-story parks WAC is talking about is for the aeroplanes.

[iskyfly]

Thank you Van Gough and Capn Bloggs!

Cheers!

[Nautilus Blue]

the inner enroute sector to get approval to use 3nm radar separation

westausatc - I recently suggested just that to a manager who in the distant past held a rating on the airspace in question. I received a confused look and "why would you want that?" :ugh:

A parallell rwy not being a solution to departure congestion has been pointed out on here before, but people won't believe it. Even if it was, why would WAC spend money on something that won't earn them an extra cent? An article someone on here linked to recently about their ten year expansion plan stated explicitly that no runway/taxiway upgrades were going to happen. The RAAF aren't going to pack up and move either. Basically, between the taxiway and cruise level, things are as good now as they are ever going to be, and probably going to get worse. The airlines have two choices, put up with it or stop flying to/from Perth. As long as they make money, they will put up with it.

[Dick N. Cider]

The last advice I had on the parallel runway reserve was that industrial property developers have been granted 20 year leases. If you want the extra runway give 20 years notice to regain access to the land and then you can commence works!

DNC

[Quokka]

westausatc - I recently suggested just that to a manager who in the distant past held a rating on the airspace in question. I received a confused look and "why would you want that?"

When TAAATS was first commissioned, there was a reference in MATS that clearly stated that the RADAR separation standard on a TAAATS display within 100NM was 3NM. The only limitation being the range-scale on the display during the application of the separation standard. Melbourne Centre Local Instructions stated otherwise and denied us the application of what would have been a distinctly advantageous improvement in our ability to provide a service within 100NM of Perth with the introduction of TAAATS.

The reference in MATS was quickly removed in a subsequent amendment... and quickly forgotten.

At that time we asked the Melbourne techs whether it was true that the Eurocat processing was accurate enough to allow us to apply a 3NM separation standard on a TAAATS display within 100NM and they said "yes".

I then asked JH why the reference in MATS had been removed and he said:

"Because we don't trust En-route controllers to apply a 3NM separation standard".

Unless something has changed, it would seem that there is no technical reason why a 3NM separation standard could not be applied within 100NM on the appropriate range-scale. Which leaves only one problem... someone has to sign-off on it... which means... take responsibility for it.

Which is why we won't be taking a seat in Le Grenier à Pain, Montmarte for some time.

[westausatc]

Quokka, actually there was this lovely little cafe just off Rue de Louvre that served up a very nice croissant that I would head back to. Sadly, I do agree!

As to the MATS reference, I remember it as it was only available to TCU within 100nm of MSSR sensor (KMD fulfilled this requirement I think). Since we obviously were not in a TCU, we couldn't use it.

To make the inner sector part of the TCU would cost an absolute fortune. Firstly, they would have to pay for 5-ish controllers to go over to Perth and train as approach plus train the other approach controllers on the new part of the TCU - or just move about 10-12 controllers to PH and set it up as a stand alone part of the TCU. With West Radar staffing in the state it is (precarious is a nice description), there is nowhere for those people to come from for that period. So the removals allowances and lost time to training would be thousands upon thousands of dollars - and this is an organisation that will fight over a few bucks!

Then, AsA would have to spend a bit of money extending the TCU so they could fit a fifth console in the TCU room, or move it to another part of the old approach complex - we know you guys have enough room there! Either of these options is going to cost a fair swag of money, a big no-no to AsA management.

So, although there have been empire building plans from some (the old-old-old-old-old manager comes to mind), it will never happen. As a result, West Radar will still need to have departures extend each departure out a little bit to go from around 4nm separation to over 7nm for handoff. Delays will continue as before.

NB, that wouldn't happen to be the same manager who makes a thuka-thuka-thuka-thuka noise while he is supervising? Sorry, was I too noisy then? :p

And totally agree that things are as good as they are going to be. Only having a short arc to get all the departures out of (while leaving space for arrivals to go in!) means that everything gets squeezed and that stone has just bled its last drop.

[neville_nobody]

So what's the solution then?

Any chance of building a new airport somewhere? They cannot seriously consider doing nothing given that they predict growth in the sector and now QF are going to base an extra 10 aircraft in Perth.....

The rest of the world seems to build decent aviation infrastructure why doesn't Australia?

[flightfocus]

The rest of the world seems to build decent aviation infrastructure why doesn't Australia?
:eek:

Um, this is not a comprehensive list but the following come to mind:

Apathy, short sighted management, aforementioned empire building, bonus culture, lack of investment, lack of vision, lack of balls, over inflated perception of our own importance, isolation, lame government landlords (of leased airports) - and these are the PG rated ones. :mad:

You only have to travel to any of our regional neighbours - Hong Kong, Singapore, Malaysia, hell even Bangkok now - to realise that almost all Australian airports are about 10 - 20 years behind the minimum standard.

Unfortunately Perth is 10 - 20 years behind the best Australian airports!! :{

I am finding it harder to tell the difference between the Perth "International" and Denpasar terminals. Oh, yeah now I remember, Denpasar is cheaper, more modern and easier to negotiate :}

[Nautilus Blue]

westausatc - yes, thats the one. Its a sad state of affairs when you say "a manager who was once rated on the airspace they manage", and you have a choice of one.

Reference staffing, how many crews who fly into PH realise that the arrival rate is often set below what the airport can handle because of staffing shortages? Last Wed afternoon for example instead of 6 controllers to run the 5 radar sectors around PH, only 4 were available, 1 of which was rated on only 1 sector, the second only on 2. Extensive wx diversions were predicted. Solution, reduce arrival rate all afternoon (no NOTAM obviously), make controllers do 3.5+ hours on the console without even a toilet break, and no one has to know!

The 'TCU only' thing as far as I can tell is/was an anachronism, stemming from the old TAR spinning faster than the old RSR and the old green screen updating faster, 5 seconds verses 12. Oh, and TCU controllers being supermen, in their minds anyway :p.

As for moving the inner sector to PH, I never did see an official announcement cancelling PH APP's move to Melbourne centre. I just assumed that once PEA APP moved in, it was cancelled. Moving sectors to PH would be a 180 degree change in policy, umm which happens often now that I think about it.

Back to Ph RWY's though, the quickest/cheapest improvement I can see would be to extend the northern end of 06/24 to allow SIMOPS for A320/B737/B717 and below. Even then, looking at a map I suspect there would be some engineering issues with the creek, and undoubtedly even more issued with various 'anti-' groups.

It all comes down to money. European and Asian airports are to an extent competing with each other for business. If you were a shareholder in WAC, and they announced an expensive upgrade of the runways and taxiways on the grounds that the airport will work better, but won't make any more money, would you support it?

[dodgybrothers]

.....and hence the reason why airports should never be private assets, needed works don't create additional revenue but they make it run smoother.

[Roger Sir]

Reference staffing, how many crews who fly into PH realise that the arrival rate is often set below what the airport can handle because of staffing shortages?


Get with the times! Zer is no staffing shortage! Ze dumkoff kontrollers vont dayz off! Zis must stop. 3.5 hours at the console? Did anybody wet themselves? If not ve must try for 4 hours next time...:ugh:

[Nautilus Blue]

I was tempted to but a box of huggies with "Short Break Procedure" written on it on the ALM console, along with a jack-in-the-box labeled "ALM UFB", but after my last telling off I chickened out.

[Icarus2001]

and hence the reason why airports should never be private assets, needed works don't create additional revenue but they make it run smoother.

Exactly right. If they must be private then the rules of engagement need to be water tight.

It becomes cost shifting. Instead of WAC spending on airport infrastructure to ease congestion and delays, the aircraft operators pay for it with fuel, this in turn is paid for by the passengers, who are none the wiser because our media is unable to explain a complex argument to the public at large. They do simple really well...boat people bad...Mr Abbott bad...Kylie good.

[Quokka]

The 'TCU only' thing as far as I can tell is/was an anachronism, stemming from the old TAR spinning faster than the old RSR and the old green screen updating faster, 5 seconds verses 12. Oh, and TCU controllers being supermen, in their minds anyway.

True.

The Melbourne Tech's could think of no reason why West Radar could not apply a 3NM separation standard within 100NM. The reference to "TCU only" seemed to be nothing more than ATC politics and a demarcation. Something that we as a profession in Australia have only ourselves to blame.

Some years ago I flew into Marseilles up-the-front (courtesy of BA) and watched on TCAS an opposite-direction aircraft pass 5NM abeam us on descent. The crew told me that the separation standard was 3NM... everywhere.

If Area Controllers in France can apply a 3NM separation standard using similar equipment then why can't Area Controllers in Melbourne?

As for an additional console or two in the Perth TCU... it can be done.

Staffing issues can be solved and it could quite easily become a Feeder Sector for the TCU if not an Approach-Journeyman position. Perth Inners in TAAATS sat alongside Approach/Departures in the TCU during Consolidation. There is no reason why it couldn't happen again.

[Miles to go]

Why not litigate? Add up what it's costing your airline to sit around and wait over the course of a year then sue whoever necessary for failing their duty of care?

Traditionally an excellent method for enforcing change.

[flightfocus]

Add up what it's costing your airline to sit around and wait

I have often wondered the same thing. Heard a B767 crew recently tell ATC that they burn 600kg per side per hour at idle on the ground. He had been waiting for 40 mins by the time he got to the gate.

What about the A320's, B737's and A330's that regularly wait for a vacant bay. How much do they burn sitting at idle with a plane load of frustrated pax?

What is the P.A to the pax like?

"Ladies and gents, Captain 4 bars again. Unfortunately despite our best efforts to defy gravity and hurtle through the stratosphere at 80% the speed of sound, we are now stuck here in this tube because we have nowhere to park! Apparently our arrival is a surprise - AGAIN. So stay belted in, don't go to the loo, don' t move. We should have a gate within the hour - on average!!!!" :{

[Capn Bloggs]

Heard a B767 crew recently tell ATC that they burn 600kg per side per hour at idle on the ground
I assume that they can't shut one down whilst waiting, or taxiing onto a bridge on one is a bit iffy?

What about the A320's, B737's and A330's that regularly wait for a vacant bay. How much do they burn sitting at idle with a plane load of frustrated pax?

How much of this is caused by airport delays verses company delays? Capt 4 bars had better not have the boss in the back, as AJ may be unimpressed by the sledging being meted out by 4 bars to his employer.

[Quokka]

The Australian Financial Review page 3, 19th January 2011:

"A net 56% of mining, oil and gas firms expect to increase their workforce in the next three months"

Adrian Rollins
Economics Correspondent.


A significant increase in FIFO for Western Australia in 2011?

One could suggest that an increase in capacity on the ground at Perth and in Airspace Management would be the logical response.

However, there are two economies in Australia. The critical problem exists in one economy... the tier of government and Government Business Enterprise responsible for the solution resides in the other economy... a long, long, way away as they sip their lattes this morning over the Canberra Times and The Age.

[Capn Bloggs]

Geoff Thomas, aka Bbiggles, in The West today:
Residents living under Perth Airport flight paths will have to keep putting up with aircraft noise after the Federal Government rejected solutions including installing sound insulation in their homes.

A Senate inquiry into the effectiveness of Airservices Australia's handling of aircraft noise also recommended altering flight paths to share the noise with other suburbs and changing noise measurement to a more sensitive European system.

But the Gillard Government has decided that despite the inquiry's findings, Perth Airport is not noisy enough to warrant the measures.

About 220,000 people live in suburbs surrounding Perth Airport and more than 400 flights take off and land each day.

Passenger numbers are increasing about 10 per cent a year.

Steve Irons, the Federal member for Swan, yesterday challenged Federal Transport Minister Anthony Albanese to visit his eastern suburbs electorate.

"The noise is just as bad as his electorate in Sydney," Mr Irons said. "The Labor Government says it will not provide noise insulation to Perth residents on the grounds that ANEF (Australia Noise Exposure Forecast) contours show noise to be not that bad.

"I challenge the Minister to come to the electorate of Swan and sit down and listen to the noise in some local homes."

The ANEF system was developed in 1980.

"It has long been my view that ANEF should not be used as the standard noise indicator for planning purposes in Australia as it is outdated and underestimates real noise in the community." A noise insulation program has been completed in Sydney and Adelaide, with 4,730 homes and 106 other buildings near their airports insulated for $470 million.

A similar scheme in Perth would include about 2,000 homes and public buildings and cost about $250 million which would be paid for by a levy on air tickets.

"It would just cost $5 a ticket for five years," Mr Irons said.

"Everyone - industry, airport and government - need to be working together on this".

Perth Airport chief executive Brad Geatches said the airport was committed to working with community representatives, local government authorities, airlines, air traffic controllers and relevant government agencies to manage aircraft noise.

"We are working closely with Airservices Australia and the recently appointed Aircraft Noise Ombudsman to ensure that Perth residents are engaged in aircraft noise issues and that appropriate responses are put in place," Mr Geatches said.

I hope all you chaps are noise-abating to 3000ft...:cool:

[John Citizen]

I hope all you chaps are noise-abating to 3000ft

Which procedure are most pilots using ? NADP 1 or NADP 2 ?

[Chief Wiggam]

I hope all you chaps are noise-abating to 3000ft...
and mast-abating if there is a tall yacht in the creek...:E

[Capn Bloggs]

Which procedure are most pilots using ? NADP 1 or NADP 2 ?
Neither. In fact, I dunno what they are. I Don't have ICAO bla bla on my 'puter.

We use the AIP alternative. :ok:

[John Citizen]

What ICAO bla bla on the 'puter ? :confused:

We don't have that either :confused:

[Capn Bloggs]

Well in that case John what do you mean by NADP 1 or 2? I am aware that those terms are mentioned in AIP but I don't know what they mean. I assumed, since you asked us if we are using them, you actually knew what they meant.

[Continental-520]

Nah, I think we better have a aircraft noise levy for this. Paid by all annually except those affected by noise.

[Nautilus Blue]

Some interesting numbers in that article.
4,730 homes and 106 other buildings near their airports insulated for $470 million
$470 million on 4 836 homes/buildings is $97 000 each.
2,000 homes and public buildings and cost about $250 million
At $125 000 each.
Granted some of the other buildings would be schools, office blocks etc, but doesn't that seem a little high? Or is it a case of $5 000 worth of double glazing, $20 000 profit for 'installers' and $100 000 in 'admin costs'?

As a comparison, ASA revenue last year was $805 million.

[Capn Bloggs]

The end of an era... the old tower came down a few days ago and is now just a distant memory...

http://i521.photobucket.com/albums/w334/capnbloggs/2011-04-04OldPerthTowerdemolished.jpg

Bring on taxiway Alpha! :D

[Capn Bloggs]

Geoff Thomas (aka Biggles), in The West today:


Passengers to take buses to planes
Congestion at Perth Airport will force Qantas to start bussing domestic passengers to and from flights at peak times in an effort to eliminate inbound planes being held on taxiways for up to 30 minutes for a standard parking bay.

From next month, Qantas will use buses for at least four flights in the morning and the same number late in the evening because holding aircraft on taxiways is severely disrupting operations and irritating passengers.

Separately, Airservices Australia is introducing a new gate-to-gate air traffic control program that will monitor flights between Sydney and Perth over the entire route and slow them when congestion at Perth is expected.

The congestion at the domestic airport has forced Skywest Airlines and Alliance Airlines to bus passengers for some time but it is a first for Qantas. It is expected the bussing will be mainly for Boeing 717 to regional destinations such as Paraburdoo, Exmouth and Newrnan. The airline will bus passengers in increasing numbers until the new regional Terminal WA and domestic pier off the international terminal for Virgin Blue are completed in 2013.

Those terminals were delayed firstly by the global financial crisis and then by a radical change of requirements for Virgin Blue, which necessitated a redesign by Perth Airport to provide a dedicated pier off the international terminal with aerobridges.

Once the new terminals on the international side of the airport are completed Qantas will expand into Terminal 3, currently occupied by Virgin Blue, Skywest and Alliance.

Perth Airport yesterday issued tender documents to five building companies for TWA construction.

An airport spokesman said that tenders would close in late May with construction to commence within three months. TWA will have fully enclosed walkways which will eliminate the need for bussing by airlines. Perth Airport is also strengthening the tarmac around Qantas' domestic terminal so it can handle widebody aircraft such as A330s and 767s.

Next month, Qantas starts a double daily 747-400 service between Sydney and Perth, which marks a return of the Boeing 747 to domestic routes.

Passenger traffic at Perth was up 9.4 per cent for the eight months to February 28, and for the full year total passengers are expected to top 11.4 million.

[Chadzat]

Oh my.....what is this world coming to when QANTAS....QANTAS have to be 'inconvenienced'! Now I HAVE seen everything at Perth Airport!! :}

I think they could start with stopping those MD-95 thingy's using Bays 18-21 and they can go on remote bays! :ok:

[flyingfox]

Who wants to walk?? Moving footpaths or aerobridges I say!!

[Nautilus Blue]

Separately, Airservices Australia is introducing a new gate-to-gate air traffic control program that will monitor flights between Sydney and Perth over the entire route and slow them when congestion at Perth is expected.
I'm guessing this is journalistic mangling of the slot time system thats been in place for months? Gate-to-gate is ASA's favourite buzz phrase at the moment, sounds dynamic, proactive, paradigm altering and synergystic, just doesn't mean anything.

[Capn Bloggs]

I'm guessing this is journalistic mangling of the slot time system thats been in place for months?
Not really. The current CTMS PTL system only applies to aircraft departing within 800nm of Perth.

My understanding is that the new PTL system (Metron) will apply to all aircraft inbound to Perth. All aircraft departures will be "controlled" ie if you're trying to taxi early, you'll be told by ATC and suffer the consequences (eg enforced holding if you dick another aircraft around) if you decide to depart early.

That should reduce the airborne holding (and also reduce the cheating that is currently occurring).

I think they could start with stopping those MD-95 thingy's using Bays 18-21 and they can go on remote bays!
Now now, be nice! A few white rats in amoungst the riff raff raises the standard of the place! :E

[Continental-520]

That should reduce the airborne holding (and also reduce the cheating that is currently occurring).



That will be an interesting change, given that all those who try to comply with their PTLs get slowed down and all those that charge on in whenever they feel the urge (well outside their PTL, typically) experience far less delays.

Therefore, there becomes an incentive to 'cheat'!

Then, to rub a bit of salt in the wound, the same controller tells you to slow down by 40kts, then vectors you somewhere off the beaten track and once near an IAF says "Request MAX speed down final". :confused:

As if an extra 40kts over 5nm is going to make any measurable difference!!


520

[Nautilus Blue]

My understanding is that the new PTL system (Metron) will apply to all aircraft inbound to Perth. All aircraft departures will be "controlled" ie if you're trying to taxi early, you'll be told by ATC and suffer the consequences (eg enforced holding if you dick another aircraft around) if you decide to depart early.
Be interesting to see how that works. There is currently no mechanism for a controller to know what an aircraft's slot time is. I also doubt for example that the Singapore Ground controller will be telling aircraft they are taxiing early. Plus how do you know these things and we (ATC) don't!

The problem with shafting the cheats is that its much more work for us. (I know, boo-hoo, public servant whinging about having to work!) With extensive holding the arrivals sectors can be right on the edge. If we than have to hold some plonker for 45 minutes while others go through the pattern it could be enough to push it over. Many feel though that we should though, because we would only have to do it once or twice before the message got through.

As if an extra 40kts over 5nm is going to make any measurable difference!!
A 'speed up' is usually about who is behind you, if another aircraft is 4 miles behind and 40kts faster it makes all the difference in the world.

The thing to bear in mind with last minute changes is that the procedure relies on aircraft crossing the fixes on time pretty much to the second, which is beyond the capability of most of our traffic. If number one is 30 seconds late and number two is 30 seconds early, we have to intervene to maintain separation. I would never claim that we don't sometimes make a pigs ear of it though.

[sled_driver71]

Does anyone know: - when the PTL's are issued, have they taken into account single runway use (closing 21) or ILS operations?

From my experience the answer is NO!

PTL's are a waste of time. Since they have been introduced I have never, ever been able to meet one. Thats 100%. And my collegues are the same. It doesn't matter if we leave early or late, they always go out the window? So why bother?



PS to Perth ATC. Turboprops can maintain max speed to about 5nms! Jets can't! You work it out....:ugh:

[Nautilus Blue]

Does anyone know: - when the PTL's are issued, have they taken into account single runway use (closing 21) or ILS operations?
Credit us with some sense! The Perth Traffic Manager sets the arrival rate the night before based on the forecast. Visual and both RWYs is 24/hour down to about 15 for bad wx and/or staffing issues.

[Servo]

Sled Driver, thats because jets tend to have a higher max speed.........:ugh:

10 miles is my boundary, it can be done, is uncomfortable and noisy for pax and higher workload, so not really worth it.

What gets my goat is being placed behind the F50 that is grounding 90 knots in strong winds, when we could have had max speed in punch right into it.

Also appears to be favouritism with the local operators and especially QF.

Is it true ATC gets ID travel with QF? It would appear so.............

[sled_driver71]

"thats because jets tend to have a higher max speed........."

Really? I never knew. I thought all planes flew at the same speed...:ugh:
I should probably read up on that!

NB

Can you explain then why last week we had a PTL of 1400 when the original eta was 1315. Wx CAVOK and minimal traffic and both runways in use? Was it just a typo? We 'cheated' and departed accordingly to meet 'our' schedule and got direct tracking. To me the issuing of the PTL makes no sense because no-one adheres to them. Not ATC and not the pilots.

[Roger Sir]

Is it true ATC gets ID travel with QF? It would appear so.............


If only!

Whilst i don`t work Perth traffic i can honestly say there is no favouritism where i practice my trade. Whatever is the easiest and most efficient for ALL is what happens day in , day out. Maestro is not a perfect tool by a long shot and asks for interesting sequences but a quick chat with the flow and a workable solution is generally available.

Separately, Airservices Australia is introducing a new gate-to-gate air traffic control program that will monitor flights between Sydney and Perth over the entire route and slow them when congestion at Perth is expected.


Ah yes. This one`s been sighted in glossy publications for a few years now but what does it mean to the average controller? Believe me, we have that many amendments to the various documents we are expected to be familiar with. It may have slipped through the net but i`m pretty sure to those of us at the coal face it`s quietly beavering away in the background adding to the other "efficiencies" emanating from YSCB. Did somebody say "ALOFT"? :ugh:

[Servo]

Roger Sir,

Sydney and Melbourne ground seem to be the worst culprits. "Hold short of XXX and pass behind or follow as number two" to the Qantas that is 100's of meters away.

Also had a few during flight, vectors, slow downs only to see QF blasting off in front. Smacks of favouritism to me.

Get it ALL the time. Maybe they dont like the sound of my voice :p

[le Pingouin]

Well maybe you should fly something a bit faster! :}

Only half joking. The sequence is based on untouched landing times. Untouched the other aircraft might be beating you by a minute or two because they're cruising M.02 faster. Throw in a couple of aircraft coming from other directions (that you know nothing about) that happen to have untouched landing times in between you & the QF & voila! You need to lose time to fit them in ahead of you.

[Capn Bloggs]

Can you explain then why last week we had a PTL of 1400 when the original eta was 1315. Wx CAVOK and minimal traffic and both runways in use? Was it just a typo? We 'cheated' and departed accordingly to meet 'our' schedule and got direct tracking.
Assuming you're talking about Perth, cheating (in this case) isn't required. PTL compliance is not required outside the Traffic Holding times.

To me the issuing of the PTL makes no sense because no-one adheres to them. Not ATC and not the pilots.
How is ATC supposed to "adhere to them"? As mentioned above, with the advent of Metron, early aircraft will be held if they get in the way of a compliant aircraft, and so they should.

[Nautilus Blue]

Servo - see Confirmation bias (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias) :p You will also follow Qantas aircraft more often because there are more Qantas aircraft.


sled_driver71 - I assume you are talking PH local time? Going from memory, 21/03 was closed last week and 1315 is a relatively busy part of most weekdays. For arguments sake take an arrival rate of 20/hour, or 3 minutes between arrivals. So your delay, 45 minutes, equals 15 slots, Which means in the hour prior to your arrival there were 15 more arrivals scheduled than slots available, or a demand of 35 arrivals an hour. A demand of 35/hour is nothing special, peak is over 40 I think.

As for what happened, put yourself in our shoes. 15 - 20 aircraft converging on PH, roughly in the right order. Except number 15 is at the front, 45 minutes early. Now we have two options. One, hold you for 45 minutes, and have you restrict descent and climb for everyone else. Two, make you number one and give you track shortening, and simply add 3 minutes to everyone else's time. Workload management I'm afraid. However you are correct, we should have held you.

Lastly, and no crew ever believes this, you cannot judge traffic levels on one sector by the amount of talking on frequency, and there are more than one feeding any airport. I once held the only aircraft on frequency for 14 minutes, because the poor soul next to me was holding 12.

[sled_driver71]

Nope I was talking UTC, hence the query?

[Nautilus Blue]

At least one day last week slot times were extended past the usual time. PH was on 24 only and ILS approaches. CTMS was run at an arrival rate of 18(?), which meant the slot times went past the usual cutoff. Late in the evening the wx improved and we went to visual approaches which meant the sequence could be closed up. The rest still applies though.

edited to add : There should be a NOTAM issued extending the holding/slot time period when that happens.

[Continental-520]

Some good info here from both sides of the fence, but it does beg the question, why the hell are we using this system when:

a) there is no way for the controllers to easily know/incorporate each aircraft PTL into the job

b) The system is designed outside most aircraft capability in that it requires 'to the second' accuracy, and creates a '30 second early/late' type error

c) it all boils down to workload management on the day/time anyway!

Nautilus Blue, if 40 kt faster will keep spacing between me and the one behind, why would the same controller slow me down 10nm earlier when the preceding traffic is faster?

I realise it is entirely circumstancial, but just trying to get my head around the system. :ok:

520

[willadvise]

The PTL system is a long way from perfect. I relies on voluntary compliance with the PTL to reduce holding during the peak times. Most operators have figured that the PTL is not enforced so they just depart anyway. Some have done the right thing and delayed their departure for 40 mins only to cop another 30min delay airborne are are not happy about it so next time they just depart and take a chance. It has had some good results in reducing overall holding and workload times. No one wants to go back to the bad old days of 30mins+ holding every Tues,Wed,Thur but as said above it relies on voluntary compliance with PTLs.

ATC is not an exact science. Every aircraft is flown slightly differently and are impossible to predict accurately down to the second on every day. Everyone has a different idea on how they will meet there feeder fix time. Some will continue at planned cruise speed, reduce to 210 on descent then increase to 250 crossing the FF. Some will reduce speed in the cruise and descend at profile speed some will do a mixture of both. Hence the problems that are encountered with the slow down/ speed up instructions. We are acutely aware that you hate this and try to avoid it at all cost but somedays shi!ts are trumps and that the only way to get you down. The only other solution is to vector you for long finals like they do in the US and apply speed control to achieve the sequence. This is probably the most effecient way of maximising runway usage but it increases fuel burn as it is not the most effecient way for aircraft to lose time.

This thread has amused me a little as we have the turbo driver telling us they can maintain maximum to 5nm so they should be no1 followed by the jet driver complaining about a turbo being put infront of them and they could have burnt them off in descent so they should be no1. The reality is that some days you are the statue and somedays you are the pigeon.

Servo You suggest they may be favourtism for the local operators. I can assure you there is no favouritism but occasionally the locals might get something. Because they are locals, they are familar with the procedures/airspace/configurations etc and we feel that we can rely on them not to stuff it up because of this.

The upshot of all this is.. you must complain/submit ASIR (not to the controller on air, they can't do anything) if you have complied with your PTL and cop a significant airborne delay. The only way things change is if industry complain then something might get done.

[Capn Bloggs]

a) there is no way for the controllers to easily know/incorporate each aircraft PTL into the job

Every aircraft arriving during the holding period (after departure from inside 800nm ;)) is required to obtain a PTL beforehand. So every aircraft is known by the system. Further, they are supposed to hit it within 10 minutes. Obviously there's going to be a bit of shuffling but, unless pilots are butting in, there shouldn't be too much holding because there will be a slot for each aircraft.

b) The system is designed outside most aircraft capability in that it requires 'to the second' accuracy, and creates a '30 second early/late' type error
True, but that is what speed control is for. FMS aircraft should be able to hit the FF time within a few seconds (assuming "the" time is when the minute changes over). For non-FMS types the job is a bit harder.

The FFs are far enough away to allow speed control to generate a couple of miles separation, either increased or decreased.

From where I sit, the system works pretty well. I don't get held nearly as much as before. Everybody has to do the right thing though.

[Nautilus Blue]

It is good to have these debates, its really the only chance we gave to talk to crews. Its hard not to get spiky and defensive though :O. I guess I've confused the issue by discussing the feeder fix time, which is different to CTMS/PTL. CTMS is s strategic device to match demand to availability using ground delays, whereas FF are a tactical tool to achieve sequencing.

Continental-520 - the short answer is its better than doing nothing, and it solves more problems than it makes.
Originally Posted by Continental520
a) there is no way for the controllers to easily know/incorporate each aircraft PTL into the job
Every aircraft arriving during the holding period (after departure from inside 800nm ) is required to obtain a PTL beforehand. So every aircraft is known by the system.
The 'system' in this case is an excel spreadsheet on a PC in CB, not connected to TAATS in any way. To be honest I don't think it occurred to any of us that monitoring compliance was going to be necessary. (Also, the way I read the NOTAM, its ALL scheduled ops, and non-sched depatring within 800nm.)

b) The system is designed outside most aircraft capability in that it requires 'to the second' accuracy, and creates a '30 second early/late' type error
Thats a FF issue rather than PTL, my fault. The one specific case of two aircraft in trail adjusting their own speed is less efficient and safe than us assigning speeds and/or vectoring. It does explain why sometimes you will get a FF, and then a vector/speed at late notice. Also bear in mind that the people designing and pushing to implement these procedures don't work traffic and don't use them, but that our problem not yours.

if 40 kt faster will keep spacing between me and the one behind, why would the same controller slow me down 10nm earlier when the preceding traffic is faster?
Aircraft in trail on descent at the same speed will, overall, close up. Speed reduction isn't linear though, especially with different profiles eg Airbus vs Boeing, or domestic medium vs intl heavy. You can watch the speeds swing between some closing, some opening, some closing, lots of closing, oops! Now consider a chain of 5 or 6 aircraft doing the same. By slowing you down the controller may have solved one problem and made another, thus requiring an increase later.
Alternatively, they may have just made an error. Monday lunchtime a 717 was given a FF/250kts - cancel FF - max speed cancel speed below 10 - reduce to 230kts, while a turboprop received hold- cancel hold turn inboud now profile speed - orbit -FF/220kts. Not even I an going to try to defend that!

willadvise - (cough)fokker conspiracy(cough) ;)

Edited to add : two interesting quotes from the airport master plan,

Annual aircraft movements are forecast to increase from 107,000 movements in 2008 to 170,000 movements in 2029.
It is considered unlikely that any of the runway developments will be required during the 20 year planning period of this Master Plan 2009.
:ugh:

[flightfocus]

You think that PH airport is having trouble coping, then have a read of this:

33 000 workers needed in WA by next year | Australian Mining (http://www.miningaustralia.com.au/news/33-000-workers-needed-in-wa-by-next-year)

I particularly like this bit:

As many as 90 per cent of the workforce will be employed on fly-in., fly-out contracts, which is sure to further add to the already hot debate about FIFO work.

WAC needs some pressure from government. Barnett should be riding them like a mule! They are now a major restriction on economic activity and potential revenue in the west.

The great T.W.A debacle has not even begun to be built yet and it is already looking inadequate. :ugh:

[Capn Bloggs]

To be honest I don't think it occurred to any of us that monitoring compliance was going to be necessary.
You don't know pilots very well do you? :ouch: :}

[Quokka]

Barnett should be riding them like a mule! They are now a major restriction on economic activity and potential revenue in the west.

How's this for an idea...


Make RAAF Pearce a Joint-User airfield.
Invite only the FIFO operators to the party, by contract, Monday to Friday between 1800H - 0800H and weekends only.
Call the civil side Muchea Airport.
Install a bucket-load of air-conditioned de-mountables on the Neaves Rd side of the runways.
Grade a sealed, fenced, road connecting the de-mountables with Neaves Rd.
Run an express coach service between the de-mountables and Joondalup Railway Station.


The Boys & Girls-in-Blue will choke on their beers... but... if you give it some thought...

How many FIFO flights in the morning departure burst are off the ground and clear of the Restricted Areas before the Boys & Girls-in-Blue have started work?

How many FIFO flights return from the mines after the Boys & Girls-in-Blue are comfortably in the Mess?

A lot cheaper than trying to build a new runway, buildings, services and access at Perth Airport... if you can bully WAC into achieving it all by next year... and... do you really think they can?

[captwawa]

Most operators have figured that the PTL is not enforced so they just depart anyway. Some have done the right thing and delayed their departure for 40 mins only to cop another 30min delay airborne are are not happy about it so next time they just depart and take a chance.
Exactly why the system will never work in its current form.

Just everyone remember, especially as it's going to get much much worse that the situation is neither the ATCer nor the Pilots' fault. No one is Right and no one is Wrong.

The blame sits squarely at the government for privatising the airport and allowing Pearce to exist this side of Learmonth; WAC for being grossly incompetent and near sighted and Airnoservices for being.....well.....all of the above.

The economy and state will suffer but those responsible will be long gone!

This is not going to change until someone starts loosing a lot of money.

Until then, we just have to show understanding on both sides.

[Nautilus Blue]

You don't know pilots very well do you?
Just the one (well, ex-pilot), and not as well as I would have liked :{ but thats another story.

[runesta]

This is Perth WA we are talking about right ?

yep, first world city, third world efficiency

[sleeve of wizard]

With all the mixed traffic into Perth, with all the varying speeds it amazed me that a common speed requirement has not been implemented ie 160kts to 4 dme. (don't tell me it can't be done, it works well in the UK, Europe and the USofA.)

[Capn Bloggs]

it amazed me that a common speed requirement has not been implemented ie 160kts to 4 dme.
It's coming. :ok:

[flyingfox]

How about every operator sends invoices for any extra fuel used, airframe hours wasted in holding or vectored track miles to WAC and then they can decide on the economics of an extra runway. At present the aircraft operators are bearing the cost of Perth Airports innefficiencies. The airport owner gets off scot free and still charges for it's so called services. The costs should go to the organisation causing the problem.

[willadvise]

I am interested in what you all tell your passengers when you cop one of these delays. Do you blame it on ATC or do you explain to them the reason for the delay is that demand for landing (or taxy) slots exceeds the supply and there is nothing that ATC/Qantas/Skywest/Skippers/Virgin etc can do about it. The only way it will improve is the construction of another runway? For those operating FIFO do you tell Fortescue/BHP/Woodside etc that the reason why there staff are 30mins late is because there is not enough capacity or do you blame it on ATC.

If not, then start doing so because the only way it is going to change is if the public and the mining companies which pays all our bills start making noise about it.

[Mr. Hat]

Direct China-to-Perth flights to lift travel, tourism | Perth Now (http://www.perthnow.com.au/business/direct-china-to-perth-flights-to-lift-travel-tourism/story-e6frg2qc-1226040158821)

Enjoy Perth ATC I get a good laugh out of Sydney giving these lads a bit of a chat!

[flightfocus]

Was only a matter of when. I wonder where they will park them.

The Chinese tourists will be amazed to see and visit a 3rd world airport for the 1st time :E

They will have just left the latest greatest that they got to on a high speed train. Google Guangzhou Airport and look at the pictures. Vision, planning and commitment - and probably a few billion dollars. Now that's an airport. WOW :D

If we what we have is the result of the "great resource boom" economy I can only shiver at the thought of what we left behind, because the PH Airport that WAC presides over is embarrassingly cringe worthy:

"We believe Perth Airport will benefit from his contemporary management style and strategic thinking along with excellent implementation."
WAC announcing Mr Brad Geatches as CEO. The Age, 25 January 2007

Perth is working to meet demand and cement its position as one of Australia’s most successful airports,” added Mr Geatches.
WAC Press Release 23 March 2007.

Mr Geatches said that Perth Airport was Western Australia’s most important infrastructure asset.

Our responsibility is to respond to this continued growth by delivering solutions which provide a positive passenger experience and enable our airline partners to operate as efficiently as possible.”

“We have recognised the need to bring forward airport expansion plans and detailed studies are happening right now,” said Mr Geatches.
WAC Press Release 21 August 2007

“I also thank all users of Perth Airport for their patience during 2007. I am looking forward to 2008 which will mark some important and exciting milestones in the future of Perth Airport.”
Mr Brad Geatches, WAC Press Release 10 December 2007

Perth Airport also serves as a vital infrastructure asset for Western Australia’s resources sector. Our partnership with the resources industry goes from strength to strength as we continue to support growth in fly-in fly-out operations

Mr Geatches added that Perth Airport’s continued growth was strengthening the business case to initiate a major expansion of airport infrastructure.
Mr Brad Geatches, WAC Press Release 24 January 2008

The Premier Alan Carpenter has described Perth's Domestic Airport as an embarrassment to the state and called on its owners to embark on an immediate upgrade.

"Because I don't want to stand in queues with people who are embarrassed if they are Western Australians or very very unhappy if they are visitors coming to WA and seeing Perth Airport and thinking that somehow or other that reflects upon the state broadly," he said.

The Airport's Chief Executive Brad Geatches says he shares the Premier's concerns and says an announcement on a major redevelopment will be made within weeks.

"We're on the job, there's is no lack of commitment, there is no lack of preparedness to invest," he said.
ABC News 2 April 2008

Perth Airport is committed to delivering world class airport facilities to the people of Western Australia. Perth Airport is an essential element in the economic and social infrastructure of this State and we agree that Western Australians deserve an outstanding airport.
Mr Brad Geatches, WAC Press Release 2 April 2008

Perth Airport is a vital element in Western Australia’s resources sector, providing a commuter hub for the many thousands of fly-in fly-out workers who are employed on resources projects in remote locations throughout the State. The new terminal for flights within Western Australia will provide these workers with a superior travel experience, with a good retail offering and easy access to price effective long term car parking.

We want Perth Airport to be a place which Western Australians are proud to call their own. That is why our plans will produce more than an airport. As well as new terminal buildings, we are looking at building at a range of facilities and features that will make Perth Airport a destination in its own right.
Mr Brad Geatches, WAC Press Release 1 May 2008

Perth Airport Chief Executive Officer, Mr Brad Geatches said the impact of the economic slowdown on aviation demand in Western Australia has been less than that experienced elsewhere in Australia and overseas.
WAC Press Release, 15 May 2009

Perth Airport has experienced the highest passenger growth rates of any Australia capital city airport, reporting a 6.1% increase in passenger numbers for the 2008/2009 financial year.

Over 9.7 million passengers travelled through Perth Airport during this period, an increase of 555,815 passengers over the previous financial year. International passenger growth stood at 4.2%, while domestic passenger growth of 6.7% was recorded.
WAC Press Release 23 July 2009

The approval of the new Master Plan is another important milestone for the company’s plans to redevelop Perth Airport.

We are pleased that our Master Plan has been approved and we are looking forward to implementing our plans to deliver facilities and services that all Western Australians will be proud of,” Mr Geatches said.
WAC Press Release, 3 November 2009

The press releases have mainly been fluff pieces about new shops and airline services since then.

Did someone say accountability?

[Mr. Hat]

Ah the wonders of selling off the airports to balance the books at budget time!

Privatisation worked so well! What a great future!

[Quokka]

The blame sits squarely at the government for privatising the airport and allowing Pearce to exist this side of Learmonth

2FTS et al should be repositioned to RAAF Learmonth. There is no strategic imperative for a training unit to be located in Perth... and... they should be training where they will be fighting.

RAAF Pearce should become a Joint-User airfield with a caretaker unit on the RAAF side and a full civilian airport built on the other side of the runways. Rename it and use it as a civilian airport until the next war. By which time WAC... might... have completed the parallel runway and terminal extensions at Perth.

[patienceboy]

Good idea Quokka.

In the short term all they would need is a shed at Pearce for the LCCs to operate from, a bus service between the two airports, and a tweaking of airspace design.

[Quokka]

...and the WAC solution to the problem:

Perth Airport is to impose hefty charges on small aircraft at peak times in an effort to untangle the logjam snarling operations and preventing bigger aircraft getting critical take-off slots.

From July 1, the airport will charge $3.65 a passenger for all airlines, but with a $200 minimum in peak periods, which will hit any aircraft below a 55-seat capacity. It also charges $10.44 per passenger for using its domestic terminal and $15.36 for each international passenger.

Airport chief executive Brad Geatches said the new minimum peak charge was an incentive to get airlines to operate outside the peaks and to move to larger aircraft. The demand for early morning flights is driven by fly in, fly out workers.

"The West Australian", page 13, Monday April 18, 2011.

[Capn Bloggs]

From the local Community News, 19 Apri 2011:

Five tender for new air terminal

FIVE companies are in the running to build Perth Airport's first new terminal in more than two decades. Corporate affairs general manager Fiona Lander said the terminal would primarily service flights for the resource sector's fly-in fly-out market plus some interstate routes.

"It is expected that over a million passengers will travel through the terminal during its first year of operation in 2013," she said. She added there has been increasing demand on airport services, including a record 10.4 million passenger movements last year.

The single-story terminal will be adjacent to the International Terminal.

Perth Airport chief executive Brad Geatches said: "all airlines from the current domestic terminals, other than Virgin Blue, Qantas and Jetstar, will locate
to the new terminal.

"Not only will the airlines and their passengers benefit greatly from the new terminal, but the move will also substantially reduce activity in the current domestic precinct, thereby improving our customers' experiences in the existing terminals."

The terminal will have 16 check-in counters, a larger security screening zone, 14 aircraft gates and an aircraft parking area able to park 36 aircraft.

The tender closing day is May 20 and the contract is expected to be awarded by July 2011.

And here's me thinking those new A330 markings at Terminal 2 were for Qantaslink's upgrade! :{

[sled_driver71]

I thought Skywest weren't going to move without Virgin?

[flightfocus]

"Not only will the airlines and their passengers benefit greatly from the new terminal, but the move will also substantially reduce activity in the current domestic precinct, thereby improving our customers' experiences in the existing terminals."

I think that should have been followed by:

"The move will substantially increase pressure on an already inadequate road system to get people to the new terminal, thereby drastically decreasing the quality of the TWA users experience and further frustrating passengers using the international terminal."


:ugh:

[Chadzat]

sled_driver- the devil is in the detail. Skywest will occupy the new Terminal WA, and Virgin will occupy the extension of the current International terminal towards the new Terminal WA site. Its all going to be joined in the end, so who knows why the journo had to make it confusing for everyone. :rolleyes:

[Capn Bloggs]

From the Letters page of The West today:

Second runway needed

How sad that Perth Airport's answer to the air-traffic congestion is to "impose hefty charges on small aircraft at peak times" (Airport charges rise, . 18/4) in the hope the smaller aircraft will go away It is typical of the small-town mentality here in WA that a financial big stick will be wielded, rather than addressing the real problem.

This airport desperately needs a parallel runway and high-speed taxiways and Australia in general needs a revamp of the clumsy and restrictive air-traffic control procedures that strangle aircraft traffic flow into Perth every day

Many airports in WA are too small to be serviced by big aircraft and there will always be a need for small aircraft to provide for industry needs. The smaller aircraft operate to fit in with the shift-change schedules of the big mines and it is not easy for these to be adjusted. Currently a two-hour round trip flight typically is extended by up to 15 minutes because of air-traffic control delays, adding hundreds of dollars to the cost of the flight. At least one charter company in Perth is already adding this cost on to its clients' fees. Undoubtedly, others will follow suit so, as usual, the customer pays.

Where else in the world would the main runway of the primary airport in the State be shut down for maintenance for six weeks, six days a week for 11 hours and extending through the evening peak period (that's excluding over Easter, of course, in this land of the long weekend)? Many other countries would be doing this essential work during the night, or at least re-opening the main runway for the evening rush hour. Even Main Roads does its maintenance at night on major roads -for example, the recent night closures of the Farmer freeway tunnel for re-surfacing.

It is absolutely inevitable that we will eventually have a second runway and high-speed taxiways (which allow aircraft to exit the runways quickly after landing, thus increasing the rate of movements). Let's get on with it and join the rest of Australia in the 2lst century.

Lesley Smithers, Rivervale.

I'll bet ATC won't be too happy about that rant. :cool: I actually think the do a pretty good job, considering.

I wonder what the acceptance rate is with both runways operational as opposed only to 06/24 (they do cross in the middle, you know) and how does that pans out against the bill for double-time for back-of-the-clock runway grooving?

The brutal fact is that two runways are only needed for a few hours a day and if the mines (and/or their flyers) were to spread their changeovers over the day, two runways would not be needed at all. Problem not only belongum WAC. The problem is well-known but unless the big miners do something about it, nothing is going to change anytime soon.

What exactly is wrong with not working over Easter? :cool:

[Awol57]

I worked in the tower for a while, though I can't remember the exact arrival rate for 06/24 it was certainly less as we had to cater for the Heavies to backtrack and vacate at J1 or 03/21 (if that option was available) or back track to C1/S. Ditto for them to line up. I am pretty sure after the resurfacing closure W was pretty well buggered from the heavies, so I don't know if they can/are using it again.

[cac_sabre]

TWY "W" is now commissioned to Code E aircraft which very much improves the RWY 06 / 24 only situation, heavies still have to backtrack a short distance for departure off RWY 06 and the turn on to the threshold of 24 from W is quite a wide angle so aircraft are slower to commence the take off roll, never the less in this mode movement rates of 40 per hour have been achieved with the right traffic mix, this is about as good as you get from RWY 21.

During the works there are a significant amount of taxiway closures, we are virtually operating with half an airport, there are less options on taxi routes and the holding of aircraft waiting for bays, we have to carefully manage the situation to keep things moving and prevent log jams which could quickly escalate to the point that go rounds may happen or we need to call in the tugs to pull the fur ball apart. This is especially so during periods where we have a busy arrival and departure mix typical of most weekday afternoons. Overloading of the airport system is prevented by strategic adjustment of the arrival acceptance rates, these are reduced below the typical arrival rate to allow departures to get away ensure there are vacant bays and we keep it all moving. Another big factor we have to consider is the management of an immediate runway change ie swapping ends, with so many closures this would be very difficult to manage, another reason for the "tweaked" down rates.
This methodology was used with great success during the overlay last year. The restrictions for the grooving and other associated works are actually a bit worse in some respects to the overlay works, the strategy is working, its safe and the traffic is moving, if compliance regards to slots etc could be guaranteed it is likely that a positive adjustment to acceptance rates could be achieved.

The next stage of works involving the construction of the the TWY A extension through RWY 06/24 will also be challenging, there will be much runway crossing of the only usable runway (03/21) plus taxy routing via the Eastern TWY system.. we cant wait..........
to have it all finished!

[Nautilus Blue]

Could spend hours picking that letter apart, but couldn't be bothered. For some people, 'theirs' is always better than 'ours', whether its ATC, education, health, public transport etc.

The evening sequence on Easter Thursday involved more than a few significant delays for aircraft early for their slot time :E.

[Hailstop3]

Just saw an ad on ABC 1 for a report on Perth airport and the skies around it, on tonight at 730pm in WA. Will be interesting to see what they say.

[jarden]

Perth airport was rated POOR by its users in an article in this AA June issue.

[Another Number]

Just saw an ad on ABC 1 for a report on Perth airport and the skies around it, on tonight at 730pm in WA. Will be interesting to see what they say.

Pretty much the usual.

...plus...

A quick hop down to YPJT for a free advertorial from those bastards at RACWA with their usual Come Fly With Me pitch alerting the public to the current crisis affecting airlines worldwide - the lack of pilots! Come train with us now - you'll have a jet job lined up before you've even landed the 152!

[YPJT]

Brad Geatches, CEO of Perth Airport was on ABC radio this morning suggesting that higher charges may be applied to "smaller operators" during the peak departure / arrival times. Be interesting to see how the lines in the sand are drawn on this one.

[sillograph]

Toll bridge alert

[ozineurope]

we could of course take the Frankfurt example - spend a squillion Euro on a wide spaced parallel and then only use it for landings because of the NIMBYs.

World's best practice - only move as many aircraft as the infrastructure allows. But Perth does have plenty of new car parking spots!

[Capn Bloggs]

What's with everybody ignoring their PTL? Seems to be a lot of unnecessary holding going on. :confused:

[metrodashbrazconkie]

Simple. Abide by them-get holding, ignore them-get holding, either way-get holding. :ugh:

If you are 30 mins ahead of your PTL you still get home 30 mins early and everyone is happy.

[dodgybrothers]

geez just a stab in the dark but, maybe weather??!!!!

[megle2]

JPT already a $150 in and $150 fee outbound at Brisbane
7 - 10am
4 - 7pm

Made no traffic difference but good little earner for BAC

[Juice Rider]

"What's with everybody ignoring their PTL? Seems to be a lot of unnecessary holding going on. "

Your talking about ATC ignoring them right

[sunnySA]

presentation by Guy Thompson, Westralia Airports Corp

http://www.airservicesaustralia.com/projectsservices/industryforums/waypoint/2011/presentations/guy_thompson.pdf

[Capn Bloggs]

That presentation conveniently skirts the REAL issue: not enough runways OR bad scheduling! ACE will make little difference, and what's with those two new 90° taxiways off the runway?? How about four high-speeders?

Dodgy, the wx was OK (for a change).

Your talking about ATC ignoring them right
It seems to me ATC haven't been empowered to make early-birds pay for their "transgression". Hopefully that will change with Metron.

I reckon over 40 tonnes of fuel is wasted a day (MTuWTh) on unnecessary holding. 120,000kg of CO2 up in smoke. I never thought I'd say this but...bring on the carbon tax.

[holdat]

ATC don't have the ability to punish PTL offenders, Perth Flow does though. Hopefully things will begin to improve.

[Capn Bloggs]

Maybe there will be some Lancing going on soon! :}

[le Pingouin]

From an ATC perspective it's not very nice having to thread following traffic through a few delayed early birds - safer to let them through. Ducking & weaving for the sake of enforcing an administrative procedure is increasing complexity & risk unduly.

A threat of a nice hefty fine or a sin binning denial of a slot for a day or two would be my favoured option. Everyone would clean their act up rather rapidly at minimal risk.

[dreamjob]

A mate said he once delayed his departure time by 1 hour to meet his "PTL" yet still copped 20 minutes enroute delay in a 1 hour leg.

To me it sounds like there must be a lot of "cheating" going on for that to happen?

[holdat]

There is a lot of cheating going on, as was evident if you flew in last night from the north.

[flyingfox]

Bloggsy! How does 40 tonnes of fuel equal 120,000 kg of CO2 (up in smoke)? Alchemy?

[Capn Bloggs]

Bloggsy! How does 40 tonnes of fuel equal 120,000 kg of CO2 (up in smoke)? Alchemy?

Don't worry FF, did me homework. Burning 1 tonne (or whatever) of Avtur produces 3 tonnes of CO2. :eek:

Example: Aviation sources (http://www.carbonindependent.org/sources_aviation.htm)

[le Pingouin]

Chemistry.......

Hydrocarbon = mainly carbon

Jet A-1 is approximated by C12H26

Atomic weights: H = 1, C = 12, O = 16 (ignoring isotopes)

Molecular weight C12H26 = 12x12 + 26 = 170

Burnt hydrocarbon = CO2 + H2O

Total molecular weight of resulting CO2 = 12x(12 + 16x2) = 528

Ratio of resulting CO2 weight to originating hydrocarbon = 528/170 = 3.1

Burning 40t = 40,000kg of jet A-1 produces

40,000 x 3.1 = 124,000kg CO2.

[flyingfox]

That's fascinating! So fuel oxidised makes a big mess. Fuel really is a condensed product!!

[Capt Claret]

I wonder if the fact that a little fuel is mixed with a lot of air for combustion, influences the CO2 output? :}

[Jim Shoos]

The parlous state of the Perth airport is astounding. The current runway taxiway works are causing chaos and when all is said and done (if they ever get finished) they will not increase the movement rate by even one movement per hour.

Even more astounding is the fact that the government sit back and watch while an essential part of national infrastructure is being so badly mismanaged.

I suspect the mining boom will be over before their planned Terminal WA is completed. More fool on them. In the meantime we suffer together.

[neville_nobody]

It's been discussed on here before but they are suggesting that the airport can expect an significant increase in traffic without the need for a parellel runway.

Even more astounding is the fact that the government sit back and watch while an essential part of national infrastructure is being so badly mismanaged.

For some reason no government in this country at any level wants to do anything about aviation............but spending 30 billion on a railway tearing up forrests and farmland is a good idea.:ugh: