BNE ATC Holding

[Angle of Attack]

Does anyone know what is going on in BNE recently? Seems if the weather requires Instrument approaches you get a ridiculous amount of holding. In the last week there was unforcast low viz (1500m) but everyone was getting in ok, 58mins holding, 2 nights ago at 9.30pm with normal showery weather 25mins holding, tonight with no weather requirements (There were some TCU around a couple hours earlier but nothing too bad) 48 mins holding arriving 8.30pm. Is there something going on industrially with ATC? Even in the wet when there was Instrument approaches all day and night long there was rarely more than 15mins hold usually only a 5-10 min delay.

[ejectx3]

I was wondering the same thing. 25 min hold for a few showers, both runways in use.....

[international hog driver]

We held for 75min and then went to the Goldy.....:mad:

Pax were unimpressed is an understatement, Absolute joke. If they think that BNE will cope with all the future FIFO and related development without a parallel runway. :ugh:

Add a little rain and a few well spread clouds the place went silly :{

Every quarter there is continued pax growth all along the J-curve..... where's the added infrastructure..???:rolleyes: Thats right... they are shopping malls with a passenger terminal attached now:oh:

[Jabawocky]

What was the safety issue that was not apparent in the last 20 years?

[Worrals in the wilds]

Some all-star in a Cirrus doing a missed approach on 14 and having a close encounter of the Boeing kind with an aircraft on final for 19.

It was one of those Pandora's box incidents that didn't happen for twenty years, but once it did it was impossible for all the relevant agencies to say "oh well, let's stick that back in the box and pretend it didn't happen". With the information from that incident, the risk assessment for a lot of the dual runway ops suddenly looked...risky.

ihd, the parallel runway is on the way but it got delayed by a year. Even on the original time line it wouldn't have been ready yet. It is a big aviation infrastructure project and it will happen, but there's a lot of ground work to do before the land is suitable for runway building. The airport probably should have been built with a parallel 01/19 back in 1988 but no-one realised how busy Brisbane was going to get.
http://bne.com.au/projects-and-development/new-parallel-runway-project/npr-frequently-asked-questions

[worked to death]

if you want to see how much traffic can be moved from a single runway airport, in various weather conditions, have a look at Gatwick.

[Wally Mk2]

BN already has a second airport but ya can't get off da plane, it's called 'BLAKA'!!!

Aussie airports are a disgrace. We have been playing backwood politics for years being left behind from the rest of the advanced world, they must look at our aviation infrastructure & laugh!

Look at SYD. Australia's gateway airport & our busiest, it's a coastal drome & it's curfewed with the politicians running it!!!

CB, Australia's Capital city drome, CTAF R after hrs!!!!!

ML, No Precision App on it's main Nth rwy & now with a new twr being built (75 mtrs high) I'd bet that the Min will be higher on the 34VOR!!! (920ft now) I hear curfew is being discussed for this drome, yep great idea, nowhere too go (well T/off after you have arrived due curfew like AD) when the whole SE region gets ugly due wx!!

PH..........need I say more !!!

AD, sleepy, curfewed, nobody wants to go there anyway:E

Yep it's a great country for sure just not for RPT into Major dromes!



Wmk2

[scam sniffer]

WTD.

Surely you are not suggesting that those responsible pull their respective heads out of their respective armpits and see how the rest of the world operates?

In fairness to the guys on the mic. they are hamstrung to a degree by Aus archaic rules, malevolent noise lobbies and weak as piss pollies. They do however have a responsibility to offer professional advice on how to improve the system. A trip to a few overseas airports would work wonders for the corporate knowledge base. (Chicago, LAX, JFK, Atlanta, Narita, Incheon, Heathrow, and Gatwick to name a few)

Who knows, maybe we could even get away from the fallacy that SYD/ BNE and MEL are busy airports. Sunday picnic parks more like it.

"behind the landing, line up and wait be ready immediate, following at 10 miles"

SS

[framer]

ML, No Precision App on it's main Nth rwy

That still amazes me every ime <i go to ML. The city is awash with money compared to most other cities in the world and yet there is still a VOR to the main strip. Mental.

[Keg]

I must admit to having seen some excellent ATC work in recent days from TWR controllers. Getting departures away with four miles between arrivals. It's been pretty to watch.

I'll admit to having seen the occasional clanger (being asked to taxi as number 2 to Thai out of PER the other day was one of them given that we could have been airborne before he had reached the holding point given his slow taxi speed) but these things happen from time to time with the best of intentions. More often than not it's been great work and far better than I've experienced in most places around SE Asia.

If we could go to an system such as used in HKG, LHR, LAX, etc for SYD airport then it'd be great. One runway for arrivals, the other for departures. :ok:

[Chadzat]

Yep, Keg the Perth tower guys have been on fire recently with the single runway ops off 06/24. :ok:

Maybe this calls for an Airport Infrastructure Senate Inquiry!? Get the heads of those aiports mentioned above in for a bit of a 'chat'.

[Nautilus Blue]

In fairness to the guys on the mic. they are hamstrung to a degree by Aus archaic rules, malevolent noise lobbies and weak as piss pollies. They do however have a responsibility to offer professional advice on how to improve the system. A trip to a few overseas airports would work wonders for the corporate knowledge base. (Chicago, LAX, JFK, Atlanta, Narita, Incheon, Heathrow, and Gatwick to name a few)
As much as I would love a visit like that unless I do it in my own time at my own expense, its not going to happen. Even better would be a 2-3 'exchange' type arrangement. We do have a few 'foreign' controllers, and locals who have come back from working o/s, which is the next best thing I suppose.
Two questions though. What 'Aus archaic rules' are you referring to, and what is, for example Gatwick's arrival rate compared to BN?

[JustJoinedToSearch]

Surely Govt, BAC, ATC (whoever is doing the ass covering) could get parallel runway ops back by putting something into ERSA like 'No go-around available RWY14 during parallel ops' or similar.
It's hardly groundbreaking, there are many airports in the world where a go-around is unavailable (usually terrain), so if you only let people land who were happy to accept a no go-around landing, what's the (legal) problem?

In fact, you could even have something like 'if going around, early left turn must be made as to avoid entering 19 final approach path.'

Any reason this can't be done?

[Keg]

And please don't call it an ATC delay (including on your P/A's when I am aboard!). It is a TRAFFIC delay. Last time I looked, it wasn't me ordering more traffic.


ATC has asked us to slow down to fit in with the arrival sequence due to the number of aircraft all arriving at [insert airport here] at the same time as us.

Does that do the job? :ok:

[haughtney1]

In fairness to the guys on the mic. they are hamstrung to a degree by Aus archaic rules, malevolent noise lobbies and weak as piss pollies. They do however have a responsibility to offer professional advice on how to improve the system. A trip to a few overseas airports would work wonders for the corporate knowledge base. (Chicago, LAX, JFK, Atlanta, Narita, Incheon, Heathrow, and Gatwick to name a few)

Who knows, maybe we could even get away from the fallacy that SYD/ BNE and MEL are busy airports. Sunday picnic parks more like it.


That in my opinion sums up ATC and ATM in Oz, superb post scam sniffer.

Vegas in traffic terms is a backwater, there is no good reason why there needs to be excessive delays in anything other than severe wx or poor vis. Words fail me sometimes when I read stuff like this..honestly you have a 3500m or so long runway with plenty of exits..and yet certainly in my Company Doc's (Lido) no mandated minimum rwy occupancy..other than a general note and advising if you need full length.
Am I being unfair in my observations? I'm not having a go...I just can't fathom a 45 minute delay for 1500m viz?

N-Blue, LGW has an average movement rate of a little over 40, but at peak periods it can get up to 52-54 I'm told...LVP's generally dont go into action until vis drops below 800m from memory.

[le Pingouin]

haughtney1, the number of movements is not a useful indication because the arrival rate is the limiting factor.

As P-Dubby said at the start - it's physics. The only way you're going to do better on one runway is by reducing radar standards & you getting off the runway faster. Gatwick could no more handle 50 arrivals in an hour than BN.

[le Pingouin]

"Delayed due to airline scheduling exceeding airport capacity" :E

[disturbedone]

All ATC's know pilots hate holding. But ATC's hate holding just as much as pilots, especially when we look outside and see clear skies!

[Worrals in the wilds]

Surely Govt, BAC, ATC (whoever is doing the ass covering) could get parallel runway ops back by putting something into ERSA like 'No go-around available RWY14 during parallel ops' or similar.


I believe the problem is that neither BAC, ASA or the airlines are prepared to accept the liability in the event of it going wrong, so the whole thing's sitting in the limbo tray. As we're all well aware, what's done in the rest of the world doesn't necessarily get done in Australia.

The Cirrus pilot didn't follow the missed approach procedures anyway, hence the close encounter. If it had done so, there would have been no incident.

[haughtney1]

P-D, I have no doubt you are accurate in what you say, but where does the 45 mins come from if the numbers you speak of ring true?
Is 45 min a usual figure? or is it exceptional based on an exceptional set of circumstances? just wondering.
With respect to the movement rate, the a/c mix at BNE and LGW is broadly similar, mostly medium jets with a heavy or 3 thrown into the mix...and of course those pesky TP's floating about as well.
FWIW, my experience of Vegas app and twr has been pretty good, and as our usual arrival times are mostly outside peak times..we never usually have any bother.
At LGW (as a comparison) its pretty much always peak time...and yet with a similar runway, less airspace, and certainly a far greater volume of traffic, the worst holding delay in wx above CAT1 was in the region of 20 mins. So with that in mind, where is the difference? is it procedural? is it a systemic difference? is it a competancy issue? (both pilots and controllers?) Or is it perhaps more a cultural or corporate reluctance to deal with these peak traffic periods as effectively as possible?
I know Oz has some unusual procedural stuff (as does the UK, USA, and everywhere else!) so does this contribute into the mix?
Interesting stuff...and I'm interested in the answers, cos we all learn from this.

[le Pingouin]

haughtney1, it's simply a numbers game - once the number of arrivals exceeds the max arrival rate you get delays. Exceed it by a large number & you get large delays. Overall volume has little to do with it. Density does.

Maybe Gatwick enforces slot times?

A stiff headwind will blow out the acceptance rate as you're slower down final (ground speed) - 3NM radar separation gives longer time spacing into wind. It's also harder to judge turns because you're screaming along on down wind & screech to a halt as you turn.

[Fuel-Off]

Even with a slot time, BN still F:mad:K you around!

Fuel-Off :ok:

[WhatWasThat]

From what I understand arrivals to Gatwick, Heathrow and other major European destinations will have been subject to a slot time for departure, using a centralised computer system based in Brussels that determines capacity for a given piece of airspace or concrete and does not permit more than a set number of aircraft to arrive in a given hour. The delays are absorbed on the ground or schedules are adjusted accordingly preventing excessive airborne delays.

This kind of system is planned for Aus and has been patchily attempted, but has not been critical until recently as airborne delays into our major ports haven't been long enough to make the accountants cry or overload the ATC system. We are probably approaching that point now. Note - this will not increase the arrival rate, it just means the top of the peaks will be forcibly shoveled into the troughs with the scheduling complications to be dealt with by the companies. Its not all beer and skittles - In europe if you miss your ramp time well thats tough titty and back you taxi until another slot is available.

My experience is that too much less than 90 seconds between arrivals and number 2 will be going around. Something more than that will be required if tower is to have an opportunity to depart one occasionally. This places a practical upper limit on how many aircraft can arrive within an hour without someone having to wait, you can do it on the ground or in the air, but unless there is more concrete the delay will have to be absorbed somewhere.

WWT

[le Pingouin]

Australian ATC doesn't enforce slot times - we have no way of knowing & just takes you as you come. First in best dressed.

[Nautilus Blue]

Presumably slot times are enforced o/s, and maybe thats the main difference? Delay=demand-capacity, so cap the demand with slot times.
This kind of system is planned for Aus and has been patchily attempted, but has not been critical until recently as airborne delays into our major ports haven't been long enough to make the accountants cry or overload the ATC system.
Slot times were introduced at PH awhile back as a temporary measure to cope with rwy outages. With some coaxing from at least one ML line manager, a light went on somewhere in the corridors of power, and they stayed. Stage two is that a/c early for their slots are being held to meet it, allowing those on time to come through. The current situation in BN would seem a good opportunity to follow suit.

[Angle of Attack]

Yes I can understand obviously that if the number of arriving aircraft exceeds capacity there will of course be delays but it has only happened in the last month or so, it has suddenly beconme extremely bad, in fact the worst Capital city airport by far for holding. Has there been a massive increase in the number of scheduled flights in and out of BNE recently? And yes it is bad when Instrument Aproaches are in use so it is about the weather, I guess greater seperation standards required. The other night when we had 20mins at 2130, the plane behind us got 25mins, we landed and there was no takeoff or landing for a further 6 mins??!! Something is going on its pretty obvious.

[tourismman]

BNE currently handling around 600-620 movements on Thursdays and Fridays with a further 10 movements a day to start over next 2-3 months and more to come with DJ ATR's, and Tiger planning to base 2 aircraft here later this year.Easily another 40 movements a day could be added by years end . The the FIFO will increase as well over the next 1-2 years.

With 660-670 movements a day BNE would be on a par with KL,and a little bit busier than MEL.

[Nautilus Blue]

The other night when we had 20mins at 2130, the plane behind us got 25mins
The one behind you in the sky or the one behind you in the sequence?

[Angle of Attack]

Sequence, and they landed 7 mins after us, no departures either between us.

[Nautilus Blue]

Nope, can't explain that one. Following a/c could have been late out of the hold, but that seems excessive. The problem is that without pulling the tapes for three or four positions, there is no way of finding the reason (assuming it wasn't just a stuff up).

[flightfocus]

Yep, Keg the Perth tower guys have been on fire recently with the single runway ops off 06/24.

Keg, Chazddat - Thanks chaps! :D We are up for it if you are. Gotta love the backtrack 06 from J1 or J2 into the teeth of the next arrival turning final at 4nm. :eek: Were getting good at maximising tarmac time, but everybody needs to be on there game!

Seen some great work from the drivers as well. Although one 76 driver was concerned that he might break off his nose wheel on the turn around on 06 threshold! :{ He still took the gap and got away.... :O

[Jabawocky]

The Cirrus pilot didn't follow the missed approach procedures anyway, hence the close encounter. If it had done so, there would have been no incident.

Yeah she was VFR and had no MA procedure to follow, mind you what she did was mind boggling from the way the ATC friend described it to me :uhoh:.

So no VFR CROPS, that should have been the end of the problem.

So are they no using 14 and 01/19 for IFR CROPS? Is that all over now?

Time for a few K's more concrete folks!

Or........ Brisbane is full of tunnels, build a high speed rail link under the city to YBAF and move all the turbo props out there :}

[Chadzat]

Out of interest flightfocus (and this is wayy off the topic of BNE here) but if RW06 is in use, approach tell us they need to give 5nm separation for arrivals to the tower. This often results in long downwind legs and a complete bugger up of the profile. Is this only done if there is a heavy taxiing to give them a chance to backtrack or is it done regardless? Seems a bit of a waste of time if there are no heavies waiting to go.

[cac_sabre]

The backtrack is only part of the problem, runway occupancy time is also increased with most arrivals having to vacate at the end on TWY "W"
often the last third of the runway is taxied at quite slow speed, 5 miles is there to ensure everyone gets in and everyone gets out without having to wait long periods at the HP.

[By George]

I appreciate the Aussie system is hampered by different separation rules

but surely it could be tightened up a little. To me LHR is the standard to

aim for. I know they have two parallel runways etc but they reallly shift

the traffic. It's not uncommon to get the landing clearance in the flare.

It seems to work OK providing everybody knows what he's doing. The

Yanks and most of Europe are more or less the same. In ORD (Chicago)

any pilot who slows up the system is sent into a 'sin-bin' an off-set

holding point and ignored for twenty minutes. It does wonders to house

train the slow to learn types.

One common procedure is the "not below 160knots until 4 miles" and to

"vacate on the first available high-speed". 40 knot exit speed is common

and quite safe if it's dry and uncontaminated.

Every time I come into Aus the tension is in the air but I never seem to

be looking up someone's bottom as much as elsewhere and the daisy-

chain is not as tight. As for a SR-22 causing problems they wouldn't

be allowed anywhere near the place. (in JFK it would be shot down). I'm

not saying that I agree with that but if you want to move 'big-iron' it's

'big-iron' only. Apart from the obvious second runway, maybe a few more

high speed exits are needed and bunch 'em up more.

[Worrals in the wilds]

In Australia Big iron only is hard or impossible to do without a change of legislation. As it currently stands, if you operate an airport you pretty much have to welcome anyone with a radio and VH rego. Presumably the States has different legislation.

[Roger Sir]

Apologies for a slight thread drift...

ATC have been pushing more tin than allowed in Sydney! The legislated "cap" of 80 movements per hour has been exceeded so the "fix" is to marginally reduce the acceptance rate under certain conditions. The best case scenario of 34 parallels has an acceptance rate that will be reduced by ( i think ) 2 movements per hour. i.e. from 46 to 44 landings per hour.

My point is that we , ATC that is, are capable of moving more heavy metal but there are numerous reasons, many of which are not apparent to all, why we don`t.

If you`ve got questions then ask away! Don`t expect a quick response from the official channels though.

[mcgrath50]

In Australia Big iron only is hard or impossible to do without a change of legislation. As it currently stands, if you operate an airport you pretty much have to welcome anyone with a radio and VH rego. Presumably the States has different legislation.


Can't they just do what Sydney does and charge landing fees that make it prohibitively expensive to land your bugsmasher at Brissy? If you want to cough up $200 + parking then go for it.

[Worrals in the wilds]

Can't they just do what Sydney does and charge landing fees that make it prohibitively expensive to land your bugsmasher at Brissy?

Actually I believe they've just started doing that in peak times, but I don't think it's had much of an impact on traffic.

Brissy never got all that many bugsmashers anyway, and even the fine upstanding metro freighter fleet :} tends to operate at night when it's not all that busy. What 14 used to take a lot of was peak hour Q'link and Skytrans Dash 8s. I would guess that putting them onto 01/19 due to the new restrictions is having an impact on traffic.

[max1]

If I had a buck for the times I have been asked why we are on Rwy07 instead of Rwy 16 parallels in SY when the wind is 160/10 and everyone is holding, well then I would have lots of bucks. Qantas 767 drivers tend to be the most chirpy.
I hope the pilots out there understand that as controllers our lives would be a lot easier without the holding. A few minutes to lose soaked up in the cruise or descent, maybe a couple of minutes vectoring and away you go.
We do not enjoy reading where it is seen as something special that the LA flyer , through the 'efforts' of an army of suits talking, liaising, flying to meetings,lunching, expense accounting,etc was given unrestricted climb and direct tracking saving X tonnes of fuel. FFS we aim to do that everyday.We then plug in, with no relief, holding aircraft for in excess of 20 minutes each so we dont upset KSAs neighbours who have no idea they have bought near an airport that has been in existence for 80-90 years.
I shake my head when I see the LA 'ASPIRE' flyer depart off R34 wiping out landing slots off R07 and then watch as a collective 2-300 minutes of holding is dumped on the jets and turboprops as the suits go off to a round of backslapping and beers because of the greenhouse gas they just saved.
Other countries ANSPs want Aussie controllers, another 5 'youngsters' from BN FIR have just signed contracts with Germany.

[Jack Ranga]

A mate has a mate who works for Melbourne Airport and they couldn't give a flying f@ck about building parallel runways. They want more retail and CARPARKS, CARPARKS make money not runways. They get their coin from the airlines no matter how much holding happens.

[Jabawocky]

..........and the more holding, the more revenue generated in the CARPARKS. :ok:

What a business model:}

Wish I owned an airport:*

[Mr. Hat]

Can't remember an occasion where we've arrived in BNE without holding or slowing down. It makes SYD look good. At least Sydney can say they have people coming from everywhere.

[Cactusjack]

Inbound Brisbane from Mackay in the evenings has always been a pain in the freckle. ALWAYS holding or slowed down. I am sure BNE ATC hate FNQ folk :E

[max1]

I am sure BNE ATC hate FNQ folk Love you, some of the better people in the centre actually come from there, as do some of the others.
It makes SYD look good. At least Sydney can say they have people coming from everywhere. You need to get out more.
Brisbane and Sydney (from the North and East) arrivals are done from the same Centre.
We only have 2 centres in Australia.
Come and have a look, we (the people who plug in at least) are not out to upset pilots and their punters, come and have a chinwag.

I have a dream, 3 parallel runways with high speed taxiways at all aerodromes, no holding, enough controllers so that we are not asked on every day off to do overtime (true BTW) , the ability to be released for promotions/transfers, a roster that lasts longer than milk and makes some effort to embrace a FRMS, managers who actually have the interests of the airlines and travelling public at heart not their next bonus or job security

[BackdoorBandit]

Inbound Brisbane from Mackay in the evenings has always been a pain in the freckle. ALWAYS holding or slowed down. I am sure BNE ATC hate FNQ folk

As far as I am aware, FNQ is north of Cardwell (approx midway between TL and CS). Mackay is not even regarded as NQ, just CQ I'm afraid.

[Mr. Hat]

You need to get out more.

You're not wrong there! I do indeed.

Might just be my luck but out of the last 10 times I've been into BNE in a row we've never had a clean run. Into SYD I have on a few occasions.

Anyway I know you guys are doing your best wasn't having a crack.

[Nautilus Blue]

P-Dubby - interesting info there. So it turns out that EGKK DOESN'T have a higher arrival rate than BN, or ML or PH. Belief, perception and expectation play a big part in these debates. We always used to say that pilots would complain about a delay into PH that they would be pleasantly surprised at into SY.

We do though have the tools to do strategic flow, CTMS from the NOC. PH have been using it for months, and I'm certain it wasn't something new when we got it.

As for Australian ATC being archaic, look into the implementation/installation timelines of RVSM, CPDLC, ADS-C, ADS-B, Flex Tracks/UPR's and reduced lateral sep, don't think we've done too bad. I've just said something nice about ASA, so I'm going to go wash.

[Blockla]

Strategic on ground delays not being effective are mostly about compliance. In Europe Tower controllers are aware of departure times issued. They are chartered to enforce these; so in the event that you are running early or late you need to refile for a new slot time. There are very few 'non towered' aerodromes for departure involved when you are landing at EGKK or EGLL.

Apples and Oranges, CTMS times are effectively unknown to ATCs in OZ and the system is relying compliance from the end user. When a review was conducted in late 07 early 08 one company was found to be effectively ignoring anything CTMS related; and what was the penalty for non-compliance, extra holding for them and everyone else...

The European FMU (Brussells) programs long sector arrivals such as from USA or Asia into the arrivals sequence with (something like) 4 hours to go; so it seems that aircraft/pilots from Aus get no/or little delays even when going into places like Heathrow; when in fact the reality is everyone else is in effect slotted around this traffic. Apples and Oranges...

Similarly long sector arrivals (USA and DBX etc.) are given a max delay on arrival at Sydney (ML and BN too probably) so it would appear to them that they don't get delayed going in there either... I used to work SY arrivals and I can remember so horrific delays some days and then watching the OMDB or OMAA LAX SFO getting straight through with only speed control due to the 'rules'.

[shinning]

Excellent points Dubby. CTMS was way wrong. Acft held at times throughout the afternoon and then with no gaps at all, on a 3min arrival sequence, between about 1700 (or earlier?) until 2220 local. Approach worked hard all night, but it's worth mentioning the effort the arrivals sectors put in with hours of holding multiple acft, weather diversions, as well as trying to thread the departures back out through all of it.

Angle of Attack - Regarding the 6 min gap after your arrival. if you're talking about Friday night just gone there were probably a couple of these and the potential for many more. Due to almost every acft diverting around weather during that evening, most acft ended up off STAR for some or all of the arrival phase. Due to the dynamics of the weather and the pilot's appreciation of the best route around it at the time, not too many acft followed the same path. Some divert a lot, some not so much.... the result is that some can end up a long way behind the one they're supposed to be following, with a few bunching up behind them. Sometimes there is another acft nearby that can be moved up in the sequence to take advantage of the gap, which happened a few times, sometimes there isn't, hence the 6 min gap you saw. In most cases the 1st acft after any was followed by a few more a scratchy 3 miles behind on min speed.

At the end of the day, it's no one's fault, it's just trying to make the best of the cards that have been dealt on the day with the resources at hand. As P-Dubby says above, we're all on the same side, and I can assure you everyone was working professionally and doing what they could to minimise the pain/holding as fairly as possible.

[haughtney1]

P-Dubby, the gentleman in question was/is probably used to getting a NZ1 arrival (you are number 1...:}) at home base, and hence found it difficult to accept an 8 minute delay.
That being said, most more modern types of medium/Longhaul machines (includind Air NZ A320's I'd imagine) are datalink equipped, and so give contollers a live snapshot of eta's etc.
How difficult would it be for example to get the departure delayed out of AKL delayed for 8 minutes? Or does that go all the way back to the issue of flow control and ATM?
From a piloting perspective..losing 8 minutes is easy if we have 4-5hrs notice...just back off a bit on the cruise Mach, losing it within 300nm of destination is impossible...1 or 2 minutes is JUST a bout doable in an hour. I am personally much happier hitting a hold and flying around in 4 minute circles at a medium level sipping fuel, rather than for instance getting vectored all over the place flying inefficiently and blowing my contingency and flexibility out the exhaust pipe.
Its a battle for you guys..thats for sure.

[sunnySA]

a roster that lasts longer than milkMax1,
That is a gem. Do you have copyright on it?

P-Duddy
the Tower do not actually know the inbound delays
Whilst they do not know the specific delay, at TWRs that have a Maestro list the information is available, otherwise a review of the paper strip to compare system ETA and the landing time will be a pretty good indication.


shinning
3 min arrival sequence
Were there a departure between every arrival if not, why the 3 min arrival sequence? What about 3/2/3/2 or such like.

[towerboy]

I went to the supermarket today!

2 checkouts open...and 2 lines of shoppers!

A group of us went at the same time (we're very close)...and you wouldn't believe it...they delayed us to two at a time! The inefficiency is obvious! I waited for 30 minutes!!!

It wasn't our fault that we all went at the same time to the checkout, it was that they didn't provide enough aisles for the "let's have dinner" group of 150 people!

Would you believe it, they tried to say, take your time coming to the register?

BTW, I tried to get an 8am seat with all the airlines last week and was told that there were no seats available.

Surely airlines can predict these things and cater accordingly?

It's not about staff availability...is it?

If I was in Denver I could get a seat!

Australian airlines have a lot to answer for.

Why can't they deliver what they say they will?

I waited 2 hours with my wife for a technical fault with Qa ...but we were told nothing!

Get real.

Towerboy.

[Flava Saver]

Nice post towerboy. :} I had a chuckle. Well written.

Most airline drivers are aware there is an infrastructure issue in BNE. But can we ask for one thing...when we get a STAR clearance 180 track miles from BNE expecting a miracle 8-10 min loss, how about some heads up 15 mins earlier poss so we can throttle back in the cruise & avoid a lap or 2 at SMOKA?

This isn't a personal dig, but some manager needs to get his effin stuff in order if the flow computer isn't doing it's thing. It's 2011!! Got to say it's such a pleasure operating into busy overseas airports who rack em and stack em rarely!:ok:

[le Pingouin]

That being said, most more modern types of medium/Longhaul machines (includind Air NZ A320's I'd imagine) are datalink equipped, and so give contollers a live snapshot of eta's etc.
How difficult would it be for example to get the departure delayed out of AKL delayed for 8 minutes? Or does that go all the way back to the issue of flow control and ATM?We'd need to use a system along the lines that Blockla mentions.

Currently we just take you in the order you come - MAESTRO calculates your untouched estimate for the threshold, which gives the landing order & after inserting the appropriate time spacing between aircraft gives your landing time. The landing time is then used to calculate back to a time at the fix.

When there is high arrival demand a few seconds can change your delay significantly - if five aircraft are all nominally arriving within the one minute a small change in calculated estimate can put you at the end or the front of the queue with a commensurate change in delay.

It's possible to set a maximum delay for an individual aircraft (as mentioned for those departing Africa & the US or MED1 & VIP) or to set the landing time, but this isn't a routine thing.

In short, delays are totally dynamic & there is no real effort to control them.

[Blockla]

In short, delays are totally dynamic & there is no real effort to control them.Well Said... But from which end... You mention slot times to airline execs and they cringe... Probably because the way things have gone in the past every attempt to reduce/save/add efficiency has been f'cked up because of some penny pinching process that ASA tried to implement as 'good enough' instead of being resourced properly... What exactly is the NOC doing? Was/Is it a good investment? If it is a good investment, for who?

[framer]

Would it not help if all the a/c depating NZ gave an estimate for the oceanic boundry before they left NZ airspace and that info was used to give them a fix time 3 mins seperate from all the other Tasman flights?
I realise it is a complicated situation that I don,t understand fully and that there are a lot of other a/c arriving from other directions but wouldn,t that at least provide some spacing? Maybe make it 4 mins to accomdate other a/c and reduce the fuel burn across the Tasman.
I imagine its not practical for some reason.....I just can.t see why.

[Nautilus Blue]

We'd need to use a system along the lines that Blockla mentions.
It exists, the NOC can do it. PH is using CTMS differently, possibly not having MAESTRO is a blessing in disguise. The NOC runs the sequence the night before and posts the landing/slot times to the airlines. There are/were compliance issues, and you have to be prepared to hold the early ones and let the on-timers through, but it does help. Get your ALM's to speak to PH's and the NOC, and speak the PH flow's.

...losing it within 300nm of destination is impossible...1 or 2 minutes is JUST a bout doable in an hour
haughtney1 - can I assume you fly an Airbus heavy? I've seen 737's for example lose 10+ minutes from that sort of distance. Until we started using fix times, I didn't even know a jet could descend at less than 230kts!

[Roger Sir]

It exists, the NOC can do it.


Yes, the NOC can do it! Maybe we in en-route and TMA have been doing it all wrong! Let`s leave the sequencing into the major capital cities on the eastern seaboard to the NOC.

We`ve recently seen how the NOC have had ALOFT working like a dream. Maybe i was asleep and it was a dream!

Seriously though. Brisbane has had a few bad afternoons with single runway ops and poor wx. and, combined with steadily increasing traffic levels, the delays have increased. Get used to it.

Some good ideas thrown about on this thread by people who work the traffic and are generally aware of what the customer wants. The trouble is we can only work with the tools we have and within the constraints of our procedures. I would love to tell you guys and gals bound for Vegas to slow down but i have no idea of the delays unless i`m told by the sectors adjacent to me who handle traffic holding. If they are not too busy they may ask me to slow some down but when the holding and wx. are as bad as the other Friday then, from all accounts i`ve heard, the controllers are at 99% of their capacity to provide a SAFE and efficient service for both inbounds and outbounds. From the south of Brisbane to Coffs it`s just two en-route guys. If they sound busy it`s because they are!

Until we have more bitumen the parking lots will be used more and more.

Maybe CDM will fix some of the extended holding but there are other issues at play that i`m not privvy to e.g gates being required elsewhere so depart aircraft 'on time" knowing full well they`ll be late and burn heaps of fuel.

The solution? Long term we all know the answer but until then? Time to from a committee me thinks....:ugh:

[Oakape]

Australian ATC doesn't enforce slot times - we have no way of knowing & just takes you as you come. First in best dressed.
Currently we just take you in the order you come - MAESTRO calculates your untouched estimate for the threshold, which gives the landing order & after inserting the appropriate time spacing between aircraft gives your landing time. The landing time is then used to calculate back to a time at the fix.

When there is high arrival demand a few seconds can change your delay significantly - if five aircraft are all nominally arriving within the one minute a small change in calculated estimate can put you at the end or the front of the queue with a commensurate change in delay.

As far as the early slow down notification - this works when long delays are predicted. Unfortunately, controllers don't have the tools yet to see this. MAESTRO is a short term tactical (200nm) blunt instrument. As a Flow I can actually see aircraft on radar (no ADS link for the flow for some reason) that MAESTRO has not yet looked at. So an initial 3 or 4 min delay for an aircraft, can quickly blow out to 10-15 min or more when the other aircraft start populating the MAESTRO window. The sequence is often impossible to lock in until 160-180 nm - this is far too late to be effective for enroute slow downs.

The trouble is we can only work with the tools we have and within the constraints of our procedures.

The system, as it stands, doesn't reward slowing down en-route with less delay. The only way to get the least amount of delay is to be first at the appropriate 'gate'. It has been this way for years.

In years gone by, if holding was anticipated I would never slow down & some times even increased speed to get to the gate as close to the front of the que as possible. It would appear that things haven't changed much.

As le Pingouin says, "First in, best dressed".

[haughtney1]

haughtney1 - can I assume you fly an Airbus heavy? I've seen 737's for example lose 10+ minutes from that sort of distance. Until we started using fix times, I didn't even know a jet could descend at less than 230kts!

Wash thy mouth clean.......:} The big two engine stretched boeing...if we tried to descend at anything less than about 260 kts at the weights we generally fly at....there would be all sorts of visits to various offices etc.

[Nautilus Blue]

haughtney1 - mouth washed :O. Hadn't thought about weight. A lot of our traffic is short out and back legs, so on arrival they must be as light as a thing thats quite light.

[towerboy]

What a good idea...all aircraft give their "ESTIMATES".

Thanks for the "ESTIMATE!"

Let's plan the 200 aircraft around your "ESTIMATE".

Let's plan the 200 aircraft "ESTIMATES" around your "ESTIMATE" ,and lets plan YOUR "ESTIMATE" around the 200 aircraft "ESTIMATES."

And when you don't turn up on time...late px, tech prob, blah, blah...everyone screams..."ATC delays?"

Are you people for real???

I take my kids to school each morning and we stop at TRAFFIC LIGHTS!

BTW it's a two way street.

When WX is in aviation, it is a 1 way street!

Oh Bugger it...you should fly when you like, at what speed you like, at what height you like, in the direction that you like, and with no delays.

And apparently it won't delay other aircraft flying where they want, at what speed they want,at what height they want, what direction they want, with no delays.

What a bunch of fwits.

BTW, I want you to complain about that red light on the road to the Gov't.

KNOBS.

Towerboy.
















1

[Oakape]

Maybe so, but he has got a point.


Are you people for real???

I take my kids to school each morning and we stop at TRAFFIC LIGHTS!

[le Pingouin]

I was thinking maybe not enough.......

[HF3000]

So, help me here... When advised:

"delay is required, speed reduction approved"

is a speed reduction going to potentially cost a place or two in the sequence and cause a longer delay, or has the sequence been locked in at this point?

Some pilots seem to believe it will cost them further delays to slow down. Some even speed up when they get told this, as they feel they may gain a place or two in the sequence.

[Capn Bloggs]

Hadn't thought about weight. A lot of our traffic is short out and back legs, so on arrival they must be as light as a thing thats quite light.
It doesn't matter where they have come from, an aircraft's weight for landing will always be low comparatively-speaking. Most aircraft arriving at Cap City airports are landing with min fuel, so it all depends on the number of punters on board. Either Hauntney is always full of pax or his cripple 7 can't fly slow like the rest of us.

[le Pingouin]

HF3000, I can't provide a definitive answer but personally I use words to that effect when I've set your estimate in MAESTRO & I'm confident things won't change significantly (i.e. the other aircraft around you have largely been set as well). Once I've set you & told you to slow down I'm not going to touch the estimate in MAESTRO, so a change in speed won't change your delay, i.e no advantage or disadvantage.

Normally I'd tell you the expected delay if I didn't issue a fix time, but if I'm busy I might just tell you to slow down & get back to you when I can. It could also be an instruction passed on by another controller. For instance I'm in Melbourne & I'll see aircraft on the climb out of Adelaide. When delays are building I'll set the estimate early (it's a bit of a guess on climb but you get a good idea of performance on the day) & tell the 125.3 controller to slow you down. Usually I'd tell them the expected delay.

Only speaking for myself but those around me work in more or less the same way.

I think you'll find most controllers want you out of their airspace as quickly as possible (it makes life easier) so will do whatever they reasonably can to achieve it.

[Nautilus Blue]

Capn Bloggs - the one that always sticks in my mind was an Emirates - PH flight that needed quite a few extra track miles on descent to get down to max landing weight. Can't remember if it was a boeing or 'bus though.
Would if be fair to assume then if the wx is bad and your carrying alternate/holding fuel your min speeds would be higher than if it was cavok, or does pax load make more difference?

[haughtney1]

Just to give some context Bloggs

Either Hauntney is always full of pax or his cripple 7 can't fly slow like the rest of us.

At MLW, the 300ER has a Vref f30 of 149kts....so 3 or so tonnes either way that speed varies by a knot or so. So min clean lets say in round numbers is 230kts....we have a company requirement of maintaining a certain speed above min clean unless slowing down below 10000 and configuring, which just so happens to be between 255-260kts in most instances...so most guys I know use about 260kts above 10 as a low speed cutoff.
EK are quite good at filling aeroplanes up....I've never worked anywhere were I've operated so close to MLW on such a consistent basis..and its often the limiting factor at the planning/dispatch stage.

Apologies for the thread drift...I guess my point is, we find it hard to slow down and lose time without a bit of notice:ok:

[Dick N. Cider]

Getting back to the question of "delay is required, speed reduction approved", when you are bound for an airport served by MAESTRO (BN SY ML) this instruction should not be issued until such time as you are at least "stable" in the sequence. Stable means that the order, based upon natural estimates for the threshold (time at the feeder fix + time to go to runway in use) has been locked in. Speeding up at this stage simply gets you to the delay quicker. It's your call. The instruction is clearly optional. However if I say "reduce to minimum speed" I expect you to slow down and will base separation with other traffic on it.

At this stage, since the system "knows" the landing order, required delays are simply a the result of required runway spacing added to the preceding traffic estimate(s). MAESTRO never issues a go fast instruction. This is always the result of someone either helping on request, or the Flow trying to reduce delays to following traffic.

So why do delays change after you been given a time, or perhaps slowed down only to be sped up again? All the things you have to deal with in the air have an impact on the sequence. If preceding traffic can't maintain the required speed (say due turbulence) then everyone behind has to slow as well. If the Flow tries to reduce cumulative delays by changing one or more aircraft to another runway, then the whole sequence moves up and maybe increased speed is required. Note that generally hi speed descents will not be issued unless there is a traffic management advantage - your companies have made it quite clear they don't want them unless asked for. Sometimes even, whilst stable, changes happen. Med1, close in departures (that had a slot) etc. have an impact.

In the end, the only reason you get a delay is because there isn't runway available when you want it.

DNC

[geeohgeegeeoh]

They have approval for a second parallel runway, and I recall a heap of flames in the local papers (I live in Coorparoo under at least one of the approaches when its not out over the bay)

I would imagine the heat and light is all gone now: they just have to find funding to build the damn thing.

[Jack Ranga]

How difficult would it be for example to get the departure delayed out of AKL delayed for 8 minutes? Or does that go all the way back to the issue of flow control and ATM?



Haugtney, what do you do about all the RPT that departs within 30 minutes of the aerodrome? Do we get them to hold for 3 hours because one has been slowed down already form the ocean?

What do we do about ALL the traffic that departs AFTER the aircraft that slows down 3 hours out?

You are all talking about delays caused by:

The ridiculous airline scheduling that has not got a hope of succeeding.

Infrastructure delays that have not got a hope of being solved. During the great depression the US built the Hoover Dam amongst other things to create employment. What did Australia do during the GFC? Pink bats! What a great infrastructure initiative! Even killed a few people and burnt several houses down.

Political Delays, the moron who's in charge of transport is an airport noise campaigner! Do you think you are gunna get more runways at ANY airport in Australia? Badgerys Creek has been going for 30 odd years now?

Weather, you can't tell me where you are going or how many track miles you are going to add to your flight so how can I tell anyone behind you!! I thought one of the biggest whinges was slow down, speed up, slow down?

[Worrals in the wilds]

I would imagine the heat and light is all gone now: they just have to find funding to build the damn thing.

They have the funding, the last estimated cost I heard was a shade under a billion dollars. Preliminary work (surveying and stuff) has already started. No-one's been eaten by a feral pig yet, but it's only a matter of time :} ...

The trouble is that it takes years to build a runway, particularly when you've got a scrubby, pig infested swamp to start with. Clearing the ground and sandpumping alone will take ages, then you've got to let it settle, then you can start putting in the base (from memory, the existing 01/19 has a base more than six feet deep, multiply that by the 45m width and 3200m length) and then finally laying concrete/ashpalt. Then there are all the taxiways...

2018 rings a bell as the completion date, if nothing goes horribly wrong.

That's why the earlier comment about Melbourne not caring is a worry, because when all the planning approvals and NIMBY placation are factored in you have to allow twenty years or so to get a runway built. It's not something you can rush in to and whack down in a year once your traffic delays hit chaos levels.

[Jabawocky]

Worrals

My dear...you really need to stop applying common sense. That is not how Governement and monopoly infrastructure organisations work. You should know better! ;)

J:)

PS.......So do you go hunting for pork in your lunch break down there? Sounds like fun, with all those guns, knives and things confiscated by the security folk you should be well equipped!

[Worrals in the wilds]

Never you mind... :E

[Roger Sir]

I should probably shut up now.


P-Dubby,

Please don`t. You share a lot of real world common sense. Stay on message...:D

[Genisis Dreaming]

One thing that I have not seen mentioned to here to prove it is an airline timetable problem is how much the holding has increased, both AM and PM since daylight savings ended down south. It changes everything!

[lestump]

And fades the curtains.

[havick]

[/quote] For now: it's about the number of runways vs. number of planes - simple math. [/quote]


What about helos that land on the GA apron (including IFR).

[sleeve of wizard]

I've never worked anywhere were I've operated so close to MLW on such a consistent basis..and its often the limiting factor at the planning/dispatch stage.


Haughtney, the 777-300er will be landing weight limited on sectors of about 8-9hours, short intra gulf sectors unless your tankering will be zfw limited.

[haughtney1]

Sleeve.....ummm, since we are talking about BNE holding, thats the context of my comment, as for short sectors, I dont tend to do many..and hence MLW weight comment as going to Vegas, or MEL invariable means having gas for each other for "operational flexibility"
Anyway..back on subject..nothing to see here :ok:

[havick]

P-dubby. Agreed. But that does not help helo drivers (IFR), as you call up to get a slot time, response "no slot time needed", pilot response "but the weather is poo, can I get a slot time", response "no slot time needed for helo's".

Helo gets airborne, enroute to Brissy, helo pilot told "the weather is poo, do you have a slot time?", pilot response "no, told it wasn't required"..

Helo pilot now diverts to amberly to let down on the ILS and fly visual to parafield to pick up passengers due to 1 - 1.5 hr holding at brisbane..


That's but one scenario... Not having a go, but it would nice to be able to slot in to pick up your pax, even when the cloud is on the deck

[max1]

Not sure if I really answered your question. BTW - in this instance did you request your Slot time via the adjoining sector, or by telephone to the Flow?

This should be interesting?

[havick]

P-dubby via telephone..

The problem that arises now is every time I need to go into Brisbane I call up via telephone to organise a slot time, and told it's not required for helo's. Weather looks like it could go either way at this stage, therefore pilot is told that a slot time will not be given.

It's one of those circular things, you can't get in without a slot time (in bad weather), but you aren't given a slot time because at the time of the phone call the weather looks OK, but then it turns to custard and you have no slot time even though you have tried to do everything you can in the right fashion.

In the particular instance that I mentioned earlier fortunately we were able to transfer the pax to archerfield by road and pick them up there. But I can see it posing a problem in the future with a similar scenario if weather comes in. ie back of the line as you don't have a slot time, even though you endeavoured to get one 'just in case'.

** I'd like to add, I'm not having a go at the controllers they're obviously doing their best with a crappy situation. I'm just passing along what can/does occur from a IFR helo operator level.

[Dick N. Cider]

Anyone want to take the bait about who answers the phone? On legal advice I bear no opinion at this stage.

[Roger Sir]

Anyone want to take the bait about who answers the phone?


Could i suggest the NOC? It couldn`t be a real controller could it? The more i think about it the more i think it sounds like a job for the NOC.

It would be "seamless and beneficial" no doubt.....:D

[max1]

Havick who are you ringing on the phone??????

Is it a high rise in the middle of Canberra that has two people on the nightshift because OH&S regs deem it is unsafe to have one person alone?

Or is it someone with operational experience at the airfield who can understand what your problem is ( i.e. not in a place a 1000km away where the CEO has come back from an OS trip and decided Australia should have one of those , staffed it with people who have bugger all operational experience but who can recite whatever corporate relations tell them to and still try to tell Qantas, Virgin, etc that everything is wonderful and there are no staff shortages??) and advise that you do actually need a slot time.

Dick.N.Cider and Roger, I believe we may be reading from the same book??

[max1]

I'm having a 'robust' McClaren Vale Red but I may switch to Bundy to understand ARFOR.
Barring another desperate phone call tonight/tomorrow from my fully staffed employer I'll hope for an uninterrupted day off tomorrow. Fat chance.

[havick]

max1, not sure if you're having a swipe at me... simply calling the number in the ersa as it directs you to for a slot time.

I'm not insinuating that my ops are more important than someone else.. in fact the opposite.. Merely suggesting that the practice that is in place is clearly not adequate if you can't even fly into a major airport and pick up some pax, even with trying to tick all the boxes.. It makes it difficult to guarantee any sort of service delivery if you're not sure whether you'll even manage to land at the airport (no crystal ball to look 2 - 3 weeks ahead at the weather for your arrival).

It's just getting harder and harder to get things done these days... I'm but one end user of the system.. we're all in this together.

[havick]

my previous posts are probably a thread drift anyway, the originator was talking about holding times into brisbane.. I'm talking about slot times (or lack of) which is a different topic..

[ARFOR]

Max ... on the same side .... broadcasting the ... cold hard reality

Don't worry, ;) many are scratching their collective heads trying to find a justification for Australia's application of safety critical resources!?!?! .. :rolleyes:

[Angle of Attack]

I admit to being quite impressed watching the QF 737-800 hit the gates within 10 seconds for an RNP approach. But if the guy in front or behind is out by a minute that precision has been for nought in the overall picture.

Thanks for your info P-Dubby, obviously you are an ATCer and would be interested in your observations about how accurate aircraft make there set times at waypoints, I have flown with various others some try for a minute early others strive to the second, some +- 1 minute,but my guess would be you guys want it as spot on as possible right? I also echo a previous poster your posts are really valuable please dont shut up! :ok:

[max1]

havick, DEFINITELY NOT having a swipe at you.
From an operational ATC point of view, just wondering whether you are being funneled by ersa to the National Operations Centre in Canberra( Airservices Australias version of a Mumbai call centre spawned by the CEO) or actually talking to someone within a light year of actually helping you.
For those in the know, the NOC decided they would draft and implement ALOFT (Ats Long-range Optimum Flow Tool) this year off their own bat. Incidents, debacles, etc. They were advised,warned and finally ALOFT was cancelled.
The NOC cannot be seen to be a failure as the CEO has decreed it. Hazeltons RIP.

[Capn Bloggs]

I am not sure if anyone has ever rung them for a slot time - it would be interesting to know what they would say?

I have a few times. Always courteous, they have allocated me a new slot without fuss. I haven't liked the delay sometimes, but that's not their fault.

[severidian]

EUROCONTROL - The CASSIS Flight Trials (http://www.eurocontrol.int/tma2010/public/standard_page/CASSIS_flight_trials.html)

Results of CASSIS trial at Arlanda of FMS for CTA OPS. You are correct that 1 minute is no where near accurate enough.

ATC generally use time to establish the sequence to a TMA volume at which point in trail distance is used, in general for high capacity OPS this is about +- 10 SEC accuracy.

[Nautilus Blue]

I have a few times.
But you fly into that weird west coast airport. The only thing I like more than having a go at ASA is having a go at TFN personally, and I know slot times are a hopeless cause on this thread. But since slot times, most days I do less work to provide a better service to industry, and at worst its only as bad as it was before. The only down side is you have to let go of a little prejudice, and upgrade the NOC from WOFTAM to mostly WOFTAM.

[amberale]

Havick, sounds like you are an IFR charter op.

If you plan this way and call for a slot when TAF/TTF indicate that an instrument approach is required then you should be able to get one.
It's a PITA to fit you in to a busy sequence because of the time you will take to do the approach but I don't know any flow's who would knock you back because of that.

The problem happens when the weather is marginal and the tower assures the TMA that there should be no problems with a helo getting visual on lowest safe altitudes.
If the WX goes to shtt then you lose out.

I suggest a call or visit to the center in BN to explain your concerns and sort out a solution.

Sound like BN has gotten worse since I left there 2 1/2 years ago but I don't think my departure has had an effect on that.:}

Keep up the good work PD [congrats on your flow rating btw]

AA

[HF3000]

It seems this thread is attempting to ascertiain why a more efficient system could or couldn't be implemented but most defendants are saying that this is the system, like it or lump it. I suspect we are all constrained by inflexible policy makers, be they computer system designers or beaurocrats or both.

If only real world pilots and controllers could regain charge maybe some practical, useful and efficient solutions might prevail.

I saw a pig fly once, but I may have been mistaken.

[Dick N. Cider]

Sadly the pigs are now retired. Replaced by some sort of super insect for the time being.

[Jack Ranga]

Angle of Attack,

When I was doing arrivals (:hmm:) one minute early is taking the p!ss, 30 seconds is perfect (approach can tweak your speed if they need to lose that thirty seconds) but late, even thirty seconds is a complete pain in the arse. It's very easy to lose time (vector, speed control) it's extremely hard, as you'd know, to make up time at that phase of flight.

[Roger Sir]

If only real world pilots and controllers could regain charge maybe some practical, useful and efficient solutions might prevail.


Tell him he`s dreamin!

Recent events at ASA have seen the "experts" in Canberra stuff up ALOFT. Until there is a distinct change in attitude from Canberra, and the field controllers are consulted, then sadly i see no change.:yuk:

[Capn Bloggs]

I suppose you guys realise some FMS eg Honeywell don't display Est Time Over waypoints to the second?

http://i521.photobucket.com/albums/w334/capnbloggs/mcdu_eto.jpg

Even when the FF is the next waypoint, we only get a 6 sec accuracy display.

http://i521.photobucket.com/albums/w334/capnbloggs/eti_nd.jpg
Generally, it's almost too late to do anything about it (unless you're early, in which case a drastic slowdown can fix it, as Jack mentioned).

Also, what actually is THE time? Say the FF time 0845. The norm when talking about a number is to round it. So 0845 is 0844:30 to 0845:30. So when the box says 0845, it could be 0845:01 or 0845:59. There is no way of knowing what it is without some detailed experimenting, fiddling the FMS speed, to find the exact 0844>0845 changeover point.

If only real world pilots and controllers could regain charge maybe some practical, useful and efficient solutions might prevail.
What is required is a complete change of mindset of the operators/pilots. Make your slot or else. That's the way Europe operates, and the way we'll have to. If you're early on your FF time, you're screwing somebody else.

[amberale]

Not always possible Cap'n.

Some FMSs are better than others in this detail.

We regularly give the little busses a FF only to be told that they can't get there until a later time.
They then turn up early.:ugh:

Not the pilot's fault but the data the aircrafts FMS is based on.

The main problem with most of our airport delays is, as Pdubby says, the runways or lack of them.

AA

[flightfocus]

This is without doubt the best thread I have ever seen on PPRUNE. :D

Everyone sharing information, staying on topic, no F*&*^#ts slagging each other, no pissing contest's and an informative read.

Well done all. :ok:

[VH-Cheer Up]

Sounds like resolution of the FMS time display is one issue - but how are FMS synchronised? If from a satellite then OK, but if not, my 0845+-:30 could be the next person's 0846 or 0844, +- recurring to infinity.

Whose clock is the real clock?

[Jack Ranga]

We regularly give the little busses a FF only to be told that they can't get there until a later time.

Never trust an airbus, in particular an A320. They will burn you every time.........every time :{

[havick]

P-Dubby, quick question for you.

ERSA states that aircraft with a slot time can expect a maximum 10min airborne delay, except GA aircraft which will be allocated a delay IAW traffic priorities.

so does this mean that if you're not RPT etc that even with a slot time to expect a delay (realistically) greater than 10 mins (assuming you make your slot time etc)?

the ERSA then goes on to say ground delays will be implemented if airborne delays exceed 60 mins

I can't see this actually happening for any GA arrivals, (even with a slot time).


After re-reading all that it would seem that for a GA aircraft arrival during a busy period, a slot time really holds no weight anyway. so with this in mind, how much fuel should we realistically need to carry if we really need to get into brisban and diverting to AF is not an option due to operational req's?

It's all very unclear as to how much fuel you really need due to holding.

[havick]

P-Dubby.

THanks for your informative response. At least we both agree that the ERSA is very ambiguous, and doesn't really offer much with regard to expected delays (read flight planning - fuel etc).

Ideally we would plan to arrive outside of peak periods (the few times we do have to arrive) and fingers crossed it wouldn't require an ILS and then break off for the GA apron (helicopter).

Sometimes though we have to meet a corporate jet to pick someone up, so at least now we can either plan to get there considerably earlier (outside of peak times - aircraft availability might prevent this), or carry the go-juice and just let the pax on the ground know to expect delays.

From an operator level, I really don't mind at all extended periods of holding (helicopters in IFR arrival - bad weather), it would be nice to know a worst case scenario in order to stack on the fuel otherwise organise alternative arrangements in advance and pass it on to the client if the fuel tanks aren't big enough.

cheers, havick

[havick]

it's rare, generally only when the weather requires it to get visual.. otherwise it would just be the typical sighting jet traffic and manouvering as req'd for the GA apron.

All of the above only really applies when it's crap weather requiring an instrument approach to get in. essentially making a helo (with more limiting fuel tanks) an aeroplane until you're visual.

[Capn Bloggs]

Sounds like resolution of the FMS time display is one issue - but how are FMS synchronised?
Most modern ones are GPS updated.

[le Pingouin]

As is TAAATS.

[Angle of Attack]

When I was doing arrivals () one minute early is taking the p!ss, 30 seconds is perfect (approach can tweak your speed if they need to lose that thirty seconds) but late, even thirty seconds is a complete pain in the arse. It's very easy to lose time (vector, speed control) it's extremely hard, as you'd know, to make up time at that phase of flight.

Jack Ranga,
Thanks for that, I always suspected slightly early is better than slightly late, as as you say its easier to lose than gain time in final stages of approach. I will now try and spread the word to some +-1min crew (but then when they stuff it and it blows out to 2 mins late just say OK well tell ATC we are gonna be late at around 5 mins to the fix... lol) and aim for the -30s to on time goal. Thanks
:ok:

[amberale]

Havick I have often wondered about corporate jets flying private rather than charter.

If the company was set up with a seperate flying company section could you not operate the flying wing seperately and charge the corporate section for services?

This would then make you non scheduled RPT and equal priorities.

I don't know if there are other costs associated with this but if it means your corporate travellers get to their meetings on time it might be worth it.

I am sure a small restructure would be no problem for the accountants.

Just a thought.

AA

[havick]

Amberale... that's a good thought, but wouldn't quite work with the technicalities of this particular operation (I'd probably be crucified for publishing commercial in cofidence stuff publicly). Needless to say we can't tick the military box on a flight plan.

[Genisis Dreaming]

Havick,

With having 'clients' and not owners, doesn't this make you a charter operation and not GA. Hence, you should be able to plan N and not G. Same going if you're meeting a jet with 'clients' and not 'owners'?

My understanding was any charter operation was cat N, not G.

P-Dubby can you elaborate?

[havick]

Holding is never an issue when the weather allows visual approach as we just make an approach to the GA apron. It's when the weather is crap (seems to be the case every time I get tasked) that you need to punch an approach to get in, in which case a helicopter is no different to a fixed wing until visual.

Category type aside, if we know what delays to expect at least we can then forward plan accordingly. At the moment it's pretty unclear and the ERSA is fairly vague about it all.

** Edited - removed some company intricacies

[Dickcheese]

A little known fact is that around about the time we lost CROPS, the criteria from changing to Instrument Approaches (and thus more spacing) was altered. Whereas a cloud base of 2500 ft was the cut-off it was changed to 3000 ft for runway 19 and 3000 ft to the south or 4000 ft to the north for runway 01. Something to do with a visual point on the STAR.
I think this change was masked by the loss of CROPS but imo it hasn't helped with holding.

[max1]

Thanks for that, I always suspected slightly early is better than slightly late, as as you say its easier to lose than gain time in final stages of approach. I will now try and spread the word to some +-1min crew (but then when they stuff it and it blows out to 2 mins late just say OK well tell ATC we are gonna be late at around 5 mins to the fix... lol) and aim for the -30s to on time goal. Thanks


I hope this thread has been informative for pilots. But don't assume that you are helping by trying to be on the early side. Aim as close as possible to the time you have been given, always. ATC will then assess and massage you into the sequence based on what those in front of you have achieved. This has been discussed on Pprune before. Pilots don't have the full picture and sometimes neither does the arrivals ATC.
In a nutshell, MAESTRO ( flow computer) works on a Feeder Fix time ( a defined point somewhere on a 45nm circle from the aerodrome) , adds a distance to landing predicated on the duty runway and calculates a landing time. It continues to assess these landing times as aircraft progressively get closer to the field and eventually locks in a time. When delays are required it uses this calculated landing time and works out a sequence wherein delays are shared.
The FIRST TWO MINUTES OF DELAY are assigned to the Approach unit to absorb, above this then becomes the arrivals controllers responsibility. In this instance, aircraft may have a MAESTRO delay that the Arrivals controller DOES NOT KNOW ABOUT.
If the arrivals controller has all the aircraft in the sequence through their FF it is easy for them to work out that the sequence is A,B,C,D and E, and that MAESTRO is applyinga 2 minute delay for Approach to fix. Approach will be looking for around 10nm spacing and no huge speed difference at the Feeder Fix point.
MAESTRO may show that B and C can come across at the same time, C will actually be getting stretched out in Approaches airspace. Usually the sequence is a mix of aircraft from different FFs. Arrivals sectors have Maestro set up to show the required times that their aircraft are required to cross their Feeder Fix, Arrivals can access a Runway View that shows ALL landings and can see how their aircraft fit into the whole landing sequence but can't second guess how the Approach controller will achieve this , as the Arrivals controller does not have the full picture of what the Approach/Departures cell are doing.
With the example above, there may be no aircraft landing in the slot ahead of A, Approach's plan may be to shorten A and B up thereby negating the need to stretch C,D, and E.
X is slow departing due Y missing a high speed exit after landing causing A and B to now NOT being shortened up, C now needs to fly those extra 2 minutes causing D to need those 2 minutes, D's time at the FF was actually 0823.4 rounded down to 0823, D thought they were helping by being there at 0822. Controllers plan A is out the window. A and B to continue downwind, C onto a vector/ speed reduction , D is fair up Cs clacker big vector/ speed reduction for D.
D thinks "I got on Pprune asked the questions turned up a bit early at the Feeder Fix to help out like they asked and get stuffed around like this. This has got to the most incompetent bunch of ATCs in the world." This is ATC on a minute to minute basis. P.S. This is not aimed at AoA.
It's great that we get to have this dialogue here, but just aim at the time we give you and let us stuff you around from there. Cheers.:ok:

[max1]

Fair enough P-Dubby, it is the Bne ATC Holding thread.
Sydney is even more complex in that with dual runway ops MAESTRO will may have 3 aircraft for Rwy Left, Right, Left due through the FF all at the same time as the second aircraft will be getting its delay in the terminal area.
P-Dubby, in Brisbane, do you want them at the FF early/on time, on time, on time/late?

[Jack Ranga]

"I got on PPRuNe asked the questions turned up a bit early at the Feeder Fix to help out like they asked and get stuffed around like this. This has got to the most incompetent bunch of ATCs in the world." This is ATC on a minute to minute basis. P.S. This is not aimed at AoA.
It's great that we get to have this dialogue here, but just aim at the time we give you and let us stuff you around from there. Cheers.

Gees, Angle of Attack, disregard my answer, turn up at the fix not one second early, not one second late and you will never get dicked around.

I was taught that it was much easier for everyone involved (including approach) that it was easier to lose time than make it up. I was taught that it was the most efficient way of processing traffic. In my experience it p!ssed approach controllers off less if aircraft were marginally early rather than marginally late

Poll for Pilots:

If you are a minute late at the fix doing 250kts and on profile height wise, can you make up a minute with 50 track miles to run?

If you are a minute early at the fix doing 250kts and on profile height wise, can you lose a minute with 50 track miles to run? If not, will a vector help to lose that time?

[Angle of Attack]

No Worries I always try to get on time and either way no one really wants to be late at their fix anyway, as they are probably late anyway. Personally I aim -30sec to on time and if i am in that gate i am happy. I prefer to make it closer to spot on though if I can.:)

[HF3000]

Poll for Pilots:

If you are a minute late at the fix doing 250kts and on profile height wise, can you make up a minute with 50 track miles to run?

If you are a minute early at the fix doing 250kts and on profile height wise, can you lose a minute with 50 track miles to run? If not, will a vector help to lose that time?

Depends on altitude and wind a bit.

But say you are 20-30 thousand feet at 250kt in nil wind you are doing around 360KT GS to pick a round number. That's 6 NM per minute. It will therefore take you around 8.3 mins to get to the fix.

You want to do it in 7.3 mins? That's 410KT GS or about 285KT IAS. No problem.

You want to do it in 9.3 mins? That's 320KT GS or about 225KT IAS. Some aircraft might be able but some can't (or won't - it can be uncomfortable).

I think you'll find most pilots prefer vectors to large speed increases or decreases close to the fix. 250 knots is a nice fuel efficient and comfortable speed that suits most aircraft types.

[max1]

Jack Ranga,
Calm down. I'm not sure if you work arrivals???
My point is, if I instruct the pilot to make a time at the Feeder Fix , I am working on the assumption that the pilot will do their best to make that time. Not disregrard that time and think that I really want them there 30 seconds to a minute early. You are correct in that it is easier to lose a minute in the Terminal area than make it up. If I look at the sequence and work out that the Maestro time is 23 1/3 but 24 will work better, I am not wanting them to work on getting there early. If I want the aircraft there at 23, I'll tell them that. If I have a requirement for an aircraft to cross a point at a level , can the aircraft decide that they will be okay a little higher or a little lower than what I asked , because they are anticipating what they think I really needed?

I was taught that it was much easier for everyone involved (including approach) that it was easier to lose time than make it up. I was taught that it was the most efficient way of processing traffic. In my experience it p!ssed approach controllers off less if aircraft were marginally early rather than marginally late

I was hoping you were taught that it is much better and efficient to get it right the first time, but if you don't get it right , you are correct.

I am happy for pilots to query what I am doing, speak up if the frequency is quiet, ask if they are still required to be on a heading, if a restricted area is active,etc. What I don't want is a pilot to assume that the ATC instruction that I have given them is open to their interpretation. It's nice that those who frequent this forum know that controllers would prefer , if you can't meet your time, early rather than late. But please aim to get it as near to right as you can. If you plan to get there earlier than the time I have given you and the winds aren't what was forecast (shock, horror) you may end up there even earlier than early. The controller is in a better position to know how long aircraft are taking to do a certain distance, they would have watched many aircraft fly that route segment, they know that airline X with the Airbus will get down low and slow and is always late at the Feeder Fix, they will shorten this aircraft up to get there at the time they want, they know to put this aircraft up the clacker of the preceding aircraft and leave plenty of room behind because that airline goes low and slow no matter what you tell them. It is these type of things that the pilots do not know about how all the other aircraft are affecting them. A favourite is when an aircraft is given the instuction to maintain maximum speed. The distance is not really opening up as you would have anticipated. You ask the pilot their speed , the reply is " er 300 knots, but we can go faster if you want", which part of maximum is not understood here.
There are a number of complaints on here about how controllers O/S do it better. Have a listen to the frequency you are on, and count how many times controllers have to repeat instructions to our domestic RPT jets. Rarely have problems with internationals listening out, we sometimes have problems with the understanding of the instructions, but they rarely have to be called twice.

[Roger Sir]

turn up at the fix not one second early, not one second late and you will never get dicked around.


Which planet are you living on?

If this was the case then we could do without controllers i`d say. In the cold, hard light of day there are stll a whole lot of valid reasons why issuing of Feeder Fix times doesn`t always work.

If it was as simple as issuing times then ALOFT would work. It`s recently been 'sin-binned' `cos it didn`t work!

[Hempy]

13.4 At the time or position advised, the pilot must advise departure from the stack, and state heading and altitude. A pilot should endeavour to leave the holding fix on time, but one (1) minute ahead of time is acceptable.

^^^ my bolding

[Trent 972]

Max1, your statement
...they know that airline X with the Airbus will get down low and slow and is always late at the Feeder Fix, ...because that airline goes low and slow no matter what you tell them...
In managed 'Vertical Navigation' the Airbii (can only speak for 330/340, 380) are programmed to 'Go Down' then 'Slow Down'. If you want 'slow down then go down', and have not communicated it before Top of Drop, it can get a bit messy to alter the 'Managed Speed' after descent has commenced. (There is a backdoor way to do it, but it's messy). If we use 'Selected Speed' to make your timings then sometimes our height restriction protections are impacted, and when it comes to complying with your speed requests versus 'Coffee and Cake' with the Fleet Manager, for busting altitudes, you're 2nd on my list of priorities. The bigger airbii come down at 4nm/1000ft. 330's/380's are invaribly hung up against the bottom of a CTA step at some stage on most descents into the capital city airports. That's pretty much why they are 'Low & Slow'. They're better gliders than fighters.

edit- thanks max, and saw your brief reply too dubby. :)

[VH-ABC]

Hempy,

Is a holding fix seen as the same thing as a feeder fix though? I would have thought so, but the reference only mentions holding. Confusing hey...

[max1]

Trent 972,

It is a trait that the Intls Airbus' seems to have. It is not a criticism, it just is and we work with this. The time Maestro calculates these airbuses being at the feeder fix and the reality are not the same, tweaking times is not uncommon to reflect the reality.
e.g. 3 of us are following each other to a point 500 metres away and are told to get there 2 minutes apart. Person A may decide to sprint 400 metres and walk the last 100 metres and meet the time. Person B may elect to jog the whole 500 metres and meet the time. Person C may decide to sprint 300 metres and walk the last 200 metres and meet the time. They all have met their required times , the problem is that I don't want Person C to get up close and personal with Person B.
Some aircraft types lose the time in the cruise, some descend early, some try to lose it all on descent, Intl airbuses have their own way and it sometimes gets interesting for us.
This is why we try to put the Airbus close to the one in front and leave extra room behind well before the feeder fix. We know that by the feeder fix we will naturally get back to roughly equal distances and comparable speeds.
Hope that explains things for you.

you're 2nd on my list of priorities. I'll take that, its higher than I get at home.

[Jack Ranga]

Which planet are you living on?

Are you serious, you can't detect sarcasm................;)

Calm down.

I'm ok mate, no worries here :ok:

I'm not sure if you work arrivals???

Did, don't anymore.

I was hoping you were taught that it is much better and efficient to get it right the first time, but if you don't get it right , you are correct.

I'm talking about the half hourly occurrence of things not working out in the terminal area as planned i.e. not all pilots flying at the speed published in our books, slowing down for turbulence, diversions, foreign pilots flying more cautiously than they would in their own country etc.

Or if I stuff it up :E

[Capn Bloggs]

they know that airline X with the Airbus will get down low and slow and is always late at the Feeder Fix
Surely a gentle bollocking on the radio will stir the crews up to get it right next time? If the aircraft FMS has a problem in that it consistently tells lies, then the company should work out a strategy for it's crews so they can hit the feeder fix on time. It shouldn't be up to ATC to continually "work around" a fleet that always messes up it's timing.

3 of us are following each other to a point 500 metres away and are told to get there 2 minutes apart. Person A may decide to sprint 400 metres and walk the last 100 metres and meet the time. Person B may elect to jog the whole 500 metres and meet the time. Person C may decide to sprint 300 metres and walk the last 200 metres and meet the time. They all have met their required times , the problem is that I don't want Person C to get up close and personal with Person B.
Some aircraft types lose the time in the cruise, some descend early, some try to lose it all on descent, Intl airbuses have their own way and it sometimes gets interesting for us.
AsA would do well to start talking to the airlines about the problems ATC have, because there are many ways to skin a cat when working out how to hit the FF on time, some of which obviously cause grief. There probably are types that cannot slow down much more in the cruise but others can. There's no point in barrelling in to the descent point at warp speed then descending on the stick shaker, but at the moment, it appears there's no consistency for ATC to rely on.

The bigger airbii come down at 4nm/1000ft. 330's/380's are invaribly hung up against the bottom of a CTA step at some stage on most descents into the capital city airports. That's pretty much why they are 'Low & Slow'.
It's about time CASA revised the MOS steps so that this is not necessary. Not only does it mess up the flow by the look of it, it wastes fuel and annoys/increases workload for the crew.

[Capn Bloggs]

If you want 'slow down then go down', and have not communicated it before Top of Drop, it can get a bit messy to alter the 'Managed Speed' after descent has commenced. (There is a backdoor way to do it, but it's messy).
That's what the PCL/Fixit Stick is for. Or does that make your tinfoil wings waggle too much? :E

[le Pingouin]

AsA would do well to start talking to the airlines about the problems ATC have, because there are many ways to skin a cat when working out how to hit the FF on time, some of which obviously cause grief. There probably are types that cannot slow down much more in the cruise but others can. There's no point in barrelling in to the descent point at warp speed then descending on the stick shaker, but at the moment, it appears there's no consistency for ATC to rely on.Fixed profiles with no deviation without asking (none of this +/- 20kts rubbish!) would help a lot. Of course that wouldn't please the accountants :/

It makes me laugh (or is it cry?) when I see all the effort being put into developing aircraft efficiencies (Aspire & tailored arrivals for instance) without taking into account anything else affecting the aircraft. There's no point in optimising just one component (a single aircraft) without optimising the entire system.


It's about time CASA revised the MOS steps so that this is not necessary. Not only does it mess up the flow by the look of it, it wastes fuel and annoys/increases workload for the crew.That smells like an airspace grab to me :eek: The horror!:E Good luck on getting anything even half sensible approved :ugh:

[Trent 972]

Capn B.That's what the PCL/Fixit Stick is for. Or does that make your tinfoil wings waggle too much?
Speed Brake at anything other than warp speed is like having an erection at a nudist colony. (Other than be able to carry 5 donuts and two cups of coffee), it's out there, but doesn't count for much.

[havick]

P-Dubby. Thanks for keeping the posts informative and letting us all know that it's not just us pilots that get frustrated at times, but the same sentiment at your end.

I guess at the end of the day there's only so much optimisation one can do, but the reality is that another runway is needed.

[asw28-866]

Interesting & informative thread.

The operator I fly for has a twice weekday arrival/departure at YBBN in a GA type under charter ops. We have certainly noticed the impact of the CROPS changes and congestion periods on our ability to get in/out in a timely manner. That being said, ATC have and continue to be very helpful.

+-30 secs for a slot time is a little more tricky without an FMS, but +-1 minute is usually manageable. Though as others have said losing is far easier than gaining.

My question for those in the know is, fairly often the ATIS will be broadcasting single runway ops on 01/19 and we will initially be told to expect that duty runway inbound. Then we will be offered a change to 14, which is beneficial and welcome. The question is what dictates the ability to offer 14 in that situation?

'866

[asw28-866]

P-Dubby thank you Sir,

All perfectly clear.

[Going Nowhere]

Without CROPS in operation, Approach must separate using a radar standard your approach to RWY14 and missed approach with both the first aircraft landing and making a missed approach on RWY19, as well as with the aircraft landing after you on to RWY19. Because of the intersecting natire of the approach and missed approach paths these separation distances end up being greater than if we processed you via RWY19 in trail.

If using 2min spacing at MLY/SMOKA/BLAKA/etc, can you apply a 2 min spacing to each runway but offset but 1 min from the converging runway?

EG
Landing runway 19 @ time 45
Landing runway 14 @ time 46
Landing runway 19 @ time 47
Landing runway 14 @ time 48

etc, etc...

Does that infringe the 'radar standard' ?

[Going Nowhere]

That pretty much covers thanks P-Dubby! Thought 1 min alternate spacing down final might have worked. :ok:

Guess we'll have to keep counting laps at the inbound fix for another 8 years.

[Angle of Attack]

I think Sing Air need a talking to! lol whenever i hear them on approach ahead we invariably get told to reduce to 220 knots with 30-40 miles to run then "max 160 knots on final" I think they must be fully configured at 4-5000 ft by my experiences.

[Angle of Attack]

Yeah very true!

[megle2]

Plenty of holding last night

[Jabawocky]

Fortunately, just about everybody seemed to be carrying adequate supplies of humour.

yep pretty [email protected] = JETA1 I assume

YBSU and YBCG = ILS...........yeah they would....I bet some were virtual ILS though :ooh: about time they invested in some infrastructure.

For that matter, why does YBBN not have higher spec ILS :uhoh: It only needs to be once a year........................................................ ......................

[Wally Mk2]

................bloody Brissy,who'd wanna go there anyway? 22/22 was the dry & wet bulb when we arrived,felt like it to...yukky sticky joint it is:-). Luckily the met man got it wrong again, no TS's just a light drizzle, but in the cockpit !:E

I loved it when I asked ahead enroute to BN can we expect much of a delay? (asked due TS's advertized) Nah pretty good maybe a couple of minutes.......15mins at Brissy's 2nd Airport...Blacka was a typical end result!!!
Oh well I guess we are in Australia:)



Wmk2

[Tangan]

P-Dubby, The last thing we as pilots want is you controllers trying to fly the aircraft for us. We need you to keep us in the loop of what is going on and what we can expect. STARS which include waypoints with sensible crossing heights and speeds would result in less grief and less talk for all of us. To get these numbers controllers and pilots need to sit down together and talk, something that has not happened for many years.

[haughtney1]

As far as sitting down and talking, I agree. We see very few visitors these days.

Mainly due to having very little "entertainment" time available whilst visiting Vegas, I barely have enough time to get down to Eagle street pier and oggle the lady office talent.....before my 12 foot from bottle to throttle rule kicks in :E

[Capn Bloggs]

It's all happening: http://www.airservicesaustralia.com/aip/current/sup/s12-h03.pdf

Banana-benders later in the queue. :}

[framer]

I go out of Auckland for Sydney about once a roster, will this mean that my push back time in AUckland is controlled? I would have thought it better to have a ¨Time over Sydney¨requirement rather than a departure requirement.....or have I missed something?

[atlas12]

I can't really complain about BNE too much... never really get more than 5-10 holding unless the wx is really bad. ATC always try to squeeze us in on 14 even right on last light, which is nice of them. I guess the only thing I can say is that in some cases more advanced notice would be nice, where we don't have a slot time.

The folks in tower & app do good work with what limited resources they have, that's the way I see it anyway :ok:

[Wally Mk2]

The list is growing in our abbreviated flying world.

CTMS
Metron/CDM
ATC
COBT
STARS
SIDS
CDM
ATFM
GDP
ASA
NOC
NOS
.............but wait there's more am sure!:)

Flying the actual plane is the easy bit about aviation, you can teach monkey's to fly but to remember all of this crap would take a Philadelphia lawyer with two brains!


Wmk2

[1Charlie]

I totally understand why pilots get frustrated thinking they're being messed around by controllers. I think its a combination of the whole process being so dynamic, and the pilot hearing what's happening but not knowing what the ATC is thinking / doing. Wouldn't it be nice if we COULD say arrive over this point at this time and everyone would flow into the airport like a zipper, in fact it wouldn't because I'd need a new job. I flew to NZAA recently with a local crew I knew, we flew down wind for 05R did two left hand orbits then vectored 20nm down wind to join a line of jets coming in from the Tasman. I talked with the furious crew after we landed. He couldn't understand why if we left on our CTOT we didn't go straight in. I'm not sure of the situation in YBBN, but in NZ if the visibility was 1500m they would have to protect the missed approach for CAT C aircraft. Meaning if there are departures as well as arrivals there has to be something like 10nm between arrivals as the departure has to be rolling before the arrival reaches 4 DME. This obviously means the runway can handle only half normal, even though low vis ops aren't in use. I'm not an AA controller so I don't know the exact figures but you get the idea. Perhaps this maybe the case in BN also.

[noclue]

Hey guys, slightly off topic, but still involving Brissy ATC. My question regards noise abatement procedures before 6am.

Why are 737/320's allowed to depart off runway 19, but the dash8/ATR's are forced to wait until 6am. I haven't found any noise data, but I think it would be a safe guess that a 737/320 would make more noise than a turbo prop?..


All I can find is:
Local traffic regulations:
"6. ICAO chapter 2 ACFT BTN 1200-2000UTC.
Unless directed otherwise by ATC, at the time of operation, all ICAO chapter 2 ACFT shall:
a. Land RWY 19;
b. Take-off RWY 01;
c. Take-off RWY 19 NOT permitted."

and, from Brisbanes noise abatement procedures:
"2.2 - Departing aircraft
(a) Departing Runway 19:
- Non-jet propelled aircraft will normally follow radar-based SID's.
-During the period 1200 - 2000 UTC all aircraft will be routed, as far as possible, clear of noise sensitive areas."

[topdrop]

Chapter 2 aircraft were not permitted to operate in Oz after 1 Apr 2002. Air Niugini may have operate their F28s for a short while after that on a concession.
The B737s and A320s operating in Oz are Chapter 3.

I don't know why Brissie still refer to Chapter 2 aircraft or F28 in their ERSA entry, since they don't fly here any more.

[ButFli]

Runway 19 takeoffs go over my house. Turboprops make a far more obvious and annoying noise, especially at night. I won't comment on whether they are actually louder by dB.

[shinning]

Not sure about turbos being forced to wait until after 6am. If 19 is the duty runway then so be it. Normal procedure is to use 01 for departures and 19 for arrivals between 10pm-6am, unless wet runway or 10kts+ downwind. During southern state daylight savings 5am-6am, Rwy01 is duty due to number of jet moves heading south combined with inbounds. But..... if runway 19 is on the Atis, if runway 14/32 is suitable, turbos may be given that runway for departure as it is more "noise abatable'y" preferable than 19. I guess if rwy14 was suitable for a dash8 departure, even though jets are departing rwy19, and the dash8 requests 19, they may be made to wait until the noise abatement period is over ie 6am due to rwy14 being available.

[noclue]

Yeah sorry, it only becomes an issue if runway 19 is the duty runway.
Runways 14/32 weren't nominated on the ATIS. Runway 14 is usually offered along with the option of holding at 19 until 6am when we call for taxi. If we're on time our first departure is around 530 if we're on time, thats rare and are usually calling ready 545/550. Because those early departures go north and north west, to taxi to 14 (on narrow taxiways, which impose a 15kt speed limit on our operation) or hold 10/15mins for 19 is not much different.

[Going Nowhere]

No to mention that 19 with a right turn is much quicker than 14 with a climb to at least 6000 before going north/north west. :ugh:

[Capn Bloggs]

Too many Jabas and FTDKs there!! :}

[falconx]

cant be as bad as holding yesterday in ML

[tourismman]

Thanks P-Dubby for sharing.

Starting next month June and increasing through to September a further 324 movements a week are scheduled by the airlines to operate into and out of YBBN .Tuesday will be the biggest growth with a extra 66 movements a day planned.
As you well know Thursday and Friday's are the busiest days with around 625-630 movements on Thursday and a little less on Fridays.Both those days will gain around 45-50 movements a day by September..

[Capn Bloggs]

Stick to your COB times and holding shouldn't be too bad! :E

[Jabawocky]

Too many Jabas and FTDKs there!! :}

Bloggs you are a funny bugger :}

Not much FTDK action down here....or TL for that matter. He has gone incognito and only seen in PTDK's and them CTTDK's of late.

Jaba's have even been bumped around of recent times even, so yes it is getting crowded!

Have to say the BN CEN / BN APP folk have been working their butts off and have been doing a stellar job under the pressure. :D:D:D

J:ok:

[1Charlie]

http://a1.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/551169_3778892786947_1115716706_33525591_434719966_n.jpg

[1Charlie]

Last Thursday evening. CAVOK

[Jack Ranga]

What has CAVOK got to do with anything? Can you fit more aircraft on runways when it's CAVOK?

[1Charlie]

Are you saying the arrival rate is not affected by the weather?

[1Charlie]

I was only clarifying that weather wasn't causing all the holding. No point posting a traffic picture covered in holding patterns if terrible weather is causing it.

[Livin the Dream]

Stop your whinging about traffic delays you 'flyboys'...

I flew on one of our Domestic airline carriers the other day and guess what......

# I had to WAIT at check-in (why couldn't they tell prior to leaving home that there would be delays);
# I had to line up & WAIT to board the aircraft even though I asked for priority...
# I had stand in the aisle & WAIT before reaching my seat (where's my boarding slot time...)
# I had to WAIT in the aisle (yes CAVOK as well...) before getting off
# .....& yes I had to wait to get my bag.....

Perhaps too many passengers per staff and limiting hardware processors...??

At least I realize it's a game of maths.....

[ozbiggles]

How much money did all those delays cost you dreaming?

[chuboy]

How much money did all those delays cost you dreaming?

I didn't realise airline pilots had to pay the fuel truck driver with their own money! :ok:

[DutchRoll]

Livin the Dream,

How big a sweat did you break out in knowing that you were sitting at 30,000 ft running critically short of fuel because the traffic delays were in excess of the NOTAM'd time?

[Stiff Under Carriage]

How big a sweat did you break out in knowing that you were sitting at 30,000 ft running critically short of fuel because the traffic delays were in excess of the NOTAM'd time?

Exactly.

I was on a flight inbound to BN Friday night. Was holding for 50 mins at what must have been 50nm out as it took at least another 20mins to get on ground. Admittedly the weather was very poor, but still not good enough. This is occurring national wide. With the implementation of the new traffic management system things have gotten worse. This is supposed to be a better product.

[Wally Mk2]

Out of the 3 major "J" curve dromes the order of muck-around is BN,ML then SY in that order .
Yep to me it seems ML is more troublesome than SY mostly. BN you can forget they get first prize for working against 'Juliars' Carbon Tax rubbish!

BN really have gotta improve it's 2nd AP infrastructure, it's impossible to get off the plane! (Blacka):)

I'd hate to be an ATC'er working with their hands tied behind their backs.


Wmk2

[Livin the Dream]

DJ & SUC - you guys still don't get it.....

It's the airlines that organise their own scheduling...

It's the airport owners who spend (or most time don't...) on airport infrastructure (2nd runways, more efficient high speed taxiways, etc)...

ATCers catch the mess.....and cop the blame...!!

I'm not saying it is not a problem - because it is....and it's only going to get worse. It's a simple game of maths.

As far as traffic notam delay accuracy.....it's the airlines that need to keep the system (Metron) up to date. So guess what - if THEY don't - IT don't tell the right story...

Just a thought....

LTD

[Stiff Under Carriage]

LTD,

We get it mate, we get it!

None of us saying it ATC fault, that was your assumption. It is ATC who hold us, they might cop some flack from the drivers, we cop it from the pax, round the world it goes.

Whether its infrastructure, (BN), curfew, (SY), or some other reason, (ML) I don't care. The three busiest airports in Australia have excessive holding for whatever reason. That's what we are saying. It should be fixed. He government is the biggest problem here, what other government in the world forces an international airport to close at 11pm because some FW decides to buy a house near the airport and complain about noise. Why do we have only 1 RWY operating at BN? Use the other one. Build another one, start spending money where it's needed, not on some insane Carbon Tax scheme and handing it out to everyone to appanrently compensate.

The airlines arrange there own scheduling yes, but in accordance with slot times available. Close and airport, restrict an airport and you create a problem, don't accept more traffic without specific room for it, just because of revenue.

[Willoz269]

Dont run out of steam....things are about to get worse with the works scheduled to commence on BN taxiways....notably A7....:ooh:

[Hempy]

How big a sweat did you break out in knowing that you were sitting at 30,000 ft running critically short of fuel because the traffic delays were in excess of the NOTAM'd time?

at the alternate I take it..

[haughtney1]

Just one for you approach guys, arrived in the cripple from the west the other morning 5.15amish, and had the delightful experience of having to fly the full RNAV arrival for Rwy 19, rather than getting the usual direct to sinnk from 100 miles out or so.
Just wondering what the thinking was, given there where no departures or arrivals within 5 minutes of our arrival, and that the extra track miles ate about 1000 usd extra worth of jet fuel.
Is this something new? Also anecdotally, guys I'm flying with seem to be of the opinion that there seems to be a bit of a concerted effort (conspiracy if you will) to back guys into corners..and then try and trap them resulting in a violation i.e. "you have approx 45 track miles to run" then getting cut in on a 10 mile final 3000 feet high:ooh:
Never had it happen to me, but I'm now hearing it often enough with guys going into BNE to be wondering if there is anything to it.

[haughtney1]

PM on its way P-Dubby :ok:

As for the conspiracy theory, I'm with you....it's just that I've heard it once to often to dismiss it out of hand (probably just means they are all paranoid idiots:E)

[pcx]

Don't see any conspiracy there. Just the ATC guys and girls trying to provide the best service and maximize the use of the available airspace and runway.
Simple solution if it doesn't work for you.
Unable, request xxxxxx.

[le Pingouin]

Tell your conspiracy theorists that they are not alone :E

There are in fact other aircraft in the sequence with them. They can't be shortened up until the aircraft ahead in the sequence has made it possible. The controller often can't know whether that will or won't happen.

[haughtney1]

Just because you are paranoid le Pingouin, doesn't mean they aren't out to get you:E

[jarden]

All the capital cities airports have the same problem. If their management refuse to invest in proper infrastructure and only wish to invest in shoppimg facilities etc they should be forced to sell up and buy into stockland or westfield. As that is where their hearts is set on. Airport Privatisation has been a failure in Australia. I can't think of one airport where the supply has kept up with demand. We need a bit more regulation to put more pressure on the airport owners to start the ball rolling faster in the right direction. As at the moment its really lagging behind on all fronts.

[coolbananas]

Nothing wrong at Sydney just ask them. Plenty of gates!!!

[Livin the Dream]

Haughtney1 ......fair dinkum!!!

Don't Post such dribble.....

.......conspiracy....concerted effort.....back guys into corners....

Yep we've got nothing better to do.......

LTD

[le Pingouin]

Geez, I thought you guys in BrizVegas had everything! Don't you have the flashing red label in Maestro that means "screw this aircraft over"? Funny how it's always the same airline..... I hear we're integrating it with crew manifests as well so we can target individual pilots.

[sunnySA]

Don't you have the flashing red label in Maestro that means "screw this aircraft over"?

Actually the technical name for this colour is "salmon", sorry can't remember the RGB values, always thought it was more of a "prawn" colour, as in "raw prawn".

[le Pingouin]

We've adjusted it to a very definite red after a few of the bastards got through - the IDDE investigation was ugly.

[benjam]

I always thought raw prawns were a greenish milky grey.

Surely you should say 'don't come the cooked prawn with me!'

[haughtney1]

LTD, I do have better things to do mate, trust me..and you should note, I merely asked the question, I didn't say I was the recipient, nor did I say that I felt it was anything other than an observation of what OTHER people have said, as for dribble...well, I do that on even a good day.
PDubby by way of PM was more than helpful in helping this button pusher understand the vagaries and uniqueness that is entailed when operating into YBBN on an infrequent basis.

[cribble]

:DApproach controller BNE today at about lunchtime (2 JUl 12): Big ups, guy. It is hard to be mad at someone you agree with, what with gin clear wx,a gentle southerly and a hold out over the ocean.

It may have got you a bit of trouble with your supervisors, but the quiet reference to " stupid restrictions" (or words to that effect) really made a difference to the mood on our flight deck (plenty of gas and a warning for 20 min hold, but a lot of bitching before that comment to another aircraft). Good assist with the non-standard hold, BTW.

[Jabawocky]

The folk at the coal face really do an excellent jobs with one arm tied behind their backs. :D

[tourismman]

I think a new record was set today between 9am-10am.

57 movements between 9am-10am according to webtrak..

I think you guys and girls are doing a wonderful job .

[grrowler]

I think the greatest frustration in general is the apparent lack of foresight and coordination between sectors, and potentially a lack of understanding of how aircraft operate.

For example:

Trucking along for 3 hours only to be told at TOD to descend at a reduced speed. A little notice (don't need that much) allows for a much more efficient and comfortable descent.

Given max speed to the field after having just reduced to 250 kts at 10000.

Given a speed reduction just prior to a height requirement, with no height waiver.

Slowed down to min speed by one sector, only to be given max speed a few minutes later by the next.

Ok, so you say that prior notice is not always possible and it's part of my job to meet these requirements - that's absolutely true. I'm saying that if where possible this could somehow be addressed, both our workloads are going to be greatly reduced (less vectors,etc due aircraft unable to meet requirements) and (not that it's ATC's problem) we can potentially save millions of dollars in unnecessary fuel burn.

[Capt Claret]

Growler,

I used to think along similar lines to your post. The during a recent visit to Cairns Tower & Approach, asked the question. The Approach people were able to demonstrate, in real time, how pop up traffic, either with or without a flight plan, can drastically alter the planned flow.

Oft times they try to squeeze every one in, rather than asking the bloke leaving Cooktown to wait 15+ minuted for the previous flow to pass through. Add to this VFR with no details, that presents at the zone boundary, and it's much easier to to understand why the late notice, as frustrating as it is, occurs.

Now what really gives on the sh!ts is requesting a visual approach at 150 to 200 nm, being cleared on a STAR that adds 30 odd nm, with altitude restrictions that keep one quite high, and then being cleared to shave 20 track miles off with only a moments notice. You'll never guess which northern port does this routinely. :ugh:

[Plazbot]

Grrowler, it is just like driving your car from A to B along a road that narrows from 2 to 1 lane, when you get to the merge, sometimes you gotta slow down then speed up to go in a gap and vice versa and some times, you rock up with noone else and get to do your own thing. Pretty simple stuff really. Easily fixed by having as many runways as arriving aircraft!

[le Pingouin]

I think the greatest frustration in general is the apparent lack of foresight and coordination between sectors, and potentially a lack of understanding of how aircraft operate.

For example:

Trucking along for 3 hours only to be told at TOD to descend at a reduced speed. A little notice (don't need that much) allows for a much more efficient and comfortable descent.How about you descend at exactly the same point every time? ;)

The sequence isn't always set early enough to allow this and giving you a delay comes a fair way down our list of priorities - separation, coordination and other routine tasks take priority.

Given max speed to the field after having just reduced to 250 kts at 10000.A sequence is a dynamic thing and approach often don't look out very far, particularly when busy. They see a gap and try to fill it because it creates another gap behind you and gives them wriggle room.

It could be you're late and the guy following is early - for us the best solution is to speed you up as it doesn't reduce the gap behind the other guy.

Given a speed reduction just prior to a height requirement, with no height waiver.The height requirement is there for separation. If you can't make it say so and expect a vector. We understand you may not be able to make it but usually can't waive the requirement. If we don't slow you you'll run up the backside of an A380.


Slowed down to min speed by one sector, only to be given max speed a few minutes later by the next.Probably due to a sequence change - the aircraft ahead has given it away and has no hope of making the required time. It's either lose a slot or shove you in it.

Some International heavies are very good at this - they end up low and slow and already a minute late at 100 miles (which is about when you're being handed off to arrivals so is when you get given the max). Far easier for all involved to not flog the dead horse and push you ahead. It's either that or you continue at min and vectored to lose another three minutes to keep you behind.

Ok, so you say that prior notice is not always possible and it's part of my job to meet these requirements - that's absolutely true. I'm saying that if where possible this could somehow be addressed, both our workloads are going to be greatly reduced (less vectors,etc due aircraft unable to meet requirements) and (not that it's ATC's problem) we can potentially save millions of dollars in unnecessary fuel burn.It all comes down to the sequence being a dynamic thing. You might be flying along on rails but the system as a whole very definitely isn't.

Time for a car analogy: would you expect to be able to maintain spacing behind another car every time with a pre-programmed level of braking? Including when the car in front slams them on hard & then coasts the last 10 metres? Or when someone nips in front of the car five ahead?

[2Plus]

So, why don't we have max/min IAS requirements on STARs or downwind or base positions, like most other countries? Would that not help?


Slight thread drift...but can anyone point out exactly where it's written, if at all, where pilots are to advise ATC of a change in TAS? And exceeding what tolerance? Seems some do and some don't. Might just be a "nice to do" thing to help out the guys and gals on the ground, but I want to know if it is a requirement. (I meant aside from the M.02 requirement for RVSM)

[ejectx3]

Aip something something

Yes exact speeds on stars would help

Sydney stars used to have them (remember 230 knots on base?)

[Capn Bloggs]

It could be you're late and the guy following is early - for us the best solution is to speed you up as it doesn't reduce the gap behind the other guy.
Correct! Growler, exactly when do you hit the fix? T+0 seconds? T+50 seconds? 6 miles a minute could be a gap of 11nm or 1nm.

Given a speed reduction just prior to a height requirement, with no height waiver.
If you need vectors to get down, you're using extra fuel due to extra track-miles; you may as well just pull out the speedbrakes and stay on the STAR.

So, why don't we have max/min IAS requirements on STARs or downwind or base positions, like most other countries?
Over here, we have a feeder fix time (minimum 36 track miles to run) and thereafter 250KIAS. Does the job.

[haughtney1]

Turn the CTA and approaches into Class A airspace....BAN THE BUGSMASHERS:E

"donning flame-proof overalls"

[grrowler]

Guys I'm not questioning why you need to slow/speed us, or asking about the variables that affect the sequence, I'm just saying the timing often sucks.
If it's possible to provide any earlier notice of changes it would be greatly appreciated:ok: As someone once said, "I'm not a f_ing hot air balloon!"

[Capn Bloggs]

three PAN calls
Technical error! "Mayday Mayday Mayday Fuel" :}

[Mozzie75]

grrowler...not sure which direction you come into BN from normally however if its from the south, we are more often than not slowing traffic south of TW (ML / CB) or south of about PMQ (SY / WLM). In general terms, as soon as the sequence is set, we want you back at min speed. The less time we have you spinning around BLAKA or CG the better! Unfortunately as someone else said "a sequence is a dynamic thing" so there will be changes some days.

A bit more background - some raw traffic data was pulled about 6 months ago and the enroute sector immediately to the south of BN came up as the busiest in Australia. The sector immediately to the north of BN wasn't too far behind in second place. I would assume that there has been further traffic increases since then, especially for the northern guys. Factor in the significant increase in daily holding (now most of the morning and most of the evening some days!) and you have some very busy and hard-working controllers who do a great job with the limitations / restrictions that they have to work with. Unfortunately they do put up with complaints, questions about delays / NOTAMS and sometimes general rudeness which I would much rather see passed on the phone after shut-down. That said, most crews still seem happy to help with speed reductions / early descents etc and don't complain (on frequency at least!) which is great.

[le Pingouin]

Growler, changes are usually given as soon as the need is identified. You're being sequenced with aircraft coming from a number of directions so as an individual controller I'm generally not aware of how the overall sequence is progressing. I'm usually just following what Maestro tells me you need to do.

Occasionally I miss a change in Maestro as I'm busy doing a stack of other tasks and you'll get a delay after TOPD.

[Plazbot]

So Grrowler, what exactly is your gripe? **** happens? Is there some conspiracy like a rimjockey alluded to that ATC don't tell you on purpose so they can file reports on you?

Sky gods indeed........

[bagchucka]

slightly off topic but why are the taxiway closures broadcast on the atis? is it just arse-covering? it's in the notams, there's bloody cones and diggers all over them and what's more, if they're closed i doubt ground are going to send you down one!

[Wally Mk2]

Out of all the excuses & BS etc mentioned here I'd like to know why a certain airline Co whom shall remain nameless as their going down the toilet anyway where 6 nm behind us falling further back & we get min speed so they can overtake us & land first.Will be interesting how the spin doctors here explain that one !

Wmk2

[maggotdriver]

To the controllers out there, if you knew what the heavies would fly (domestic A330s and B767s) and how long they'd take for a visual approach would that help? What I'm talking is a bit like SDCs in reverse. Before some bright spark says it, I have flown a STAR or two. Essentially, if you could give a visual approach and EXPECT a standard 4 mile base and 4 or 5 mile final that could be known by both parties and that it would be flown like an RNAV-RNP giving you a constant profile (no cutting them in) for the drivers and a constant time for the controllers. Would this help?
That way more heavies may willingly accept a visual approach because they can plan for it (every unnecessary instrument approach is 3 mins and 300kg of fuel) and may facilitate more movements?

[noclue]

Does a holding instruction allow you to reduce speed, what if ATC don't include the phase "reduce speed, hold at ABC, expect to depart at time XX"

[Wally Mk2]

'PD' I understand where yr comin' from but from a common sense point of view (yes hard to have ATC understand that at times I says with tongue in cheek) with a Cavok drome ahead, little traffic about in the middle of the night & the rdr controllers would have been seeing this event for the past hour or so ( we ahead & getting further ahead) one has to wonder why said Co gets a LOT of preferential treatment.
Must be not what ya know but who hands over the most grog to the ATC'ers at Xmas!:-)

Wmk2

[maggotdriver]

P-Dubby - No, it isn't because it allows a greater flexibility and could be used for myriad different companies and planes. What I mean is if you say, "make standard COMPANY visual approach" and there was a corresponding STANDARD company visual approach for that particular aircraft from that direction that you didn't get to vary i.e. speed and height, you may find the heavies far more accepting of your requirements. Having flown various fleet types in my company, I can assure you there is a reticence to accept visual approaches on the fleets that don't often do them. Particularly, when ATC throw in extra variables it is often considered "too hard". Soft as you may think that is, it is the facts. Probably why you no longer give them as standard at the companies request.

What I'm suggesting is a more known quantity. Every visual approach starts at 3000' from the clearance. They all start at 10 miles to run without being varied. Every aircraft for that company flies them at a known speed/configuration - like a curved ILS flown visually. The pilots know what they're going to get and therefore, are more willing to accept them. You know what they are going to fly from your 10 mile feeder points and how long they will take. The Breakky Creek does this (with a shorter final than some would be happy with) and so to the one over Redcliffe (except the lack of height requirements and therefore known speed). What about from left downwind for Rwy19 or base for that matter. Local knowledge allows some of us to know that you'll be held to 5ooo' early in the morning for noise abatement when coming over the coast. What would happen if this was translated into written knowledge for the common operators? You would then know exactly what times to expect. No criticism, just trying to think of benefits for both sides.

[grrowler]

I'm usually just following what Maestro tells me you need to do. This is my point. If Maestro is not identifying a change until TOD, 10k, etc, there is clearly a problem with it's parameters, which if changed could make everything a lot more efficient. Otherwise it creates the perception of a lack of foresight and aircraft knowledge.

**** happens? Exactly plazbot, all the time. Instead of taking it personally, why don't we try to work out how to stop it happening so often. Towergod indeed.

[Capn Bloggs]

Taking up Maggot's point, the time has come when the whole of visual STARs should be in the database. It is ridiculous that hundreds of times a week, crews are tapping into the FMS made-up waypoints to construct an LNAV track for the aeroplane to follow (and manage the VNAV most efficiently) eg Smoka V. On the River Track, the Breakfast Creek waypoint isn't even defined.

Local knowledge allows some of us to know that you'll be held to 5ooo' early in the morning for noise abatement when coming over the coast. What would happen if this was translated into written knowledge for the common operators? You would then know exactly what times to expect.
NAP 2.1 (but I agree could be clearer).

[Wally Mk2]

'PD' I know yr trying to put all the little pieces that make up the nightmare task of being an ATC'er (yr welcome to that job !) into the puzzle here for us pleb drivers so we get a better understanding of how the 'system' works. My generic type statement here about being a fav Co may seem laughable to you but I have seen this a few times & to us plebs at the pointy end it does seem with a reasonable amount of certainty that one said Co gets in first. Seen it at the Hld point awaiting T/off sometimes & Syd.
As for the other scenario I am painting here there was no A/C slowing in front of us it was the opposite actually as mentioned we where asked to slow whilst the 'favored' A/C whom was well behind us & getting further back was allowed to slip past us to as usual get in first. The Vis comment was just adding to the picture no more.
Anyway it matters none there's zip any of us plebs can do other than speed up, slow down,turn this way turn that way cross here at this time cancel that etc etc etc to appease the scrabble board players down there in the twr:) but our necks are getting a work out from shaking our heads at amazement from what we get from ATC.
I think 'Juliar' ought to watch the ATCers in action some day, she would soon realize that her stupid Carbon Tax rubbish savings goes out the window in just one day with Ozzy airspace antics!:)


Wmk2

[Wally Mk2]

Thanks 'PD' I know your trying to get the message across to us uneducated:ok:
I won't dwell on it too much as I said we plebs can't do zip about it anyway but just go along for the ride ;-)


Wmk2

P.s.....my story was not into Brissy actually but it's all tied up with the same weegee board anyway:-):-)

[le Pingouin]

Wally, ATCs are fundamentally lazy. We don't do things the hard way if we have a choice and running a sequence in other than the natural order is hard, so why would we bother? I'll back whoever I think will win.

growler, the point is there are a myriad of reasons why it can change. In Melbourne MED1 traffic overflying for a hospital or into Essendon need to be accommodated often at short notice. The flow puts a block in where he thinks it's needed but it can change by several minutes so things get shuffled a bit.

Aircraft fail to meet their times and need adjusting. The flow might tweak the sequence to simplify things inside 30 miles.

A close in departure occurs that would naturally arrive before you.

[HF3000]

it uses your Radar Plot, Flight Plan TAS, known system winds, etc etc.

And this is why it is inaccurate if you are not cruising at your flight plan altitude.

We do not flight plan a TAS. We flight plan a Mach No.

ATC chooses to convert this to a TAS and does not take into account that you may be cruising at a different flight level (for whatever reason). Cruising at a different flight level will change your TAS considerably.

[Blockla]

...as it will take the real GS. Did they change it to use GS?

I have had many a 'battle' with the flow changing the natural order (in Maestro) to better suit the TMA complexity or picking a winner who was number two; it was often easier to make the sequence work the way the flow wanted rather than applying 'natural justice' in every circumstance... Sometimes a phone call to the flow didn't help at all, sometimes it did!!!

What is slower and behind, at TOD, may not naturally be that way at the threshold, so being in front at TOD can mean naught; you can be number two and be in front (for now)... Hence the a bit of speed and turning makes it work better, i.e. separate as well as sequence...

I had a very grumpy individual complain about being made number two (number 25 in reality) When I turned him less than number one, who was actually number 24... I had to lose more with number 24 than number 25... I couldn't get the point across that when I started vectoring he was 25NM behind and now he was 15NM behind... There was no faith in the message as I turned him to "close" him up... point being I turn the one ahead harder...

As for visuals vs instruments to maximize runway capacity, it's a furphy, look at the worlds busiest high capacity aerodromes, very few 'visuals' and they still get the job done without missing slots.

Where the holding and delays are done needs to be examined again, on the ground is the most 'efficient' (in terms of costs and environmental impact) way, but getting a system that actually delivers in terms of compliance and not missing slots is the hard part and it still doesn't cater for 'anomalies'. Many airports absorb the majority of the delays low and close to the runway but get near perfect CDA from the holding point, all Australian airports push it out far and high and few have a chance of CDA, what is the most efficient/cost effective/environmental friendly way?

With better CDM, maybe low and close is more effective as 'bulk delays' (general holding), excluding PH and BN are becoming rarer.

[Plazbot]

The eternal disagreements will never cease with respect to sequencing and it will never be clear to both pilots or ATC why each side why certain things happen. While no Brisbane specific, I will share my experience from a once off.

I was on a cockpit famil earlier in the year on an A330 into a middle eastern airport. We arrived right at the start of the evening busy period. When we checked in, the airspace infront of us looked empty as the frequency somewhat quiet. I even commented to the crew that it looked like we would get no delays. About a minute later the obviously shaky voice of a guy I work with every day pulled our speed, cut our descent off, turned us, descended us hard and put us into the hold. We then hit the hold and were taken long outbound and inflicted with more vectors and intermediate levels and rapid descents. The captain was on the speed brake the whole time to get the thing down quickly. From where I sat I could not see or hear anything to explain what was going on but knowing what the various instructions achieved had a very good idea of what was going on but to the crew, it was all a mystery.

I saw the ATC the next day and asked him if he remembered what was going on and he filled me in on the beating he was taking which made complete sense given the amount of Air Traffic COntrol inflicted upon us but to me at the time in the cockpit it just appeared as we were getting an old fashioned dicking around.

I guess the moral of the story is that sequencing is not done for fun and from an ATC perspective, we want you out of our airspace ASAP but I can see how it can appear otherwise from the seats up in the sky.

When everything is going well, we(pilots and ATC) have a pretty simple job. Unfortunately our priorities during certain phases of flight contradict each other.

[Plazbot]

Gunna make that my signature line Pee Dub. Words I rarely see. ;)

[Chimbu chuckles]

We arrived right at the start of the evening busy period. When we checked in, the airspace infront of us looked empty as the frequency somewhat quiet. I even commented to the crew that it looked like we would get no delays. About a minute later the obviously shaky voice of a guy I work with every day pulled our speed, cut our descent off, turned us, descended us hard and put us into the hold. We then hit the hold and were taken long outbound and inflicted with more vectors and intermediate levels and rapid descents

Arriving DXB from the east:ok:

[Plazbot]

Have we revealed our pprune identities without realizing? Hah. Small world if so. 383?

[haughtney1]

Arriving DXB from the east

West..North..South....and thats just to BUBIN :{

[Plazbot]

Hah. You get your money's worth. I must admit that for all the hate the guys at YBBN get on this web site, we get very little considering the amount of 'rubbing' we give you guys in D Town.

Sorry to hijack.

[RAC/OPS]

there's zip any of us plebs can do other than speed up, slow down,turn this way turn that way cross here at this time cancel that etc etc etc to appease the scrabble board players down there in the twr

Wally, please don't perpetuate the media myth that en route ATC has anything to do with the TWR! We're still trying to figure out how we contributed to an airprox near Mildura, apart from actually having cleared one of the acft for takeoff.

[Capt Claret]

It surprises me that we don't have more proscriptive approach speeds. I'm also surprised how often, when one is asked for max speed to the field, one has to encourage Bloggs not to slow down to 210 kias at 20nm to run when there is no operational imperative to do so. :\

[maggotdriver]

As for visuals vs instruments to maximize runway capacity, it's a furphy, look at the worlds busiest high capacity aerodromes, very few 'visuals' and they still get the job done without missing slots.

300kgs and 3 mins per approach is no furphy, it is a waste of money and of resource. Quite frankly, if I was in charge of fuel saving in my company, I wouldn't be worried so much about the APU fuel savings and more worried about this BS! I'll say it another way so you can maybe see my point. If you had feeder points at 3000' at 10 miles to run even as generic visual approach points. The aircraft can fly them at a nice 3 degree slope much like an ILS without having to be aligned 10 freaking miles out and wasting so much gas. I understand as ATCers you still have to get A/C slotted in the correct sequence. That wouldn't change. There is however, no need to have an ILS done in VMC to accomplish this.:ugh:

[Capn Bloggs]

I'm also surprised how often, when one is asked for max speed to the field, one has to encourage Bloggs not to slow down to 210 kias at 20nm to run when there is no operational imperative to do so.
Somebody has to do it... :ok:

[Chimbu chuckles]

Hah. You get your money's worth. I must admit that for all the hate the guys at YBBN get on this web site, we get very little considering the amount of 'rubbing' we give you guys in D Town.

Indeed - the 'children of the magenta' whinging about YBBN would soon shut the fck up if they experienced just one rush hour arrival into D town:ok:

Have we revealed our pprune identities without realizing? Hah. Small world if so. 383?

Wash your mouth out - 383?:yuk:

If it aint Boeing I aint going:E

[Capn Bloggs]

There is however, no need to have an ILS done in VMC to accomplish this.
Perhaps your operation needs to loosen up on "visual ILSs" verses "real" ILSs. After all, if it was a visual approach, straight-in or otherwise eg River Arrival, you wouldn't dirty it up so early...would you?

[shinning]

Fortunately/unfortunately ATC, crews, companies etc all have slightly differing goals as to what they're trying to achieve, but ultimately, safety is at the top of everyone's list. Since ATC has the 'big picture' with regard to traffic flow, conflictions, priorities, etc, they are the ones who have to make it fit together through the various techniques and strategies that have already been explained here.

If you can do it, my suggestion would be to get on the phone to ATC and arrange for a visit to one of the centres and sit in with approach and/or the arrivals sectors one afternoon/evening during the week. That way you'll get to see the good, the bad, and the ugly of how things work from the ATC perspective.

[hadagutful]

The Brisbane Courier Mail has an article in today on the Brisbane Airport debacle... "Air schedules in chaos because Brisbane Airport's two runways can't operate at same time at night".

Air schedules in chaos because Brisbane Airport's two runways can't operate at same time at night | The Courier-Mail (http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/flying-circus-night-after-night/story-e6freoof-1226417242574)

It refers to Brisbane's other roundabout, thousands of passengers circling at night waiting to land. There are many angry and frustrated blogs on the site.
So it appears it's been a problem for sometime now and is nothing short of disgraceful for a modern airport in this day and age.
I came back from Townsville the other week and out over Kilcoy we did a 180 deg turn and headed back but it turned out to be one big holding pattern for about 15- 20 mins.
Apart from the frustration of getting in late, what about the fuel burn, extra duty time, pick up inconvenience etc.
From memory I think part of the problem goes back to the local member, one Kevin Rudd who had procrastinated and held off with the second runway because constituents were worried about noise, the usual nonsense with any airport expansion.

Now we are all paying the price for the delaying tactics.

[Baileys]

15 - 20 mins holding, getting told to slow down and speed up, descend at this or that rate, high or low compared to perfect profile - you guys can't seriously be complaining - just do it and go home happy that you did your job and landed the thing. That's what pilots are there for - to deal with all that.

Go check out the rest of the world. What you are complaining about happens all the time all over the world - it's not that big a deal. Surely not 14 pages worth.

[Chimbu chuckles]

Exactly!!:ok::D

[hadagutful]

Well yes, it's all OK for the guys up the front, of course you should be able to handle holding and other ATC requirements, that's what you are trained for.
But what about the poor suffering pax who generally don't know what the hell is going on and are rarely told.
Lots of stuff might be happening overseas but that's no excuse for what happens here!
We are talking about a lack of infrastructure planning and to think that a large and growing city like Brisbane has only one runway at it's primary airport in 2012 and for years to come is a damn disgrace.

[ozbiggles]

I think the days of governments in this country acting in the national interest are looooooooong gone.

[Toruk Macto]

How much does QLD Govt owe? Heading towards a Billion / Trillion ? They could not get their heads around a second runway , federal Govt are frozen . So who is left ? Qantas think their future is in Asia ! Maybe ask the Chinese or Arabs !

[ozbiggles]

I think the answer will soon be bigger aircraft with less frequency.
Nothing is going to happen in Sydney, I'm not sure if there is a plan for another runway in Melb with Avalon down the road and nothing in Brisbane to 2020.

[Chimbu chuckles]

Where does BAC get off asking airlines to pay for the their (BAC's) new runway?

If they did would there be no landing fees for those airlines that PAID for the runway? Yeah right.

Yet more proof that privatising natural monopolies doesn't work. I suppose we're lucky it is just swamp to the west of the current runway complex - otherwise it would already be industrial parks.:mad:

[Plazbot]

Jump onto wiki and check out airports like LAX. Movements are down but pax numbers are up over the last decade.

[nightmode]

After numerous laps around Gayndah/Maleny, the thought crossed my mind on how nice it would be for companies to return the favour to BAC and send a bill for holding flight time to BAC.

After all since BAC own it, they're responsible for providing a service (runway), if the service is poor, well- how about some contractual penalty clauses :E

Would love to know how much all operators combined hurt overall in a week due to BAC incompetence.

The ATC guys/ladies, they're doing the best they can with limited resources - hats off to you.

[international hog driver]

Word on the street is that one international operator has already commenced legal action against one of the parties involved in the BNE show for excessive delays costing them and are seeking compensation.

Lets see if they settle, I know three other operators that have been talking about it and they are now watching to see where the first challenge ends up, in front of a magistrate or settled before the sordid tale goes public :E

Lets say that their green credentials are going to be sorely tested when they see how many tonnes of additional fuel are being spent drilling holes over our favorites SMOKA/MLY/BLAKA/CG....

But then what is the governmental incentive to fix the issue..... the more juice we burn, the more excise and now carbon tax levies we pay and the coin goes back to consolidated revenue not aviation infrastructure.:suspect:

[Traffic_Is_Er_Was]

After numerous laps around Gayndah/Maleny, the thought crossed my mind on how nice it would be for companies to return the favour to BAC and send a bill for holding flight time to BAC.

After all since BAC own it, they're responsible for providing a service (runway), if the service is poor, well- how about some contractual penalty clauses

How did you go with the bill you sent Main Roads that time you were stuck in a traffic jam?

Runways etc are a finite resource. They obviously have a finite capacity. If your company and others make the commercial decision that they will send more aircraft than the resource can accommodate, and thus will have to wait their turn to use it, why is it all BAC's problem?

[Plazbot]

Hold the phone chumps. Brisbane does what, 180000 movements a year? Plenty of time outside peaks to avoid delays.

[megle2]

Why not direct it to the original cause - the Sirrus driver who awakened the risk boffins who determined that after 20 years of safe use the cross runway was now too risky

[clark y]

If it's too risky to do converging runways ops after dark in Brisbane, what about other airports that do crossing runway ops all night, and land and hold short ops and simultaneuos opposite direction ops? What's the difference?

[UnderneathTheRadar]

What's the difference?

'Normal' airports don't put the overshooting aircraft of one runway into the landing path of the other runway - which was what started this mess to begin with....

[Baileys]

It's Queensland mate. They are a bit "different" up there!

[HF3000]

Maybe the carbon tax on the "delay" fuel burn should be borne by the airport.