LEPA (Palma) slot complaints.

[blue up]

Not found this anywhere else, so, here goes....

We had a slot inbound to Palma this morning with a short delay and arrived in amongst a flurry of arrivals that suggested a small delay outbound. This led to us getting a 1/2 hour delay and receiving the ATIS info that taxy time was 25 minutes. There seemed to be a few crew who were unhappy at not being given start clearance with only 20 or 15 minutes before the start of the slot 'window'. The 'debate' went on a while but left me wondering why the slot allocation system from Brussels seems so much different in Palma from other airfields. Is it something to do with the taxying times?

Any ideas?

[tom775257]

It is my understanding that Palma are on a work to rule, so whilst the -5/+10 could usually be used by the pilots, at Palma and Arrecife they will not let you depart -5 or +10 at your convenience, only theirs.

The upshot is many times I have had to call for push way too early with the fake 15 or 25 minute taxi time or whatever fiction they come up with, then waited at the hold with two burning and turning for 10 mins waiting for the exact slot time to arrive.

I have asked them and they tell you the -5/+10 is for them and not for us. Either way I hate flying to PMI with a passion.

[10W]

If true, these guys need to remember that the 'S' in ATS stands for 'SERVICE'. Either provide it, or get another job.

That said, the 15 minute window is indeed for ATC use, but if a controller has it available and can use it to ensure a safe, orderly, and EFFICIENT flow of air traffic, then they are not very professional if they play petty games with their customers.

[andrijander]

Guys, for what I gather from other vineyards you're barking at the wrong tree.

The thing is last year's campaign against the spanish ATCO from the spanish gov included hundreds of disciplinary actions for...well...everything. Even contradictory ones at that. One of the big ones derived in an internal note to all staff acusing them of overloading sectors because traffic was deviating from established routes, therefore not being where they should when they should (according to the ideal of a computer system, that is). They were also being blamed and accused, at the same time, for delays in the system (which will be sorted by allowing directs and expediting the ops).

Lose/lose situation no matter what you do. I do not think ATCO's in Spain hate your guts nor are they trying on purpose to make your life hell, but I really believe they have their hands tied, at least as long as the same incompetent management is in place (as opposed to the new incompetent management that will take over at some point). the problem lies at the persons behind the steering wheel, not in the engine room. To make matters worse provider, regulator and government are all one and the same dog with different collars. And the thing in mind is to privatise airport$$$ before they run out of time (elections, which this gov is going to lose for sure, should be next spring and rumour has it there's talks of even making them earlier, this november).

Happy landings,
A.

[blue up]

Thanks, Adrijander, but that doesn't really explain the loss of the -5 to +10 minutes on a slot that everyone else in the world uses. Difficult for pilots to plan their departure when the rules are kept hidden. If someone could state what the rules are for Palma then we'd be able to comply with them but it seems that nobody has written them down.

[10W]

andrijander

I agree there are many examples where Spanish controllers have been treated really badly by 'management' and the Government.

However, unless they have decreed that following published and accepted Eurocontrol rules regarding the 15 minute slot tolerance is illegal, then I think you have a good case for doing what every other ATC in Europe does. If they won't let you comply with what Eurocontrol wants and allows, then you should let Eurocontrol know that a Member State is breaching the rules and forcing its controllers to do so as well. The argument about overloading other sectors is flawed, because there will always be a small element of overload possibility with a 15 minute window. It is not an exact science due to this. If the overloads are being caused by people ignoring the slot window, then that's a different issue and one which should be tackled.

Saludos

[eastern wiseguy]

"Flight plan route", not sure how many times I heard that today!! What exactly is that achieving, apart from burning more fuel

How does flying the route you planned burn MORE fuel?

[MorfArsenal]

How does flying the route you planned burn MORE fuel?

:D :D :D Well said Sir :ok:

[blue up]

I think he is correctly refering to the standard request for a shortcut/'direct' instead of the zig-zag airways routing so common in europe. 'Direct Girom' has been consigned to the history books, it seems.

[eastern wiseguy]

Irishpilot.

If you cannot pose a question properly don't complain when you are asked for clarification.

I have no need to prove my "smarts"

I refer to fuel really required,

Then why didn't you SAY so.

Your costing a needless 300-600 KG on an average flight that could be saved.

Ex PMI/LEPA I am costing you nothing. As a UK controller I will do all I can to save you track miles and fuel. IF however I were a Spanish controller in dispute with my employer and (as has been mentioned by colleagues above),the ANSP seems ready to fall upon any indiscretion by the ATCO ,I have to say that my job/livelihood/families standard of living trumps your upset at having to pull the flaps in raise the gear and settle down to doing the Star quick crossword for the next 2.5 hours whilst your jet flies itself to wherever you are off to on any given day.

I do however care about the price of petrol in my car

Which has f eck all to do with ATC.

And your also not proving your worth what your paid.

Ooh seems like a nerve may have been touched and that may in fact be the basis of your complaint.

[Gonzo]

Or maybe they've all just read this?

EUROCONTROL - Flight Plan & ATFCM Adherence (http://www.eurocontrol.int/dmean/public/standard_page/FPL_ATFCM_adherence.html)

[Denti]

Probably true Gonzo. However, any airport that uses heavy category wake turbulence sequencing behind a common 738 (not an A321 though) is somewhat wacky, same about the taxi times and slot adherence.

[Daermon ATC]

Thanks for the link Gonzo, that is the one reason indeed.

In any case, if I have on my plate many more planes than I can safely handle, then the least thing I would want is to make things more complicated by granting shortcuts. Everybody as per flight plan route, at least there I know where the conflicts are.

I really think some pilots are losing their perspective. In 2010 there were 1085 incidents reported, 47 of them near-misses. I'm aware most of you would think that spanish Atc is as close to professional excellence as a bewildered duckling to relativistic quantum mechanics but these were the same professionals that also ensured your safety in previous years without such a dreadful record.

And now sector capacity has been increased, single man operations enforced and minimum horizontal distance reduced. :uhoh:

Which leads me to ask a question... would you rather arrive to your funeral 5 minutes earlier or rather make it out in one piece. :ugh:

And another question, just for bonus. Does anybody think spanish atcs are happy with this situation and not aware that they are maintaining safety by the skin of their teeth?

Fly safe and good luck, we might all need it.

[Daermon ATC]

any airport that uses heavy category wake turbulence sequencing behind a common 738 (not an A321 though) is somewhat wacky,

Not been much to Spain, have you?

B738 is defined by spanish aviation authorities as medium when flying after a plane and as heavy when flying before.

Spanish atcos enforce the rules, they don't create them.

And if you think spanish aviation authorities are somewhat wacky, my point precisely.
:ugh:

Let's not forgett that DGAC, AENA and AESA, which should be independent are in fact all branches of the same ministry.

[irishpilot1990]

@ eastern wiseguy

I dont read the star or do the star crossword:8

My point about fuel costs and even price of petrol is we are wasting fuel that need not be used with a bit of professionalism.:ugh: Everyday you hear pilots requesting a FL higher then filed, they are being professional and doing their bit to save oil, a finite resource.

ATC constantly saying flight plan route and not allowing higher, to try to prove a point achieves nothing...except as you identified..hit pilots nerves. Do the Spainish goverment or airline managers care that its annoying for aviators....hell no. So no point taking it out on us. Were only trying to be professional.

I speak about Spain not UK control, UK do their very best. My point in one line is pissing away this fuel everyday will do NOTHING to achieve better standards/safety/rest/leave/money or whatever else it is the spainish are complaining about.

Spainish have not helped themselves either being some of europes best paid and yet holding the reputation of being worse then the french for striking! That is an achievement!

[irishpilot1990]

Not been much to Spain, have you?

Spanish atcos enforce the rules, they don't create them.

And if you think spanish aviation authorities are somewhat wacky, my point precisely.
:ugh:

Let's not forgett that DGAC, AENA and AESA, which should be independent are in fact all branches of the same ministry.

What about giving us the RVR when its CAVOK??

The one I love is "wind 250@2 kts, varying 210 to 270", , maybe it is the french that do that? :}

[foxyankee]

@all discussing about taxi times: Look at this:
https://www.public.cfmu.eurocontrol.int/PUBPORTAL/gateway/spec/PORTAL.15.1.0.1.103/gwt-detached-view.jsp?_portal_context=/gateway/spec/PORTAL.15.1.0.1.103:/PUBPORTAL/gateway/spec/PORTAL.15.1.0.1.103:TAC:1308009600000:0:1308092579591:0:&_view_id=AIM_DETACHED_LIST&_parameter_set_id=&_dataset_info=

Example for LEMD:
Link: https://www.public.cfmu.eurocontrol.int/PUBPORTAL/gateway/spec/PORTAL.15.1.0.1.103/gwt-detached-view.jsp?_portal_context=/gateway/spec/PORTAL.15.1.0.1.103:/PUBPORTAL/gateway/spec/PORTAL.15.1.0.1.103:TAC:1308009600000:0:1308092629976:0:&_view_id=AIM_DETACHED_DETAILS&_parameter_set_id=0&_dataset_info=

TAXI TIME LEMD
Valid from : 2011-06-14
Valid until : 2011-06-14
Released : 2011-06-14 17:25:43
TACT/CASA INFORMATION MESSAGE
.
1 REF : TAXI TIME LEMD
.
2 VALID : WEF 14-18:00 UNTIL 14-19:00 UTC TAXI TIME 25 MIN
.
3 REMARK : CTOT FOR FLIGHTS DEPARTING IN THE ABOVE PERIOD
WILL BE CALCULATED ACCORDING TO THE NEW TAXI
TIME AND SLOT REVISION MESSAGES MAY BE ISSUED.
.
CFMU - BRUSSELS



I don´t really know the background, but maybe somebody can explain for what reason quite a strong number of airports are publisihing these "taxi time in xxxx today" reports almost daily with different minutes for taxi.....

[FeuerDrachen]

Why is not the Slot concept change? And what I wanna mean is nothing but this: if I have a slot at 10:20 meaning I can take off between 10:15 and 10:30, why they just don't give me the slot for 10:15 and then everyone knows the window will be open up to +15 min? If there is a "secret" reason for the -5+10 I would be glad to hear it! ;)

[andrijander]

Irishpilot1990,

"I refer to fuel really required, i.e the figure when pilots and ATC do their job professionally. Professionalism includes being efficient. Management budget for planned fuel so they dont care and laugh at pilots fustration. We have no say in protest. "

I'm guessing which airline you fly for if you have no say/can't protest for the planned fuel. Which leads me to point 2:

"My point about fuel costs and even price of petrol is we are wasting fuel that need not be used with a bit of professionalism. Everyday you hear pilots requesting a FL higher then filed, they are being professional and doing their bit to save oil, a finite resource."

You may see it as being responsible, but many times these "concerned pilots" are just trying to cheat the system by filing one level to avoid a CFMU restriction and then asking for another, once in the air, to fly cheaper (pun intended). Now, I understand it is better for the environment but these people do not care for what/how needs to be done from the ATC point of view.

So if these people don't care about ATC's problem, why should ATC care about theirs/yours?

(and by that I mean walking the extra mile...or rather cutting it).

[Sonnendec]

Hello,

Let´s explain it again: the 15 minutes tolerance when a CTOT is issued is for exclusive use of ATC, and ONLY in case there is a sequence (more than one traffic waiting for departure). When you are alone at the holding point with your CTOT under your arm you WILL have to wait until the exact time to take off.

Now, was there much more flexibility time ago? FOR SURE, and we loved it as much as you do. But we were not threatened by our own management as we are now. Did you folks know that AENA refuses to investigate any report about sector overloads or incidents if the ATC have not complied with this rule or has given any direct route? Did you know that AENA blames controllers for the airspace congestion for giving shortcuts? Did you know that we have to deal with "imaginative" new sectors without having any training on them? did you know that we have, in one of the new wonderful laws made for us this year, fines to up to 4.5 MILLION euros if we screw it? did you know that AENA management rises sector capacities as they see fit without ANY safety study (FHA)? did you know that we are working under such political pressure that these "overpaid" and "privileged" workers are starting to leave the job? did you know that more controllers than you would imagine are under psichiatric treatment because of this pressure, and still, they have to go to work anyway?

Guess how many days did i rest last july? Make your bet.

Did you know that on the 1st of july, one of my colleagues (and a good friend also), married/two children, one of the best controllers i know, is leaving to go to work in IRAQ? Come on guys, when you prefer to go to Iraq rather than to stay in your "overpaid" job, something is going on. If you dont want to see it, too bad. Your life´s on the scale... :ugh:

[Lord Spandex Masher]

You may see it as being responsible, but many times these "concerned pilots" are just trying to cheat the system by filing one level to avoid a CFMU restriction and then asking for another, once in the air, to fly cheaper (pun intended). Now, I understand it is better for the environment but these people do not care for what/how needs to be done from the ATC point of view.

Just a point. It's not the pilots filing an unrealistic (for want of a better word) flight plan. That'll be Operations. However, I will always try and get the optimum flight level on any given day, regardless of what Ops have filed. That is my job. You are there to help me achieve it.

So if these people don't care about ATC's problem, why should ATC care about theirs/yours?

You should care because that is your job. I don't care what you have to do because you are there, voluntarily, to do it. You are there because you want to do it. If you don't want to do it then move aside and let in somebody who does.

[flydive1]

You should care because that is your job. I don't care what you have to do because you are there, voluntarily, to do it. You are there because you want to do it. If you don't want to do it then move aside and let in somebody who does.

And who is forcing you to be there?

[Lord Spandex Masher]

Nobody, yet I still do what I can regardless of how hard it may be.

Your point?

[flydive1]

Point being that you are there voluntarily but it seems that you do not care about ATC operators problems, yet you expect them to care about yours.

Yes, you do what you can to do the best, but I pretty sure you stop short of doing something that would get you in trouble with your company or the authorities, yet you expect ATC operators to do it

[Lord Spandex Masher]

No, I would not expect somebody to get themselves into trouble for the sake of my 200 kilos of fuel.

But, they should care about it. However, why should ATC care about theirs/yours?

...the reason there is an ATC service is because of aeroplanes, therefore, our problems are their problems and they should care. It is obvious that they don't though. ATC need aeroplanes to function, not the other way round.

If there is something, legislation or SOP for instance, that prevents me from doing my job effectively then I would be lobbying for a change in that system. Not meekly toeing the line.

I agree that there may be occasions that will prevent, for example, direct routings but everyday...really:rolleyes:

[10W]

For every controller at our Centre who doesn't make an effort when they can to give optimum vertical and horizontal profiles to aircraft (and the number of those individuals is very few), I can point to just as many, if not more, examples of pilots who really think they are the only aircraft in the sky and don't care about the workload increases they cause, who don't care about any other aircraft in the sky except their own, and don't care about the overall system and how it provides the best for the majority, albeit not for everyone.

It's not a perfect system and it can always be improved, but until then, it's what we've got and it's what we all have to work with to the best of our abilities. Some of the flexibility and safety in the system is eroded by people who take the piss, whether by filing multiple plans (using up several slots for one solitary aircraft), ignoring instructions regarding speeds or level constraint points, or arguing on an operational frequency about how unfair it is that they are number 2 to the guy 5 miles ahead, as well as those who affect things to a lesser extent by not actually filing what they want.

As long as regulations and rules are complied with, or varied where allowed in a safe manner, then there is no excuse really for inefficient and inflexible professionals in our industry, no matter what side of the mike.

[Gonzo]

LSM,

The problem is that if you get your optimum-but-not-as-filed level, that might mean two other flights are not able to be given their own filed level. Wasted capacity.

Or your direct, given with the best of intentions by London, also occurs pretty simultaneously with some other flights around Europe being given their own directs by other ACCs, and so x number of aircraft turn up in the stacks at Generic Big European Airport several minutes earlier than CFMU expected. Cue holding in a stack, which takes up x number of levels in a TMA, so other flights to other airports need to stop off underneath you for longer. Wasted capacity.

It might mean an arrival regulation being put on, which delays traffic at point of departure; wasted capacity, or it might mean that to reduce airborne holding, both runways are used for landing which increases outbound delay at your destination; wasted capacity, and therefore more likely that CTOTs will be missed, therefore possibly..........wasting capacity.

It might even result in an overload for an ATCO on one sector.

Airlines and ANSPs are talking about network capacity and network management. Having a higher level of predictability allows for better management. Not deviating from one's flight plan makes overall more efficient use of the capacity.

[Lord Spandex Masher]

Gonzo, usually the flight level that we have filed, as far as I can tell, is the optimum flight level anyway. There may be the odd occasion when it isn't. So personally I don't always try and get a higher level than that filed because I don't always need to (going as high as possible isn't necessarily more efficient).

The bit wot annoys me is when we can't ever get to our filed flight level. As you point out this may be because someone else has nicked it when they shouldn't have. This can become a problem, more so lately, because we might not be carrying enough fuel for one or two levels lower than we expected.

This situation is where I expect flexibility. NOT where people are asking for higher levels unnecessarily.

On the 'Directs' point, I don't bother asking.

[BrATCO]

The bit wot annoys me is when we can't ever get to our filed flight level.

This very afternoon, I saw that a huge number of flights going from north to Spain via LOTEE-VES or DELOG-SNR had filed FL330 over the Spain entry point...
There was surely flow restrictions in Spain over FL345. To avoid these restrictions, companies have filed below.

I'm afraid I discovered this too late (for an unlinked reason) and I didn't clear any traffic to descend FL330 by the entry point...

LSM, would you have asked for FL330, as filed ?

[Lord Spandex Masher]

Well that's a slightly different matter. Once you've got me up there it's harder to get me down;)

No I wouldn't, I would assume, rightly or wrongly, that if you didn't make me descend then either the restriction no longer applied or we were ok to stay where we were.

However, no complaints if you'd descended us as per the flight plan.

[BrATCO]

On the 'Directs' point, I don't bother asking.


Requests for directs bother the controller too : loss of time...
If a direct is available for you, you're already on it.

[Lord Spandex Masher]

Yep, that's why I don't bother:ok:

[BrATCO]

However, no complaints if you'd descended us as per the flight plan.I don't doubt that (...much !) ;)

When we discover this kind of "yo-yo" flights, we usually do let the flight follow the profile. But, believe me, this is painful for everyone !
And a big waste of capacity.