LGW ATIS

[Nightstop]

What's the point of all the extra do's and don'ts added to the LGW ATIS nowadays? If ATC wants to inform us of anything other than weather and runway in use, why not use NOTAMS? If we don't have ACARS operational (not uncommon) the endless speil on VHF uses up our limited time, if ACARS is working we print out a tree load of paper! Rant over.

[Diet Coke Machine]

Hi Nightstop.

Simple answer what we clog up on the ATIS we reduce on the GMC/GMP RT, and have greater capacity to provide you a service on one of the most saturated frequencies there is.

The following disclaimer is that this reply is not directed at you personally, but at some of the behaviours we see daily from flight crew that make our job so much harder and your experience worse.

We ask you to check that your tug team is plugged in and ready so that the clearance doesn't have to be repeated twice on the GMC freq, sadly many of you still don't do this and valuable RT time is lost as the tug crew will not push you unless they hear the clearance.

We ask that you call the correct frequency from 0530L so that valuable RT time isn't wasted telling you to give the entire message again on the correct frequency that has just opened for business. All published in the AIP but sadly ignored.

We ask that after 0600L, once all frequencies are open in the summer, that you 'report ready with GMP'. We shouldn't need to remind you of this, but again we have to as too many airline crews (some big culprits and offenders from our big 3) think that because they have DCL they can freecall GMC when they are ready, negating GMPs role in metering traffic onto the GMC frequency in an orderly fashion to ensure the GMC ATCO can control the frequency and provide a service. GMP stands for Ground Movement Planner, if all flightcrew called ready first on 121.95 it would make our lives and the RT so much easier.

We ask that, during periods of high CTOT regulation or bad weather in the TMA, that you do not request remote hold with GMP. We. Know. You. Want. Push and hold, there's no need to ask!!!!! Yes we know that the airport put a NOTAM out telling you to and your bosses tell you to ask too but seriously when our French cousins go on strike every week, GMP is unmanageable because you all give us your life story about push and hold.
And on the subject of push and hold, it's always push and taxi for remote hold. If we allow you to push into 41/43 without starting engines it means you have to use 41/43M as you're not allowed to push onto 41/43E/W lines. Sometimes we try to help and allow a push only, but that's when we don't have high expected remote hold demand. The number of times I've explained to crew in GMP that it is a push and taxi and then 1 minute later that same crew has gone onto the super busy GMC frequency and tried their luck with a long spiel about push back only to remote hold really is crazy.

And whilst we're on it, please stop asking GMC/Tower what number you are to depart, or is it busy at the hold. A)we don't know the answer that far in advance and the spacing strategy changes so a number in sequence is pointless, B)yes it usually is in summer.

And another one, I don't care if you're G able or B able 'if it helps'. Too Busy.... I'll ask if you if it will help me.

I could go on all day about remote holds actually creating delay but I've answered your original questions I think in regard to the new ATIS messages. Sorry you don't like them, we wish we didn't have to include them, but we need your help to manage the RT properly so we can work together and provide you a safe professional service this summer. The new ATIS messages are a first step.

My rant over now.

Please follow up with any questions I'm sure there will be a few..

Oh last one, LGW ATC don't send NOTAMs the airport do, so it's easier to get the message across via ATIS.

[In_The_Deen]

Hi DCM

I too was thinking the same as Nightstop. Thank you for such a detailed reply. If we had that kind of information flow from our companies, LGW would move a lot smoother in my opinion.

I have been thinking for a while about the ground crews sometimes not hearing the clearances and using valuable time to get repeat instructions. Rather than ensuring connection, my thought was that the tug drivers very often are unaware of our call sign and as such, are not mindfully tuned in to hear the pushback request from the GMC frequency. Would it be worth reiterating the stand number at the start of the push clearance so the tug driver has a chance of picking up the clearance? Not sure how these things get changed, but just a thought.

I appreciate your frustration at the continued remote hold requests. From our perspective, we get a lot of flak from the company asking why we didn't request it, and so to have it on the ATIS actually gives us a get-out-of-jail-free card.

Thanks again for your explanations

[Gonzo]

Nightstop,

A more generic response.

We know from experience that NOTAMs don't catch everybody. I'm sure there are many reasons, but it's a fact that if something is only promulgated by NOTAM, many flights will arrive, or call for departure, with no knowledge of the issue to which the NOTAM refers.

With this knowledge, when conducting safety analyses for operational changes, we often end up having to use ATIS (though that certainly doesn't catch everybody either, especially as it gets longer), or even both....Or even both in addition to an AIP supplement.

If ATC want to send a NOTAM, it's a simple process, or at least should be. Either in cooperation with the airport operator or acting alone for a purely ATC issue.

[Diet Coke Machine]

Hi In The Deen, we do try and feed that comms back to your base captains via the FLOPSC meeting. The plan in the coming months is to develop our own Flight crew liaison meeting that we will chair so we can all communicate better.

In respect of the pushback clearances, you're correct, the tug crew don't know the ATC callsign for your flight, they only have the pax flight number, it's for this reason we have an instruction that states we must use the stand number in any pushback clearance so the tug crew can pick it up. This isn't the real issue though, it's flight crew calling for push when the tug crew aren't ready (still doing checks etc) so the tug crew miss the clearance completely.

Cheers
DCM

[Del Prado]

Can I throw one in too?

Please don't report QNH on first contact with Director (if you're descending to a FL).

QNH must be given by ATC on first descent to an altitude so giving it on first contact is overkill and a waste of RT.

I wouldn't moan but when crews do give QNH on first call it is often tripped over, wasting further RT time.

Thanks for listening. Out.

[opnot]

Dial A Coke
I agree with most of your posting , the bit I disagree with is, when a pilot reports that he can take an intermediate link departure, great,that means to me that he has got his t/o figures from that point and can go if requested by me . If he has to wait for me to ask him the usual reply is stand by have not got the figures and a gap may be lost. But as you say the choice is yours from which point the acft departs

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

Del Prado - very wise.

[bobwi]

May I throw one in too?

As I agree that many pilots clog the frequency by irrelevant calls, I think the controllers blog the frequency by putting pressure on us to make their plan work. When I (we) get our line up clearance we will be ready. It is completely useless to tell us to be ready for an immediate. It doesn't change anything to my take off.

And worse, telling me to take the 1st exit just after I touched down and still run with more than a hundred knots over the runway, checking our spoiler deployment and deceleration. Again, we know we need to get off the runway, but don't put pressure on us because you decided to line up a big airplane in a gap that really is too small.

I know you need to make your targets of runway movements per hour but if it doesn't fit, it doesn't fit. If in doubt just don't line them up, you may make a very inexperienced FO very nervous who will slam the brakes, making all the pax hitting the seat in front of them, only to realize the first exit is not doable and then having to roll low speed to the next.

Rant over.

[Nightstop]

Thanks for the replies and nice to see the excess verbeage on the LGW ATIS has reduced now. However, the current NOTAM urges pilots to request push for Remote hold whereas the aforementioned ATIS diatribe stated not to! So, which is it?
With regard to the tug crew asking for confirmation of runway in use etc, why not empower the tug crews to initiate our push back request directly with ATC? That's what happens at some (but not many) airports that I fly from, it seems to work quite well.
Agree with Bobwi, when we get line up clearance we're ready to go. It's not like we're going to sit on the runway sipping coffee until we decide to roll.

[chevvron]

And worse, telling me to take the 1st exit just after I touched down and still run with more than a hundred knots over the runway, checking our spoiler deployment and deceleration. Again, we know we need to get off the runway, but don't put pressure on us because you decided to line up a big airplane in a gap that really is too small.


Rant over.
I never used to specify a turnoff to a landing aircraft unless a particular one was not available; it could result in excess braking and a burst tyre or two and maybe a blocked runway.
I always said 'vacate first convenient left/right'.

[T250]

Thanks for the replies and nice to see the excess verbeage on the LGW ATIS has reduced now. However, the current NOTAM urges pilots to request push for Remote hold whereas the aforementioned ATIS diatribe stated not to! So, which is it?

Do NOT request push and hold, the ATIS still asks you not to, so don't! :ugh:

With regard to the tug crew asking for confirmation of runway in use etc, why not empower the tug crews to initiate our push back request directly with ATC? That's what happens at some (but not many) airports that I fly from, it seems to work quite well.

Why not actually suggest this idea to those actually in charge such as GAL or KK ATC, rather than mere suggestion on an anonymous forum :}:cool:

[ATCO3]

[QUOTE]As I agree that many pilots clog the frequency by irrelevant calls, I think the controllers blog the frequency by putting pressure on us to make their plan work. When I (we) get our line up clearance we will be ready. It is completely useless to tell us to be ready for an immediate. It doesn't change anything to my take off.

I don't want to generalise and it might not change YOUR take off but there are some pilots and I could even say airlines that think they are the only ones using the runway and don't understand high intensity single runway ops so unfortunately when radar don't quite hit the spacing or someone dawdles on the runway or someone doesn't slow at the same point/rate etc etc we need to make it work so you get airborne and the lander gets a safe landing clearance.

Be ready immediate followed by cleared immediate take off DOES make a noticeable difference to performance in most cases and engines spooling as you get the read back is a great sound to hear.

And worse, telling me to take the 1st exit just after I touched down and still run with more than a hundred knots over the runway, checking our spoiler deployment and deceleration. Again, we know we need to get off the runway, but don't put pressure on us because you decided to line up a big airplane in a gap that really is too small.

I know you need to make your targets of runway movements per hour but if it doesn't fit, it doesn't fit. If in doubt just don't line them up, you may make a very inexperienced FO very nervous who will slam the brakes, making all the pax hitting the seat in front of them, only to realize the first exit is not doable and then having to roll low speed to the next.

We don't have ATC quotas but we do try to SAFELY and efficiently move as much traffic as we can each hour partly because we have to because the airport have sold so many runway slots but also because it's our job and efficient use of the runway is how the airport and airlines make their money.

I agree controllers should make requests to exit etc when at to high a speed that should all be planned and requested ahead which is how controllers I know work.

In a perfect world all gaps would be as requested all speeds standard and every aircraft would land and vacate as quickly as safely possible and line up and take off with minimum delay but then I wouldn't need all the training and experience to work at busiest single runway airport in the world.

Rant also over. But on a serious note visit the tower see what the issues are from our side of the mic we are more than happy to take on board suggestions where we can improve but as I said we unfortunately have to treat aircrew as a 'lowest common demoninator'.

[bobwi]

Do NOT request push and hold, the ATIS still asks you not to, so don't!

I have not seen it on the ATIS but it does say in the NOTAM to ask for it and our company insists that we ask for that. Tug crews need to be released for the next job and the stands need to be available. I am alright with not asking when you offer it if available, but as far as I know I need to ask for it.

[bobwi]

Thanks for your reply, ATCO3

Be ready immediate followed by cleared immediate take off DOES make a noticeable difference to performance in most cases and engines spooling as you get the read back is a great sound to hear.

That is exactly what we should not want in this profession. I am not comfortable with a pilot who starts the take off roll before I have even read the clearance back. And people do start doing that. Again, I will not mess about and be on my way, at the most spoiling the engine up a little bit on the brakes or keeping the aircraft rolling when I see that the previous one is vacating but within my companies SOP's and disciplined CRM.

Again, full is full, if it can't be done, it can't be done.

But on a serious note visit the tower see what the issues are from our side of the mic we are more than happy to take on board suggestions where we can improve

I'd love to visit the tower. I am very curious about how you guys work. One day I will, I have got your number.

[Del Prado]

Of course if (A319) operators conformed with the 160 to 4 clearance, which they have acknowledged then the gaps wouldn't shrink.

But then that deserves a thread all of it's own!

[Ratatat]

GAL and Airline management are completely out of touch with reality with their push and hold polices.
55 movements scheduled hour after hour, multiple towed movements per hour, handling agents stretched beyond their limits meaning multiple occupied stands, SEGs not activated on arrival.
Throw in multiple push and holds and you end up with non CTOT departures being delayed on stand whilst push and hold is accommodated to protect the on time departure of an aircraft that should be held on stand.
When will the outdated measurement of OTP be changed from off stand time to actual departure time?
All on what must be one of, if not the busiest GMC positions in the world.
Is there anywhere else that does regular 900+ with only 1 GMC position?
Inbound holding regularly in excess of 20 minutes and outbound delays 40 minutes - rarely is sufficient flow put on due to airport capacity. Atc will not flow it because they can take the airborne holding and delays on stand.
Atc and pilots are doing a great job - we could all do it a little better sometimes but let's not get distracted from the real issue of a completely over scheduled airport putting unacceptable pressure on those at the sharp end.
The scary thing is that we are being told by some nerd with their laptop that they have identified dead time between runway movements and they think we could move more. They don't appreciate this 'dead time' is our safety margin'
Scheduled 58-60 hours! Could be coming your way soon.
Let's stop bitching about each other and aim our issues at the right people.

[EastofKoksy]

Ratatat,


Agree with the sentiment of your message completely. Number crunchers and their lap tops are a hazard to flight safety. They mostly have zero operational experience and think the world behaves like a computer model. They won't take "no" for an answer because their bonus depends on making reality fit the graph!

[T250]

GAL and the airlines are only interested in their precious OTP figure, that means get off the stand ASAP. This OTP stuff is null and void to anyone in ATC :ugh:

Easyjet in particular have an incredibly passionate interest in this 'push and hold' garbage because it means they can pay their ground handler (Menzies) even less. In the past, they'd have to wait on stand for pushback to then depart. This meant that tug crews and other necessary ground staff sometimes racked up overtime bills etc because the already stretched handling agent has absolutely no slack or flexibility in their skeleton resourced operations when there is significant airport congestion or CTOT delays and the aircraft had to just wait on stand. These days, push and hold allows them to relieve the tug driver ASAP and they make even more of a cash saving! :=

Easyjet bosses are paid on the performance and adherence to OTP. Therefore they absolutely love this push and hold rubbish! It looks great for their figures, aircraft achieved its OTP, however did not actually depart for up to 30mins+ afterwards, and delayed other operators and even company aircraft whilst manoeuvring to the bloody remote hold location! :}:rolleyes:

GAL need more stands at LGW. That is a primary issue.

However, GAL as the airport operator should tell easyjet that they need to start funding their ground handling contracts properly. Yes, push and hold is available, however it is not a right or an entitlement and it does not remove the requirement to fund your business contracts with your partners properly! :=

Singled easyjet out here and I appreciate this may not be entirely fair, however it is predominantly one operator demanding this. It's madness that this push and hold system has got out of control now, to the detriment of other operators who may pay slightly more for their ground handling but are being penalised for what would have been an on time departure (ATD) because some cheap skate behind them doesn't want to pay a few quid extra and thinks everyone else should suffer for their profits :mad:

[Icelanta]

I disregard all things said to me on landing roll by ATC, it is the crew, and only the crew that decides where to vacate, unless there is a closure or a conditional landing clearance like in the USA.
I am personally quite fed up with atcos thinking they can order us how to brake and operate the aircraft in the safest way for a given moment.
We will do our best to facilitate, but I will NOT step on the brakes or alter my plan on the rwy because your sequencing is too tight.
It is not the crew's business that LGW has a certain amount of movements to make.
Oh and by the way, we do not have the AIP of every bloody airport in Europe handy, often having to operate to a destination at very short notice. Keep it standard like other airports and use ICAO RT, not some English bastardised version of it.

[TelsBoy]

Automated Terminal Information Service serves the purpose of giving aircrew any relevant information that the ATSU is obliged to report, regardless if it is NOTAM'ed or not. Many don't read NOTAMs anyway...

"Too much rubbish on the ATIS" can be a frequent complaint made by pilots at many UK airfields and was the subject of a PPRuNE thread fairly recently IIRC, however this simply reflects the growing complexity and challenges facing ever-busier airfields with more external constraints - Danger Areas, drones, wildlife, noise abatement etc.

[Lassie]

Unfortunately in the "where there's a blame there's a claim" culture that we now live in the ATIS is more regularly being used as an arse covering exercise....."Well the airlines can't say we didn't warn them.....it's on the ATIS"

It's a shame as pertinent messages often get lost amongst the rest of the unnecessary stuff.

[Sky Wave]

I'm of the orange persuasion but not particularly pleased at getting tarred with this brush.

I never call ready until contact has been made with the ground crew, but even then every few weeks for some reason a tug driver will miss the call. It's annoying because it makes it look like we've called before establishing comms.

I will often say 'request taxy, able charlie' if I'm parked along Quebec because on many occasions the controller says, it does help either to get us away quicker or to keep us out of the way of the traffic jam at A2/A3. Most of my colleagues will never plan a Charlie intersection departure so I've always found it worth mentioning.

Will always be ready immediate, can't understand why anyone would accept a line up clearance if they weren't ready immediate. I'm very mindful that the Tenerife Accident had a captain that was keen to advance the thrust levers prior to take off clearance and I'm loathe to do that so my engines may take 2 seconds longer to spool up.

Push and Hold requests, I used to ask in line with company procedures but as soon as the ATIS requested that we didn't I stopped that.

160 to 4 is often very tricky without dropping the gear. Sometimes you get asked to reduce to 160 in excess of 10 miles out which is a long way to drag it in with gear down. If only we were reduced to 160 before we got on the glide it would be easy. Personally I'll strive to do it and will use speed brake on the glide slope which is something our manuals advise against doing. If used very carefully it's fine and will help the speed to come back, but as I said our manuals advise against it and if you move the speed brakes too quickly the aircraft pitches all over the place. If it's not happening I will of course drop the gear because I believe a speed instruction carries the same weight as an altitude instruction. I do know that a lot of our guys n gals will just sit there with the power at idle and accept 178kts if that's what it gives. But one thing's for certain, they're not deliberately trying to fly faster, they're avoiding dropping the gear too early. Also if I've struggled to get the speed back and was closer to 170 than 160 I'll slow up a bit earlier to try and average it out. I'm sure the environmentalist and the airports neighbours would soon complain if we all started dropping the gear at 10 miles. The solution is give us 160 prior to catching the glideslope or give us 170 to 5.

Gatwick could do a lot to help itself. If we've already called ready on delivery why do we need to call ground? Many other airports get you to monitor the ground frequency and the controller calls you when they're ready for you to push. RT transactions could be almost halved.

When vacating the runway, why not have automatic frequency transfer to reduce tower congestion?

I've been up to the tower on a couple of occasions, and would love to come up again but like everything it's so much more difficult now. We used to just ask Airlinks to take us there but that costs money and no one wants to pay. On the flip side, I've been flying 10 years and have never once had an ATCO on a famil flight with us. If the orange brigade is a problem, then perhaps seeing a few more controllers on the jump seat would help gain a better understanding of each others operation.

O, and yes I'd hate to have to listen to the ATIS as it is at the moment :oh:

[average-punter]

LGW based here and certainly don't envy your job on a busy day!

Sorry for the thread drift but I'm interested in coming up the tower for a visit, is this possible and how would I arrange it?

Cheers,

AP

[Blueeyedviewer]

Morning Average Punter,

Easiest way to to call the Supervisor desk - main tower number in the AIP.

We get a few airport standby crews coming over as well as those calling in to arrange on days off. It's really up to you.

We would love to see more of the flight deck upstairs, it helps us and has proved just as valuable for the crews.

As long as we get notice and you can arrange transport to us, it shouldn't be an issue. We may occasionally have to say no due to operational reasons (checks/situation) but it's rare.

The only caveat - bring biscuits 🤓

[Ratatat]

Gatwick could do a lot to help itself. If we've already called ready on delivery why do we need to call ground? Many other airports get you to monitor the ground frequency and the controller calls you when they're ready for you to push. RT transactions could be almost halved.

When vacating the runway, why not have automatic frequency transfer to reduce tower congestion:

Good suggestions that have been discussed and are under consideration. Unfortunately change takes a long time to happen.

[TelsBoy]

Unfortunately in the "where there's a blame there's a claim" culture that we now live in the ATIS is more regularly being used as an arse covering exercise....."Well the airlines can't say we didn't warn them.....it's on the ATIS"

It's a shame as pertinent messages often get lost amongst the rest of the unnecessary stuff.

It's not really derriere-covering, there are things that the ATSU are obliged to promulgate purely for safety reasons. If information is not promulgated - something "pointless" like nearby DA activity, steel plates, cranes, WIP etc. and an incident occurs directly because of this then the first question that will be asked is "Why was the info not promulgated?".

[Lassie]

Telsboy,

The things you mention all relate to safety, are pertinent and in my opinion do have a place on the ATIS. I'm talking about duplication of non safety related information. For example a change to a procedure that has been amended in the AIP, promulgated in advance to Airlines but the powers that be still insist on it being added to the ATIS.

I just wish more common sense could return to the job.

[ZOOKER]

Ratatat,
Have you spoken to your union reps about this? Do you have a union now? Wasn't 'Red' involved in the ANSP transition? He certainly believed in his workforce having "a strong union". I have the document with that quote in the loft.
If EGKK GMC/GMP is that busy, (and I don't doubt that it isn't), surely another 'sector-split' is required.
What about Chirp, or the MOR system?

[Ratatat]

Zooker

We still have the same Union who listen to us and take our concerns to management, who to be fair to them, are also listening and are trying help.

GMC 2 is being actively discussed but will take time.

MORs are filed and results have been achieved partly due to them.
Chirp - we are not quite there yet.

The issue for me is 55/hr which is only achievable in good wx and with a 50% or greater weighting of departures.
The tea time rush is 2/3 arrivals so 50/hr is good.
The airport need to realise this and apply appropriate airport capacity flow, not be looking at ways ATC can increase the movement rate.

[Nightstop]

Visiting the Tower on a day off if a nice idea but using your Airside pass except when on duty is a big no, no. When on airport standby I don't see how we could visit either, we're meant to be on immediate readiness to leap into action...not possible, unless we parachute from the Tower :p

[ZOOKER]

Ratatat,

Thanks for the reply. All good stuff to hear. I haven't been down to EGKK for many years, but you folks do a grand job down there, and the folks 70-odd miles down the road.

[pukeko]

ATIS content is prescribed by ICAO Annex 11.
For those of us "lucky" enough to be in the Single European Sky, most of it is also copy-pasted into the European Rules of the Air.