No Joy in Zurich

[Colonel Klink]

Maybe it's just me, but I fly into Zurich quite a lot, and the place really is poor. The arrival from BLM is guaranteed to get you high every time, especially with a strong wind where you need speedbrakes from FL240 to about 4000 feet, you always hold at Ekrit while they let the Swiss aircraft in ahead of you; and in the evenings they use the VOR/DME to Runway 28 and slow you back to 180 knots at 50 miles, even when it seems not too busy. Your landing clearance comes at the last minute while they scuttle several Swiss aircraft across the runway, but we always have to wait while we wish to cross.If you are lucky enough to get the ILS, they drop you onto it at the last second. Although you are not allowed over Southern Germany to land on 14 or 16, it seems they don't mind you taking off on Runway 32 or 34, thereby creating a lot more noise. Then, when finally on the ground, very nonstandard phraseology like we got yesterday. You would have thought they would be trying to do it even safer bearing in mind their recent history, but I think the ATC there is just poor. Anyone else got any opinions?

[kriskross]

Back in the Dan Air days, Zurich was still well renowned for delays. On the early morning flight out of Gatwick it was expected that you would go into the hold above FL 200. So the crews used to save their breakfasts for 'the Zurich hold' to give them something exciting(?) to do!!!

[Colonel Klink]

And somehow I'll bet every time you did that the Swiss would give you a straight -in just to really annoy you!:O

[Shaker One]

Have to agree. Out of all the European destinations, ZRH takes the biscuit. With even tighter recent restrictions on traffic approaching over Germany it's not getting any better.

The requirement to perform a fairly high workload non precision approach onto (about) 2500m before and after certain times of day is rare for a large international airport. It may have been contributory to the hull loss they suffered there a while back.

----

Shaker One

[ZRH]

You wont belive the restrictions there are on the ATCs at ZRH!!
I think your frustrations are to be expected, but its definately not ATCs fault.
If you're inbound via BLM, the french leave you guys high and transfer the tfc to us at a very late stage. So you tend to end up very high, needing to reduce the speed and like you say, join the hold at EKRIT quite often. I can assure you that nobody here gives swiss any preferential treatment. They hate swiss too much for that!!
TFC joing Ekrit hold is inbound from three different directions, so it might seem that aicraft are sneaking in ahead of you when they're from the south or south west. And obviously there are many swiss aircraft(for now still) as this is their home base...! And one swiss aircraft looks like another, so it would be easy to mistake the one who entered the hold after you with the one, or three that leave the hold ahead of you!
The controllers have no space and therefore have to reduce TFC from way out. Have you ever looked at the map and seen how small Switzerland is? Then there is the absurd procedure of using runway 28 from 9pm in the week and from 8pm on weekends. It makes it very difficult for us. The departures from RWY 34 and 32 dont fly into Germany, but have to depart from these runways to save the poor people who live on the other side and who had to endure noise the entire day. Shame. If the guys in the twr let somebody land even one minute after the cut-off time on RWY 16/14, the DCA can fine us by SFR20000. So nobodys taking any chances.
They also need bigger spacing on final for RWY 28 as there are no hi-speed turn-offs.
As to phraseology on the ground: thats the apron office, who are not ATC and who have no ATC training. Its a specialty of ZRH which I've never seen elsewhere.
Happy landings

[Colonel Klink]

ZRH, I appreciate your comments, and, yes, I can see how the geography and surrounding countries makes it difficult for the controllers there. It's unfortunate that the pilots feel the same way! The nighttime practice is absurd of using Runway 28. It's a pity to have a gripe because flying in Switzerland is amongst the most scenic anywhere in the world.

[nurjio]

I love it when I read this sort of stuff. What are you all trying to say? Are the adopted procedures at ZRH a danger to the safe operation of your aircraft? Are the adopted procedures at ZRH wasting time and money, both yours and theirs? - Are the adopted procedures at ZRH too difficult for you to competently manipulate your MCP/control column and thrust levers? (caused by lack of awareness/capacity/ability/poor training) - I could go on, but I wont because I can't wait to read the replies.

If ZRH is your bogey port, as opposed to the one on your fizzog, then whinge officially rather than on pprune - or maybe you have already. Let us know. Is anything being done to improve matters? By the way, I've never eaten Toblerone.

Finally, I know it's Saturday night and I must be saddo to be online right now, but I've got an early report tomorrow so I'm staying clean and sharp - until you lot blunt me off.

Finally, Finally, KrisKross, back in Dan Air days they used to fly Comets and some folk apparently used to get off on the leather upholstery in the flight deck - got any more nuggets from the good old days?

[Colonel Klink]

Nurjio, you are a little plonker!!! I am not TRYING to say anything, only commenting on the procedures at an airport I use frequently. I hardly think it's too hard, and before your nasty little mouth opens again to me, or my colleague KrissKross, you may be as well to remember our qualifications and experience probably far outweigh yours. Now get lost.

[nurjio]

Please Sir, don't get mad at me, just answer the question. I am not being nasty - it's always difficult to get the tone right in these posts, isn't it? Accept my apology if I offended you. However, looking at the rest of the posts there seems to be some genuine concerns, borne out of your well informed comments, about procedures at ZRH. I just need to know if anyone has addressed these issues officially. You never know, I might have to divert there one day on my Flight Sim.

One last thing Sir, I'm always careful when I use the word 'probably'; indeed, Carlsberg use it to avoid litigation.

I can see it now 'Colonel Klink, probably the best pilot in the world'.

Love Ya XXX

NURJ

[nurjio]

Fish....out of water.

It's official. I've just read all about it in today's paper. Fish feel pain when hooked....but who cares, I love a nice piece of haddock....(I know, I know, haddock is caught in trawler nets)....ooh I'm being immature again.

[DCS99]

We live 3 miles off the extended centre-line from the R16 departure and I work at the airport, so I have a fair idea of the situation.

Couldn't agree more about R28 after 2100hrs CET, it's ridiculous.
I commented ages ago on a similar thread that 1 hour extension for R14 arrivals and R16 departures would dramatically improve the holding situation in the evenings.

I really doubt there's bias in favour of swiss: my longest hold inbound to ZRH was 30 minutes and that was on swiss. I've heard the odd BA pilot commenting on the PA as they arrive on the last departure from LHR "oh, we have to go in the hold here, that's a first for me/unusual here/a surprise". I wish it was unusual, it's normal anytime after 2100CET any night of the week.

On a positive note, I understand that the German action to limit overflights that causes the "R28 rule" is being challenged as illegal in the courts, though God knows which courts as Switzerland ain't in the EU.

To me, what is criminal is that a Crossair RJ crashed in 2001 making a VOR approach in tricky weather conditions whilst a perfectly servicable ILS was available for R14. And that's "noise abatement" is it? Thank you NIMBY German farmers. All ten of you.

[Aviatrix69]

ZRH is my home base. I understand, that it is somewhat difficult to understand the german regulation of overflight restrictions, and I do honestly think that the noise for landing over german territory is not so substantial (compared with the T/O's).

Regarding the CDA VOR DME 28: It's a great approach to fly!! We have to toss coins each time about who is allowed to do it. Demanding, keeping your brains sharp, just rising the color of your cheeks to a more intense blush... Hey, wasn't this why we all got into aviation?

Don't get me wrong, I do not think that there are no mistakes possible in contrary. And about ZRH in general: We always take 30' extra if our approach time is after 21.00 LT. The regualtion to use only one RWY for T/O and LDG was stupid enough, but now with the 28! And for my part I don't mind to go slow on 28, being fully configured at OSDAN, leaves you time enough for overview.

Cheers
Av

[theblipdriver]

hi,
have to agree that the situation in LSZH is not really good, but it's not (only?) fault of the atc. in fact, the restrictions from germany cause a lot of delay. it's ridiculous to force the big planes on rwy 28, when you have longer ones with ils available. bus as often, politics goes into airport operations, and politicians usually don't knnw much about how to fly from a to b.
unique has made a nice suggestion in case of wet rwy28, but no allowance to use rwy14 due wx mnm. they now propose to make a VOR/DME on 28, and then a VISUAL CIRCLING to 14 or 32. does anyone remember, when on 28aug1998 the cargolux B747 almost smacked into the ground when trying exactly to do this (there was a big party at the airport; they used 28 for landing, 32 for departures and 16 was closed due aircraft exhibition. so, acft requiring a loger runway hat to do the vor28 and "swing" to 32. that was when the 747 misjudged the approach)
what's next? waiting for the good next idea from this madhouse.

everyone knows how to solve the problem from ATC point of view: ILS 32 for arr, dep on 34. so, no crossing of active runways for acft departing or arriving, precision approaches, no overflight of germany and easy and efficient ATC.

but try to sell this solution to the people living under the approach of the new ILS 32 :{

and for swiss/atc: as swiss has cancelled the ID50/90 for atc, there is no premium treatment for them, believe me....

cheers,
al

[unwiseowl]

Is it not possible to put an ILS on 28?

[411A]

Have flown into ZRH since 1977, and have to say the ATC services there were (in the past) some of the best in Europe.

Now, holding seems to be quite usual, not unlike LHR, for example....:sad:

[springbok449]

Agree with most of the original posting bar the fact that I don't think SWISS get preferential treatment unlike lets say Spain where IBERIA certainly get priority sometimes to the cost of safety...
The SWISS pilots regularly get lenghty slots from delivery just like everyone else...God I hate the place!!

[Colonel Klink]

Springbok449, couldn't agree with you more as reagrds favoritism of Iberia in Spain, but that is a whole thread by itself.......................!

Regards,

The Colonel.:cool:

[ADFS]

Colonel, please give us your best. Should be fun!:}

[Colonel Klink]

Thanks for your confidence, ADFS, but ZRH has kindly explained the reasons for many of my grievances when flying to Zurich, and I have to admit, I understand things a little better and will try to be a bit more tolerant in the future. But, there is NOTHING that can possibly make me feel better when flying into Spain and seeing the controllers laughing at us while they all to pleasantly slide a few more Iberias in front of us.....!
I wouldn't mind if they did it in English so you could understand them, so I'll have to get a Spanish phrasebook.....................!!!!

[Paterbrat]

My maintainance base has been Zurich for the last eighteen years so go in fairly regularly. Have had to hold very few times though often going in in poor weather, possibly a little more these days. Could not say that I thought the controlling any worse than Bruxelles Paris or Rome. We are a foreign reg so cannot say that we get favourable treatment . Cannot say that our initial approaches have been particularly steep from any direction as we quite often come from Milan Paris or London. In fact I have always felt the controlling to be reasonably good and probably better than Nice and Marseilles

[N380UA]

Pilots flying into ZRH, ATCO's et-al
A note from an ex-flight type working the grounds nowadays.

We're all to aware of the situations generated by politicians in Switzerland as well as in Germany. From your local wannabe Kennedy to the national John Hancock, everybody got their two cents to give to the mess; proving Al-Gorge bin Bush that even old Europe has a well running democracy!

1. I don’t work for SkyGuide but am certain that there is no preferential services given to anyone in the air as on the ground with perhaps the only exception being Air force one.

2. Phraseology on the ground ought to be the same as in the air as Apron contr. has received he same training together all other ATCO's (sorry Herr Klink).

3. VOR DME 28 with visual circling on 14 and 16 LH and RH as well as visual charted 34 are currently being proven and flight tested in particular for heavy A/C who are unable to land on 28 when i.e. contaminated.

The heroic trial of the CLX 28 swing on 32 is most likely to be implemented. I had the fortune to try it my self on a MD11 sim and I must say it was rather exiting to say the least.

The problems in finding some smart way to fly in and out of ZRH are not of a technical nature but as it was mentioned before, political. Our capabilities are therefore limited. (try to explain a politician all Pans-ops, ICAO, JAR, FAR FOMs in a nutshell in a 2 hour timeframe!!)

Ya'll rest assured that we do all we can in our powers to provide the best services that politics allows us to.

[Land ASAP]

Great thread - A subject close to my heart....

ZRH ATC -

You do not help us by asking to keep 180kts to 4 miles with a 20kt tail wind in a slippery jet onto R/W 14 (I've had this request made in an A320 and a B757). Particularly as you have the 'Alitalia spur' that juts out at 6dme with a Radio Altimiter read out of 1010ft!! The last time this request was made and we said 'unable to comply' - you told us to go around (Which we did - no arguments). It was without doubt the most spiteful bit of Air Traffic Controlling I have ever witnessed.

Your job is no doubt made far more difficult by the environment, the politicians, the locals etc..Just learn a little humility and empathy. I would suggest you all need to spend a few days in the simulator understanding 'energy considerations versus speed requests' so that the next time I take an aircraft into ZRH R/W14 ILS and the wind at 6000ft is 300/35kts, you don't ask us to keep 180 kts to 4 miles. Otherwise I might be asked to spitefully go-around again.
Admission of fault is the first step towards a safer operation.

[ZRH]

Land ASAP
Fortunately I work on the ACC side of things and cant be blamed for making you go around. I will readilly admit though that we have a number of pr1cks working in our company who think they are GOD and you will comply at all cost, no matter how ridiculous it might be. I have worked at several ATC providers and you have them same type of folks at every company. Same in your airline I suppose. But, we also have some really super guys who try hard to provide a good service, give the best routing they can and try and get you to the requested cruising level.
As far as rwy28 is concerned. Its use is frustrating for us too. Much more work on our side having to bring all traffic on a right-handed approach while the departing tfc climbes out south of extended centerline rwy28. No matter if they departed from rwy16/32/34!! As I mentioned earlier, there will be delays when rwy28 is in use as the Approach fellows have to use a bigger spacing between landing aircraft of 5nm whereas they only need 3nm on rwy14.
The politicians make the rules and we are forced to abide....:ugh:

[Mishandled]

Having lived in Zurich for nearly 3 years now I can go on for hours about the customer service and lack thereof that is common in Switzerland. I suggest that you refrain from complaining. In my experience this only results in a) being ignored, as well as b) getting worse service after that. Apart from that its a great country. I do have sympathy with the people having to deal with all the political nimby rubbish though about flight paths runways etc (both Swiss and German)

[GlueBall]

Isn't it wonderful now and then to be able to hand-fly a challenging VOR/DME approach in IMC? ZRH is definitely less stressful than Kathmandu or Quito at night in the rain.

...So many people have lied down in their graves without having felt one drop of excitement.

[Few Cloudy]

Nurjo!

I don't believe you are really a pilot. Real pilots and ATC (see threads by ZRH and the easyJet and other pilots above) are true professionals who like to get pax to destinations on time, turn round on time and get out on time. When this doesn't work, they feel frustrated. This has nothing to do not being able to manipulate throttles and stick.

ZRH is a big mess for noise, terrain and political reasons. That it works at all is amazing. In an attempt to get "slugs"of aircraft in, ATC often requests highish speeds until a quite a late point. When someone behind gets close, they sometimes request an even later speed reduction point. If the pilots can manage this, they do, even though it means a lot of checks and chat late on in the approach, when things should ideally be settled and established. If they can't manage, ATC sometimes has no choice but to order a GA.

The terrain north of the field (Wannenberg) can cause the Mode 2C GPWS to come on in certain incomplete configurations if flying level at 4,000ft, adding to the stress. In IMC this requires a pull-up/ go-around. (Actually the Stadlerberg, closer in is not a problem and when Alitalia hit it they were following a defective GS indication and well below glide path.) One nice thing which can happen to you is a Swing Over from 14 ILS to RW 16 (as opposed to the dreadful SideStep the other way round) requiring disciplined visual flying and early corrections but saving up to eight minutes of taxy.

Once on the deck you taxy through a crossing maze of taxyways and opposing traffic and having turned round and prepared you take bets on how much slot delay you will get. It can be a lot, especially late in the evening, as Take Off traffic and Landing traffic vie for the same strip - from opposing directions! After take off, there is often a low level off due to the traffic situation and several frequency changes just as you are in cleanup/checklist work and anti-icing switching.

Go and have a look in ATC and you will soon see that those guys don't have it any better - restrictions due to all the above plus military traffic, gliders and light aircraft close by - also climbing/ descending traffic from Germany transiting through.

It has been getting tighter on all concerned for fifteen+ years now and I for one am heartily glad that it is no longer my home base, which it was for 25 years. Good luck to all concerned.

[I. M. Esperto]

The layovers are worth it all.

[Scooby Doo]

Yep, all 22 hours of it!

[Land ASAP]

ZRH - It would be nice if someone anonymously printed this out and stuck it on the wall of your coffee room!

If successful, I have a message for the nice lady who sent me around, "I am glad we're not married!"

[Alpine Flyer]

Well, there must be SOME reason the place is called Unique Airport Zurich.....

I flew to LSZH on a regular basis for about 5 years from 1990 to 1995 and occasionally thereafter and found ATC quite accomodating. All this was in turboprops and we usually got good service and even a special visual departure out of RWY 28 to save departure miles.

The situation with Germany has worsened things quite a lot and some of that seems to be the fault of Swiss politicians who felt they could bully Germany into accepting something for nothing......

I was always amazed how efficient ramp servicing in ZRH worked with quite a low number of staff for cleaning, loading, etc.

[Few Cloudy]

Actually, the Germans bullied the Swiss. Although for many Black Forest dwellers, ZRH is the international airport of choice, they got up tight about the overflights (well above the few homes there) and got their transport minister to browbeat the luckless Moritz Leuenberger into agreeing to a very restrictive overflight policy.

There can be no comparison to the "visual noise"which the descending ships made over the Black Forest to the resulting fully configured powered approach at lower heights over the populated areas around the field. That's what you get when politicians with little technical knowledge negotiate complex issues.

As for "something for nothing", the Alpine transit concessions made by Switzerland can't be written off like that. In Austria you know all about this phenomenon too...

[maxrpm]

Hello Alpine Flyer!

I agree with you about the remarks on ZRH. But what really puzzles me is how on earth did you manage to get pprune registered in 1969?? That was more than a decade before the internet protocoll was introduced.

[easy]

Glueball,

ZRH's VOR/DME 28 with it's 90 degree right turn on to the inbound radial and steep approach path is a lot trickier then Kathmandu's straight in step down VOR/DME approach. OK the missed approach at Kathmandu needs a lot more accuracy, but I find ZRH tightens the sphincter more then Kathmandu ever did.:ouch:

[Colonel Klink]

Although we all admit the approach to Runway 28 is a headache, try the Go aoround, which encompases all the scenic beauty of Switzerland plus a few nearby countries as well!!
I had to do this once about three years ago when someone didn't clear the runway properly, and the procedure is very long-winded, and uses a bucket of fuel!!!

[FO Janeway]

Aviatrix69 & Glueball
Read FewCloudy's post carefully.
Both your attitudes are questionable:Flying for fun, tossing coins,...etc. There's a time and place for everything.
The pax rather you flew properly than making fun. A professional attitude is required, you can have fun and knob around in a small AC where you just kill yourself not the family members of dozens of people.
If your company's trainers have any sense, you are both still FO's!

FO Janeway

[Aviatrix69]

Janeway,

ever heard about the love for aviation?. Naaah, something you seem to lack.

[FO Janeway]

I rest my case.

[Few Cloudy]

A while back I posted a newspaper report about a pending ILS installation RW 28. What happened to that we will have to ask
N38OUA or ZRH. This week flight testing was, however being done on the RW 34 ILS, so maybe things are moving.

The problem with VOR RW 28 is that in still wind or tailwind conditions it takes serious planning and execution to get the ROD working. In headwind conditions, which used always to be the case on this approach, before the politicians got in there, this was not a problem. This probably had quite a lot to do with the Crossair HS146 accident. There was a lot more to it than that, of course but it was probably a big contributing factor.

[N380UA]

Hi Cloudy et-al

ILS 28 is still an issue; however being postponed due to several problems with terrain profile and reflection surfaces of nearby surrounding buildings distorting the ILS signal.

While the bugs of ILS 28 are being worked on, an ILS 34 is being implemented. There as well, the buildings in the vicinity are a bit of a hassle such as the SRT hangar 3 which does not agree with Annex 14 areas and the Zurich Berg in turn goes not agree with Pans-ops areas.
However, it seems as though its all pretty good negotiated now and is awaiting the governments OK.
Another reason for preferring 34 over 28 at this point is the LDA. With a new THR at Romeo/Echo 8 where a bit more than 3200m will be available.
Once we got the ILS 34 done, ILS 28 will be tackled.

p.s.
How ‘bout a beer at the Hecht?
:O

[safetypee]

Has any one submitted an Air Safety Report or Occurrence report? Has an operator complained to his national authority? Have the reports been copied to the Swiss (FOCA) and German (LBA) authorities? Have all interested parties told the JAA and Eurocontrol? Written to CHIRP?
This is our industry, our safety record; thus unless we do something about it nothing will change. We must not have another CFIT; the accident at LSZH (runway 28) on 24 Nov 2001 was appalling and the circumstances leading to it may well have included issues as above. It is up to us to initiate the changes.

[chris47]

It might not really be the fault of an airport or procedure, if an airplane on a VOR/DME Approach hits the trees 600 ft below MDA and a few miles out of the Threshold after a continuous descend with Autopilot on.
Visibility was reported to be very bad (ca 1 mile) by a preceding jet, which made the landing, the chance that the Pilots of the unlucky Plane had seen any Approach or Runway Lights is zero. I know, that until the report these are still "speculations", but facing the known facts I find it wrong to blame the airport for this accident.

[pilotinoo]

@chris47

The autopilot was OFF..!!!!!! So, I guess your infos are not very well funded. As many of your infos are.

Greets pilotinoo

[safetypee]

Chris47 et al

It should not be up to us to find fault or allocate blame, particularly after an accident where crew may be unavailable to provide answers or explanation. However it is our duty to ensure that those who have the responsibility for regulating the safety of our industry be made aware of issues that may contribute to an accident.
With respect to the Nov 2001 accident; who were the responsible parties for agreeing the noise ban? Did they assess the safety risks involved in using a non-precision approach at night, if so did they consider making provision for cancelling the noise ban in poor weather? Was this just assumed to be the Captains decision / responsibility ….as are most safety related issues? Should the Airport or ATC, who may have more accurate information and the time for assessing the situation, have been given the authority to use the more appropriate runway? Who approved an approach procedure where the visibility minima were less than the distance from the visual descent point to the threshold? Why did ‘they’ approve a procedure where the vertical approach path originated beyond the threshold, requiring an increased decent rate after visual contact? Were the “normal” ZRH approach operations, high, fast, rush, contributory to the crew performance and their operation of the aircraft? Why didn’t we (mere observers, Crews, Operators, Airport, ATC, Regulators, Governments) intervene where probably the same warning signs as above were present?

An apology in that I only have questions. The answers may reside with all of us; we should take action, starting with reporting instances of less than ideal operations, procedures, etc.