EDI Radar

[brain fade]

They seem about the same 'business' to me. At least when I'm there. Anyway, aren't most of EDI's extra moves in the middle of the night? You know, freight etc?

Also (although some folk are decidedly slow to get going) what's so immediate if the lander's at 4 miles? Be an 'immediate' if he was at two surely? Also 4 miles still air ain't 4 miles into 60Kt is it?
Which sort of neatly illustrates EDI's overall approach (to me anyway!).

Now I've said it!

[Captain Mayday]

Edinburgh may be busier than Glasgow now, but perhaps the old increased spacings on final (due to having to backtrack?) are just that bit slow to disappear?

Often looks from an end users point of view that Glasgow can pack them in that bit tighter, perhaps it's just the 'gallus' Glasgow attitude - or extreme talent as someone said ?

Is there still a lack of high-speed turnoffs at Edinburgh? Be intersted to know who has the most go arounds .... Or who has the most trainees .......or who has the most experience?

I've heard "cleared immediate takeoff landing traffic at 4 miles" many times at EDI.

And I've heard "cleared immediate takeoff landing traffic at 2 and a half miles" many times at Glasgow.

Seriously though,.... all this talk of ATCO2/ATCO3 divides is very sad - you are all ATCOs. ...... but what happens when EDN go down to ATCO4 if ...

1- your management claim that the job is easier due to the new tower ..?

2- it becomes tower only when radar is centralised at New Scottish ...?

[Hootin an a roarin]

Don't worry this is not me stirring again or annoying Del Boy with the Atco 1 comments!

Seriously though,.... all this talk of ATCO2/ATCO3 divides is very sad - you are all ATCOs. ...... but what happens when EDN go down to ATCO4 if ...
1- your management claim that the job is easier due to the new tower ..?

2- it becomes tower only when radar is centralised at New Scottish ...?

ATCO4 doesn't exist and officially neither do ATCO 2 or 3's we are Band 1,2,3 etc ATCO's now.
In a way I agree the job at EDI is slightly easier due the new tower but that was always going to be the case and was expected which is why at the last Union conference we didn't push for a review of regrading our Band. However I believe we will not be split from the other Scottish airports in the near future anyway as it is too political. We should have been in the band with Birmingham who had similar problems AND TRAFFIC LEVELS at the time of grading but the ridiculous formula made it that way (We were way ahead of Glasgow but just short, and I mean by a few points of Brum,and then Duo went bust and we overtook Brum!) There was uproar at the Scottish airports at the banding system anyway which due to our Union representing the majority i.e. Doon Sooth and Area and not looking after the minority (isn't that what a union is all about?) we couldn't outvote it, but imagine if the Scottish airports were in separate bands.

WHEN radar is centralised at SCATCC I expect that the 'lucky' few who get chosen will be upgraded to the equivalent of ATCO2 pay like T.C. which again is going to be another can of worms but wouldn't expect the controllers left behind to be downgraded as the airport is only going to expand and get busier.

Brainfade (Long time no moan) and Captain Mayday

Differences between EDI and Glasgow. I can only comment on what I see on the radar and before we go any further I DO NOT want to slag off Glasgow, we have a very good working relationship.
Glasgow are not as busy as EDI so that is one factor. I still believe traffic is presented differently to Glasgow than to EDI. I hardly see them holding at LANAK but it does happen. We didn't seem to hold much when months back Scottish were trialing streaming and as I said in my previous post it did work, to an extent ,and the area controllers then as now get a phone call off me and a thankyou (See 10W, I do appreciate my colleagues at Scottish).
Before you say that they don't hold because they are better controllers, I see traffic given to Glasgow at a lower level for the distance to run than at EDI. I believe this is because Glasgow traffic needs to be under EDI's outbounds whereas our inbounds conflict with each other but nothing else which is why there is less pressure for the area controllers to descend the aircraft.
As mentioned before we have a committee called Involve to Improve which is looking at this to improve our service. We are looking at pack and gap procedures and general packing of traffic etc and hopefully things will improve but it is not fair to say that Glasgow are better controllers or more talented than us. I certainly do not think the opposite.
High speed turn offs would help but have not been built. If you are following a DH8D, even with a six mile standard gap we are lucky to have the DH8D off the runway, never mind have a departure as well. They take forever to clear the runway but we are led to believe this is due to having to slow right down for the turn off.

Brainfade

Also (although some folk are decidedly slow to get going) what's so immediate if the lander's at 4 miles? Be an 'immediate' if he was at two surely?

Totally agree with you. Certain people need to improve or just stop panicking. Don't need an immediate outside 2/3 miles as long as you on approach have your speed back and the departure doesn't fanny about on the runway BUT I would tee you up to expect a late landing clearance.

I see you will be visiting us shortly, we all can't wait

[callyoushortly]

Brain Fade

You're striking a nerve asking if PF controllers are better than PH It's a bit unfair to compare when they're totally different traffic situations!!
As for packing the traffic, my watch do our best (I can't speak for the others) and don't get me wrong, it's not perfect and we're probably not destined for LL approach but we try. We also get it wrong but I'd say it's the thought that counts, and practice will hopefully make perfect!!
Do let me know when you want to visit, I'd love to question some of your thoughts over a brew

Capt Mayday

There's no throw-back at all to the backtrack days. The standard gap is (and has been for the few years I've been here) six miles. When a backtrack gap was requested it then became 8-10 miles depending on several factors. Why they pack them tighter at PF I dunno, you'd have to ask them!!
High speed turnoffs are not in place at PH which would help efficiency, but I believe there's not enough space between the runway and 'A' taxiway to allow an aircraft to turn off after a rapid exit turnoff, so they're not going to happen anytime soon.
As for your other points re trainees and experienced controllers, I fail to see it's relevance. Trainees will sometimes push things tighter than an old hand as they haven't learnt the art of licence preservation and it's not their licence to lose. Conversely, old hands may push it tighter as they've got the experience to fall back on. It's not a black and white situation either way, you'll find it depends on the individual controller. Maybe the PF controllers are just a bit daring than us or maybe it's down to other factors, I honestly don't know. There'll always be a difference between controlling styles, that's the nature of humans, but why there's such a stark difference between units escapes me, surely there must be other factors involved not just controlling ability.......

[radar707]

Hootin,

don't want to turn this into any sort of PH - PF argument, like you said you can only coment on what you see on the radar.
Yes, PH has more movements than Glasgow, break it down into additional movements per day and it ain't that many probably accounts for the mail flights you get and maybe the EGLC flights.

As for holding, we rarely hold because we prefer to vector traffic i.e left turn off LANAK nto a downwind leg followed by a square circuit with speed control applied. It's how we teach it at PF when the trainees start. We only hold when it starts getting sily with 5 or 6 inbound via Talla, a couple via Turnberry and any others from West or Tay.

We also have a greater mix of traffic which necessitates odd sequencing, we get lots of heavies inbound from the west in the morning coupled with the usual glut of Loganair saabs, twin otters and the islander ambulance make sequencing difficult, especially with the usual "Glasgow winds"

Add to that all the crap we deal with out of PG, the stuff out in the Class G to the West (which we ALWAYS provide with a service), makes the job as complicated and awkward as at any unit anywhere else in the UK.

Each and every unit has it's own problems and I've said it before the whole re-grading system was a farce, we at the Scottish airports might not move the traffic like LL or KK but we have our own problems.

As for problems from Scottish, can't say I have anything major to criticise them for apart from the odd 2 descending to min stack to LANAK at the same time and the occasional 3/4 abreast, but it's nothing I can't sort out and 9 times out of 10, TLA will call and ask if it's ok.

My watch has a good working relationship with Scottish and PH and long may it continue.

As for moving the apc function to Scottish, can't see it happening, at least not in my time, would cause too much friction.

[Hootin an a roarin]

Hello radar707

Don't agree with all of your points, funny old thing!

As for holding, we rarely hold because we prefer to vector traffic i.e left turn off LANAK onto a downwind leg followed by a square circuit with speed control applied. It's how we teach it at PF when the trainees start. We only hold when it starts getting sily with 5 or 6 inbound via Talla, a couple via Turnberry and any others from West or Tay.

Oh the luxury! That is where this 'discussion' started. I dream of vectoring off Tweed with a right or left turn downwind but since our traffic doesn't route there this option is not available unless we mess the aircraft around and turn them back towards the hold. Thankyou for verifying my point to the Scatcc controllers and the others as this may be the big difference between the 2 airports.

As for problems from Scottish, can't say I have anything major to criticise them for apart from the odd 2 descending to min stack to LANAK at the same time and the occasional 3/4 abreast, but it's nothing I can't sort out and 9 times out of 10, TLA will call and ask if it's ok.

The odd 2!!!! and occasional 3/4 abreast!!!!! Again point proven as this seems to be the norm at EDI. Maybe you just don't take it and tell Scatcc to off when you get a lot of traffic presented in this way. we must be too nice

[Exasperated]

Often looks from an end users point of view that Glasgow can pack them in that bit tighter

This may be too simplistic a view.

Two points to note

EDI is about 15% busier than GLA (movement wise) and is working at capacity and therefore slot constrained at peak periods.

Queues increase exponentially the nearer you get to capacity.

Having made these two points, how does this affect EDI.

A useful analogy is the wondrous traffic jams you encounter each and every day. During the school holidays they are small, but when the schools go back and the traffic increases, typically by about 7 to 8%, the queues are often 10 times as long.

Once a queue starts, normally a 1 to 2% increase in volumes will produce a 100% increase in the queue length.

Also, the busier you are the more likely multiple arrivals will appear at the same time and this causes more queues (extended routing and all that). Unfortunately, during busy times, once the queue develops there is not the slack to clear it (as the operation is working to capacity) and, as a byproduct, everything also becomes more inefficient as time is taken managing the queue.

So the perception may be that GLA can pack them in better, the truth is that the volumes are lower making the management of the arrival traffic easier. That does not mean that GLA ATC may not also be better, but may explain why EDI is perceived as worse (which may or may not be the case).

In this sort of environment, it is extremely difficult to operate much is excess of 90% capacity without a queue building up and the closer you get to capacity the quicker the queue will grow. So a busy ATC operation has my deepest respect wherever you are.

Ex (Not a pilot but a statistician to trade)

[Captain Mayday]

This may be too simplistic a view.

I agree - Glasgow also get a hell of a lot more Heavies (767s, A330s and A310s) and Lights (DHC6s BN2s and C310s) giving more complex vortex wake mixes, I think Edinburgh is much more Medium/Small oriented - so you could argue that the extra miles spacing required in the Glasgow sequence use up any 'spare capacity'. The old "bigger aircraft/bigger gaps" conundrum.

However, most of Edinburgh's traffic comes up from the south, where a reasonable %age of the Glasgow traffic is mixed from all directions - still needs spacing on final, but more tricky in the Embra case if they are all coming up through TLA.

I still think they should build one Central Scotland airport at Grangemouth/Stirling with dual runways. Let Glasgow do the North Runway and Edinburgh the South - that would be fun

[brain fade]

It's not the WHOLE solution and won't work on bad weather days...............but.

Why do the GLA boys often tx 'advise if at any time you'd like to continually visually' .............thus preventing the Q building!!!!!!!!

While EDI never does?

It can't be illegal as they do it at SOU too (virtually every sector!)



Edited to add. 'Yes I've asked his one before but would some ATCO from both ends! mind answering the sucker!

BOTH ends!

Callyou. reply tomorrow as just back from the pub. You're owed a more considered response

Exasperated.

On the other hand it may not.

[rolaaand]

Hmm. The last thing i wanted to do was suggest that PF were better than PH and kick off another argument. Too late,and looking at my original reply,I sort of did just that. Having just finished my six days and arrived back from a club, I'm a bit tired and pished, so this post may well poke a stick into somebody as well.
I have no idea about the actual figures but PH has noticably more movements than PF. Between perhaps 2300 and 0600 at a guess there may be 10-20 movements of cargo aircraft.So these extra night movements don't make a significant difference in the runway movements between the two airports. PH has consistently more movements throughout the whole day from the morning rush to the late night(2100-2230)bunch of arrivals.
The differences that i can see from my TALLA sector point of view is that PF has a larger and more effective radar vectoring area that can allow the radar controller to,within reason,sequence anything handed to them from the four Scottish sectors that they accept arrivals from, no matter how disjointed or poor the presentation of traffic is,without the need to hold. At PH it is a little different,the RVA is boxed in by the PF-PH buffer to the west, the edge of the TMA to the north and east and also at the south if TALLA hands over traffic late. So despite the fact that PH only accepts arrivals from TALLA and TAY, they can have a much harder job getting them slowed down and on the ILS than PF have. As someone else has pointed out,part of the reason is that the PF arrivals are ALWAYS cleared to be min. stack at LANAK due to the interaction with the Deancross departures from PH,but the arrivals to PH on any of the TWEED arrivals have no interaction with any SIDS and TALLA can get away with giving traffic a when ready clearance to min. stack instead of giving a level by TARTN stipulation as per the standing agreement. I have been guilty of this myself at times and this can really hinder the PH radar controller with high and fast traffic being unable to "go down and slow down". A point taken on board by myself and I think one that has to be universally adopted by all TALLA controllers. It has been pointed out that most of the PH movements are of small or medium wake vortex category which allows shorter gaps on final,and departure, with the slow smalls being able to go a minute behind the fast mediums, can't remember the exact speed differential necessary. However with the exception of Emirates at lunchtime and the new Pakistan service at night, the vast majority of the PF heavies are early morning transatlantic arrivals, so I don't think this constitutes a major difference in the ops. between the two airfiels either.

Just a little early morning opinion from a tipsy TMA controller with absolutely no approach control experience, so feel free to tear it to shreds!
As an aside for the airfield controllers I am interested in visiting for a look about and a chat. Visited PF twice before i was valid but another visit can certainly do no harm, would like to visit PH to discuss some of the problems raised in this thread and for a look at your new home,and also the Scottish TMA's forgotten airfield,at least in terms of this thread,Prestwick, which in the coming years is going to have an ever increasing impact on TMA operations at Scottish. A busy airfield in the mornings too now, don't think O'Leary liked it when we started putting MDI's on there as well! Fell free to PM me or speak to me on the phone, back in on Sunday morning,cheers Rolaaand.

[NorthSouth]

Re "how much more busy is EDI?", figs for Sept show an average of 42 additional ATMs per day compared to Glasgow.

On the question of spacing on final, obviously some controllers cut it finer than others and there are times when I've sat at D1 looking at a distant landing light and wondering when I'm going to get line-up clearance but on the other hand there have also been many times when I've been given 'cleared immediate' and had to go like the clappers with someone bearing down on me - and it's great when that works because everyone's happy.

A plea from the little guys though: I hope you don't tighten the spacing up so much that you can't get the VFRs in or out.

Dare I suggest 12/30 with displaced thresholds a la Norwich 04/22?

NS

[callyoushortly]

Brain Fade

You've got your big stirring spoon out again haven't you?!
Visuals are not an effective tool for sequencing traffic and therefore will only be employed by controllers in a quiet traffic environment. Visuals don't always save a queue either, maybe you're great at visuals but some pilots aren't and it's often the case that I could vector the aircraft closer than he's prepared to put himself, thus compounding the problem.
Also, I'm sure I've said before, if you want a visual ASK, I'm not genius mind reader and as such don't want to be asking aircraft each time their opinions on visual approaches when I've much better things to do.

rolaaand

I think you've hit one of our gripes on the head! Why, if you can put the traffic to PF to be level by the holding fix, is it not possible to do the same for PH? I'm guessing that 9/10 responses would be 'because I don't have to' . This would be an easy change to make and would then allow us chance to get things in tighter without needing extra miles for descent.

NorthSouth

I have the figures from the NATS intranet for airport movements in front of me. The figures for week 49 (week ending 11/12) show PH with 2224 ATM's and PF 1760. By my humble calculations this is approx 66 more ATM's a day. No, these most certainly don't all happen at night, and therefore will impact on streams of traffic inbound. I hasten to add busier doesn't necessarily mean better OR worse at your job, just a stream of traffic you're presented with!
As for your point about 12/30...... we wish it was more readily available, but it's not! Ho hum!

[brain fade]

Hi call you

Yes, Stirring spoon deployed. Can't help it sometimes!

I promise not to go on and on about it, BUT....... IMHO one of the ways they are 'better' than EDI is they don't allow queues to build up to the same extent as invariably happens at EDI.

Queues are a pain in the ass!

IF the wx is good, GLA often seem to remind folk that a visual would be offered should they ask for it (which they frequently do), the one behind is then asked if he can see the one ahead, which often he can. He then gets cleared viz 'no 2 to the one ahead'.

You say that dont help. Seems to, to me!

[radar707]

66 more ATM's so that's 33 arrivals, take out the freight movements at night say 5 arrivals that makes 28 more arrivals throughout the day say 0800 to 2200 gives a 14 hour period so that's an average of 2 more arrivals per hour. Hardly a large amount.

Each unit has it's individual complexities be it lack of CAS limited space in the RVA lack of high speed exits, conflicting tracks between SIDs and STARs, and every controller does the best job they can with what they are presented with.

[Bagheera]

Lies, damned lies and statistics huh!
The law according to sod dictates that 28 extra inbounds in a 14 hour period does not equate to 2 extra inbounds per hour. It equals 7 extra inbounds during each of your 4 busiest periods.
Also you cant just discount the outbounds cos theyve got to get on the runway at some point, thereby affecting your inbounds.

Edited to ask brainfade. So when you are no.2,3 etc in the sequence at pf and offered a visual approach,who decides on your spacing against the traffic in front? If the controller asked you for a specific gap against the traffic in front, would you adhere to it?

[brain fade]

Hi Baggy

Just do the standard seperation by eye and TCAS I suppose. ATC no doubt would give you a shout if it gets close. Remember even if number 3, you're only following the one immediately in front, ie the number two.

As far as giving/ keeping a gap goes. Yes I will always try to give ATC what they ask for and it's easy to do. Frankly catching the one in front up would be quite hard to do even if you wanted to.

BF
ps. I'm no expert but it seems to work. No one seems to know why they do it at GLA but not EDI. Do you?

[Hootin an a roarin]

Brainfade

Your question has been answered many times before reference visual approaches. At Edinburgh we cannot OFFER a visual approach but if you ASK you will more often than not be cleared for one.

I pray that this answers your question AGAIN!

[Bagheera]

Brain Fade,
Im sure its nothing that you havent been told before but Edinburgh Airport management has always had a reluctance to allow aircraft to perform visual approaches. When I first arrived it was an instruction from EAL that controllers were not allowed to offer visual approaches, since then visual approaches at night have been banned and more recently, that on 24 you can now not join final at less than 7 miles. I cannot be sure about the reasons for this but given the procedures seem to be more restrictive on 24, I dont think it takes a psychic to realise that there may be certain influential people living along the south shore of the Forth, who have a say in the matter. I know of one individual who tracks inbounds for 24 and outbounds from 06. He is on the phone the moment he believes any aircraft has deviated from the appropriate route.

[PH-UKU]

visual approaches

controllers were not allowed to offer visual approaches

Glasgow have a very useful wee phrase ... "report at any time if you wish to continue visually", thereby putting the initiative with the pilot, but letting them know that ATC are receptive to it if circumstances permit.

That is very distinct from "Can you accept a visual approach" - which in my book is 'offering'.

on 24 you can now not join final at less than 7 miles

Glasgow are restricted on 23 to not joining less than 5 miles final. And if you go outside 10 miles you have the dreaded Campsie Line which keeps you up at 3500 and then a 12/13 miles final.

(Visuals are also very handy for SAABs etc coming in from the north and northwest - sure that applies at Eddy too.)

I would say a visual at Glasgow (via 5 mile final) saves a minimum of 8 miles and possibly up to 12 - now if there is a sequence running behind, then that saving can add up and is pretty significant if numbers 2, 3, 4, 5 etc consequently get to save mileage by the very fact that number 1 is 8 miles closer to touchdown.

I would estimate a visual for 24 at PH might save about 6 miles?

Rolaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand the party animal wrote

vast majority of the PF heavies are early morning transatlantic arrivals

Summer transatlantic schedules are only 4 or 5 767s in the morning, actually I would reckon there is a much bigger amount of other 'Heavies' during the rest of day (particularly in the summer) - BAL, TCX, FCL, OOM, TSC, UAE, MYT, MON.... I'm sure all of them operate 767s, A330s etc

Is there still the additional spacing required for Mediums/Smalls behind 757s too ? Doesn't Glasgow get many more 757s ?

Glad to see too that there is still a flying club and UAS (just) at Glasgow which chuck about another 8 light aircraft into the mix - as one caller said ... please don't squeeze out the little guys ...

[brain fade]

Baggy/ Hootin

I refer you to PH-UKU's post re visuals.

Contrary to what you wrote nobody has ever explained why EDI can't do what GLA does. ie use the phrase 'advise if at any time you wish to continue visually'

I'm all ears!

PS Thanks for explaining why visuals are less than welcome to some, but until they ban em.