BRASO holding for Heathrow inbounds does NOT equal EAT's
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Somewhere in Britain
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BRASO holding for Heathrow inbounds does NOT equal EAT's
Don't know if I' getting a bit kranky because I'm tired after what seems a shockingly busy start to the summer, but to all those dear folk who fly in and out of Heathrow, under 20 minutes delay means just that, whether you are holding at BRASO or LAM.
WE DO NOT PUBLISH EAT'S FOR DELAYS OF 20 MINUTES OR UNDER!!!
Please stop asking when we tell you that your delay is under 20 minutes.
Thanks.
WE DO NOT PUBLISH EAT'S FOR DELAYS OF 20 MINUTES OR UNDER!!!
Please stop asking when we tell you that your delay is under 20 minutes.
Thanks.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Scotland
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Unless otherwise instructed controllers shall pass expected approach times to aircraft with whom they are in contact. EATs shall not normally be issued when the delay is expected to be less than 20 minutes. The statement 'no delay expected' is only to be used, particularly for long haul flights, if it genuinely reflects the situation. However, at the request of a pilot, controllers are to give a general indication of the likely delay based on the information available at that time."
Straight out of MATS pt 1, so can you advise me if LTMA is exempt from the last sentence.
BOAC, if only wisdom made your fuel tanks bigger and and JAR OPS fuel policy require that you were wise we'd be on a winner.
Straight out of MATS pt 1, so can you advise me if LTMA is exempt from the last sentence.
BOAC, if only wisdom made your fuel tanks bigger and and JAR OPS fuel policy require that you were wise we'd be on a winner.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Apa, apo ndi kulikonse!
Posts: 1,757
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
issi, they get the rough estimate when they contact Heathrow approach on first contact.
Asking for the amount of delay wastes RT that people are trying to use to get the stacks down bring them off.
Asking for the amount of delay wastes RT that people are trying to use to get the stacks down bring them off.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Scotland
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yep, agree entirely. So the odd broadcast of rough delays a little earlier might help reduce this problem. If you can stop pilots getting tunnel vision on fuel they might spend more time avoiding level busts.
I'm not trying to be argumentative just help avoid frustrations like those of the thread starter and do my bit for safety.
I'm not trying to be argumentative just help avoid frustrations like those of the thread starter and do my bit for safety.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Swanwick, England
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whenever we are holding at BRASO I always say the following when on CLN,
"callsign 123, LAM3A arrival but clearance limit is BRASO to hold, delays approximately XX Mins"
Clear, concise and the fact that this instruction is issued whilst aircraft are stiill over the Dutch or Belgium coast should give aircrew ample time to sort out whether they have enough fuel or not.
One problem with the Swanwick system is that the information on the sis screen only says either delays are less than 20 mins, so could be one min or 20 mins, and when it does have EATS on it they are inaccurate.
The info on the supervisors desk is a lot more accurate.
"callsign 123, LAM3A arrival but clearance limit is BRASO to hold, delays approximately XX Mins"
Clear, concise and the fact that this instruction is issued whilst aircraft are stiill over the Dutch or Belgium coast should give aircrew ample time to sort out whether they have enough fuel or not.
One problem with the Swanwick system is that the information on the sis screen only says either delays are less than 20 mins, so could be one min or 20 mins, and when it does have EATS on it they are inaccurate.
The info on the supervisors desk is a lot more accurate.
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BOAC, if only wisdom made your fuel tanks bigger and and JAR OPS fuel policy require that you were wise we'd be on a winner.
)I thought it was quite clear that the original complaint here was that crews were asking for 'EATs'. The point made by 'coracle' was that there is no such animal as an EAT if delays are less than 20 minutes - so there is no point in asking.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Swanwick, England
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mike, when delays are in excess of 30 mins we do ask Maastricht to slow traffic down for us so that we can try and avoid the dreaded LOGAN hold.
And from another thread, the TMA sectors would rather we didn't slow traffic down and try and 'stream' them so it looks like both ends want different things.
We can't win
And from another thread, the TMA sectors would rather we didn't slow traffic down and try and 'stream' them so it looks like both ends want different things.
We can't win
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: If this is Tuesday, it must be?
Posts: 651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So how does this fit in with the principle that in the event of comms failure in IMC in the hold you should commence your approach as close as possible to EAT?
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Hants, UK
Posts: 1,064
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's the rub... the R/T fail procedures are anachronistic and designed for a time when the possibility to leave CAS at 45 degress and proceed visually were feasible (imagine that in the middle of LUS airspace...).
Without checking the documents, my understanding in the scenario you gave would be:
Proceed to the terminal fix, make at lease one hold, and them start down in the hold and follow the procedural approach. We have a computer-based estimate of your arrival time at the fix and will clear the other traffic out of the way. The details are of course more intricate to that..
An of course, in today's world if you are out of R/T contact for that long you needn't worry about the procedures....
There will be one or two pointy grey jets just outside the cockpit windows more than happy to lead you to the airport of their choice!
Without checking the documents, my understanding in the scenario you gave would be:
Proceed to the terminal fix, make at lease one hold, and them start down in the hold and follow the procedural approach. We have a computer-based estimate of your arrival time at the fix and will clear the other traffic out of the way. The details are of course more intricate to that..
An of course, in today's world if you are out of R/T contact for that long you needn't worry about the procedures....
There will be one or two pointy grey jets just outside the cockpit windows more than happy to lead you to the airport of their choice!
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hants
Posts: 2,295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Loki - I work in the TMA - I would love to get properly streamed traffic - unfortunately the LACC controllers do not have the time or airspace to do it properly.
eyeinthesky - try doing a 45 degree turn to leave CAS in the TMA - hjow does that work?!!!
eyeinthesky - try doing a 45 degree turn to leave CAS in the TMA - hjow does that work?!!!
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: southampton,hampshire,england
Posts: 869
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does a hold at any point before the "stack" require an onward clearance time?
I thought the EAT [if any] started at the stack. Genuine question...it may well have changed since course 26!
I thought the EAT [if any] started at the stack. Genuine question...it may well have changed since course 26!
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't know what the book says but as a pilot I need to have a rough idea of how long before I land for decisions on diversion, so if we are 'pre-stack' either an EAT or at least an OCT to be going on with is nice.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Swanwick, England
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If we dare to issue an EAT then it is always, or should be always, issued as
"callsign 123 your EAT from LAM, BIG, OCK or BNN is ........"
Still waiting for a definition of 'properly' streamed.
Hurry up, I'm back on radar in 7 and a half hours and I can't sleep without it.
"callsign 123 your EAT from LAM, BIG, OCK or BNN is ........"
Still waiting for a definition of 'properly' streamed.
Hurry up, I'm back on radar in 7 and a half hours and I can't sleep without it.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
coracle,
"Don't know if I' getting a bit kranky because I'm tired after what seems a shockingly busy start to the summer, but to all those dear folk who fly in and out of Heathrow, under 20 minutes delay means just that, whether you are holding at BRASO or LAM..........."
Quite right, you should have issued an "Expect onward clearance time".
Brasso is an enroute hold on the way to the terminal hold at LAM is it not?
Regards,
DFC
"Don't know if I' getting a bit kranky because I'm tired after what seems a shockingly busy start to the summer, but to all those dear folk who fly in and out of Heathrow, under 20 minutes delay means just that, whether you are holding at BRASO or LAM..........."
Quite right, you should have issued an "Expect onward clearance time".
Brasso is an enroute hold on the way to the terminal hold at LAM is it not?
Regards,
DFC