LHR New Tower Move
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: YYZ via the UK
Age: 49
Posts: 321
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anotherthing
I agree with you. EFPS takes some getting used to but it dosen't change the initial job of sorting airplanes.
Gonzo.
I haven't been working in the country for a year now...and granted I haven't been to LL tower now for about two years..but the only thing I don't understand is why this new system which has been tried and tested elsewhere at busy airports is causing concern at LL. Pm if you want. I find it interesting cos it is developed by NAV Canada and I was first introduced to it here in YYZ when I arrived.
Surely the move to the new tower and new equipment can't be any worse than the conditions you already work under???
I agree with you. EFPS takes some getting used to but it dosen't change the initial job of sorting airplanes.
Gonzo.
I haven't been working in the country for a year now...and granted I haven't been to LL tower now for about two years..but the only thing I don't understand is why this new system which has been tried and tested elsewhere at busy airports is causing concern at LL. Pm if you want. I find it interesting cos it is developed by NAV Canada and I was first introduced to it here in YYZ when I arrived.
Surely the move to the new tower and new equipment can't be any worse than the conditions you already work under???
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hants
Posts: 2,295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gonzo
You are not the first ATCOs by a long stretch to move to a new tower... EGPH was the latest I think(?).
New computers and EFPS - thats what the simulator is for - as Married a Canadian states - it works at airports with busier hourly periods (if not sustained like heathrow).
I honestly do not know what moving tower has to do with EFPS. If EFPS is so bad for EGLL, why has this not been picked up in simulations??
Are the majority failing (or at least having increased safety errors during simulation?). If so, then it should not go ahead. I do not think that is the case though, otherwise the unions would be involved by now.
I know of many a new procedures at TC which ahs been tried in the simulator then binned as it was inherently more dangerous than the already dodgy goings on.
You are not the first ATCOs by a long stretch to move to a new tower... EGPH was the latest I think(?).
New computers and EFPS - thats what the simulator is for - as Married a Canadian states - it works at airports with busier hourly periods (if not sustained like heathrow).
I honestly do not know what moving tower has to do with EFPS. If EFPS is so bad for EGLL, why has this not been picked up in simulations??
Are the majority failing (or at least having increased safety errors during simulation?). If so, then it should not go ahead. I do not think that is the case though, otherwise the unions would be involved by now.
I know of many a new procedures at TC which ahs been tried in the simulator then binned as it was inherently more dangerous than the already dodgy goings on.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: LHR/EGLL
Age: 45
Posts: 4,400
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anotherthing....
Did EGPH have two air controllers, who go from sitting next to each other (easy to gauge each other's workload, easy to co-ordinate - sometimes silently - easy to see exactly what the problem is etc etc) to sitting back to back (tunnel vision, no idea of other's workload, hard to co-ordinate - phones?)?
Did EGPH have two GMC controllers who go from sitting next to each other (easy to co-ordinate - usually silently - easy to gauge each other's workload, easy to route a/c his or your way in reaction to that workload, easy to see when you can bring traffic you might be holding in your ground space when you see the other guy push back an a/c from the inbound's stand?) to sitting in respective corners of the tower, so any co-ordination is done by phone, and there are standard routes on GMC which will increase delays significantly and decrease flexibility to a corresponding degree.
I could go on and on regarding the tower move without EFPS.
It works at other airports. Fine. Please can some of them come to Heathrow and tell me how to manage when my runway bay, which has room for six strips, starts to scroll (ie. the seventh strip doesn't display on the screen), and the only indication to me of that is a standard grey windows scroll bar along the bottom of the bay (the bay and background are, of course, the same grey colour). Oh, and did I mention that the scrolling is a completely illogical sideways, rather than vertically?
Or that fact that some of our strips read right to left, because we all read that way, don't we?
Or the fact that when an a/c is airborne from my runway, I have to move it to another bay, which only has room for three or four strips in it, and thus if it's the fifth strip it will not display. Then arrivals has a missed approach, and the most pressing traffic to co-ordinate with him is not displayed on my screen.
Or perhaps the vehicle that calls up I give a conditional clearance to cross after the departing, but he thinks I mean after the one that's climing through 50ft, and crosses just as I clear the next one for take off?
Or perhaps the fact that the SID on the outbound strip is very small and not clear. The fact that we've had many errors in the sim where people have launched deps with the wrong separation (I did three BPKs all wheels up the other day in the sim) because we're used to seeing the SID in big black letters on the strip. We ask to change it, but no, it's ok, KK and SS don't have a problem with it!
Up until a few weeks ago, the training was not concerned with safety errors. As long as people manipulated EFPS ok, they were judged to be ok. I had four head to heads on GMC in one run, I came out of it thinking I was a rubbish controller, and I was judged to be satisfactory. That's in a 45 minute run! I've made significant safety errors in most of my runs.
AFAIK, about 50% are not passing first time. Some are having three or even four re-runs. The problem is then there is only one exercise for each level or objective, so after one re-run you get to know the exercise, rather than EFPS. In level four, I know a KAL 747 will call to go from 615 to 334. So this time I'll start to arrange the traffic so that it can move more easily. Doesn't mean I'm any better doing GMC2 with EFPS though.
The Unions are involed. I've been involved with it for two years (feels like ten!). On the Working Group, Tech Com etc etc. So many of the problems specific to Heathrow we flagged up at the very beginning. The response? "Sorry, can't change it!"
We're in the situation now where after a day in the sim, some ATCOs are in tears. After only a few hours in a simulator, they are convinced they are crap. And the next day they have to go back to work. After my last run I was so frazzled I had to lay down in the rest room for an hour to let my screaming headache diminish to an acceptable level.
At the end of the day, we all want to provide the best possible service. That level will be at a lower level in the new tower. In that environment, ATCOs will do whatever necessary to protect their licences. I for one will be nowhere near as expeditious as I am now. Just not worth it. And that makes me sad.
Sorry for the ramble!
Did EGPH have two air controllers, who go from sitting next to each other (easy to gauge each other's workload, easy to co-ordinate - sometimes silently - easy to see exactly what the problem is etc etc) to sitting back to back (tunnel vision, no idea of other's workload, hard to co-ordinate - phones?)?
Did EGPH have two GMC controllers who go from sitting next to each other (easy to co-ordinate - usually silently - easy to gauge each other's workload, easy to route a/c his or your way in reaction to that workload, easy to see when you can bring traffic you might be holding in your ground space when you see the other guy push back an a/c from the inbound's stand?) to sitting in respective corners of the tower, so any co-ordination is done by phone, and there are standard routes on GMC which will increase delays significantly and decrease flexibility to a corresponding degree.
I could go on and on regarding the tower move without EFPS.
It works at other airports. Fine. Please can some of them come to Heathrow and tell me how to manage when my runway bay, which has room for six strips, starts to scroll (ie. the seventh strip doesn't display on the screen), and the only indication to me of that is a standard grey windows scroll bar along the bottom of the bay (the bay and background are, of course, the same grey colour). Oh, and did I mention that the scrolling is a completely illogical sideways, rather than vertically?
Or that fact that some of our strips read right to left, because we all read that way, don't we?
Or the fact that when an a/c is airborne from my runway, I have to move it to another bay, which only has room for three or four strips in it, and thus if it's the fifth strip it will not display. Then arrivals has a missed approach, and the most pressing traffic to co-ordinate with him is not displayed on my screen.
Or perhaps the vehicle that calls up I give a conditional clearance to cross after the departing, but he thinks I mean after the one that's climing through 50ft, and crosses just as I clear the next one for take off?
Or perhaps the fact that the SID on the outbound strip is very small and not clear. The fact that we've had many errors in the sim where people have launched deps with the wrong separation (I did three BPKs all wheels up the other day in the sim) because we're used to seeing the SID in big black letters on the strip. We ask to change it, but no, it's ok, KK and SS don't have a problem with it!
Up until a few weeks ago, the training was not concerned with safety errors. As long as people manipulated EFPS ok, they were judged to be ok. I had four head to heads on GMC in one run, I came out of it thinking I was a rubbish controller, and I was judged to be satisfactory. That's in a 45 minute run! I've made significant safety errors in most of my runs.
AFAIK, about 50% are not passing first time. Some are having three or even four re-runs. The problem is then there is only one exercise for each level or objective, so after one re-run you get to know the exercise, rather than EFPS. In level four, I know a KAL 747 will call to go from 615 to 334. So this time I'll start to arrange the traffic so that it can move more easily. Doesn't mean I'm any better doing GMC2 with EFPS though.
The Unions are involed. I've been involved with it for two years (feels like ten!). On the Working Group, Tech Com etc etc. So many of the problems specific to Heathrow we flagged up at the very beginning. The response? "Sorry, can't change it!"
We're in the situation now where after a day in the sim, some ATCOs are in tears. After only a few hours in a simulator, they are convinced they are crap. And the next day they have to go back to work. After my last run I was so frazzled I had to lay down in the rest room for an hour to let my screaming headache diminish to an acceptable level.
At the end of the day, we all want to provide the best possible service. That level will be at a lower level in the new tower. In that environment, ATCOs will do whatever necessary to protect their licences. I for one will be nowhere near as expeditious as I am now. Just not worth it. And that makes me sad.
Sorry for the ramble!
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: west london
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How on earth can people be criticised for having concerns about safety - by other controllers as well????
You might expect it from management, but surely not from colleagues!!!
You might expect it from management, but surely not from colleagues!!!
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hants
Posts: 2,295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Up until a few weeks ago, the training was not concerned with safety errors. As long as people manipulated EFPS ok, they were judged to be ok. I had four head to heads on GMC in one run, I came out of it thinking I was a rubbish controller, and I was judged to be satisfactory. That's in a 45 minute run! I've made significant safety errors in most of my runs.
Might be worth you ringing the Sun..... at least then they will get a factual story with no mistakes, unlike the tosh they published (which may have had some grains of truth in it, but it's impact is diminished by all the other sh
te facts within the report). I assume none of your head to heads were "over the channel"!
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: UK
Age: 69
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gonzo,
I do not wish to be cinical, obviously the organisation has to enable controllers to do their job adequately but when the organisation fails to do so, how many controllers wil be going on duty feeling underconfident, having failed the simulations? Is it not the controller who, in the end, has the final say in being fit for duty? Who will refuse to do the work because they genuinely think it's unsafe? And I emphasise genuinely
I do not wish to be cinical, obviously the organisation has to enable controllers to do their job adequately but when the organisation fails to do so, how many controllers wil be going on duty feeling underconfident, having failed the simulations? Is it not the controller who, in the end, has the final say in being fit for duty? Who will refuse to do the work because they genuinely think it's unsafe? And I emphasise genuinely
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: YYZ via the UK
Age: 49
Posts: 321
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Who have they got in to run the sim exercises??
Sounds like people that don't know how to adjust the system.
Have they brought in consultants from airports that already use EFPS (and I don't mean British ones)?? I would have thought that these are the people whom need to be consulted. As I hinted before the system works at other locations with a large traffic output. I am sure that each place required different tweaking in order it fully utilise EFPS.
It sounds like that the techies either don't know how to adjust or won't adjust the system in order for it to work at LL. If that is the case then I really do sympathise!
Sounds like people that don't know how to adjust the system.
Have they brought in consultants from airports that already use EFPS (and I don't mean British ones)?? I would have thought that these are the people whom need to be consulted. As I hinted before the system works at other locations with a large traffic output. I am sure that each place required different tweaking in order it fully utilise EFPS.
It sounds like that the techies either don't know how to adjust or won't adjust the system in order for it to work at LL. If that is the case then I really do sympathise!
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: LONDON England
Age: 52
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think some people forget , or don't realise, that Heathrow is a SMALL airport interms of ground area compaired to YYZ or CDG . It is a miracle the amount of traffic handled in such small areas. The reason Heathrow has AGLCS for example , is the complexity of the operation , caused by its own size.
It is easy for people working at airports with massive amounts of space, 3,4 or 5 runways and ENOUGH parking stands to be scepticle about Heathrow controllers concerns.
You only had to have seen the traffic situation last night to realise the luxury that is Space.
It is easy for people working at airports with massive amounts of space, 3,4 or 5 runways and ENOUGH parking stands to be scepticle about Heathrow controllers concerns.
You only had to have seen the traffic situation last night to realise the luxury that is Space.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 531
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Post on PPRune in support of LHR ATCOs shocker!!
In all seriousness thanks for your words autothrottle. I was having a conversation with a family friend who lives in the states a few years back. He said "Heathrow its just like JFK and O'Hare for size isnt it". I got the map out to show him just how small it was. Then I explained how much of it was shut due WIP. It gets even smaller then!!
In all seriousness thanks for your words autothrottle. I was having a conversation with a family friend who lives in the states a few years back. He said "Heathrow its just like JFK and O'Hare for size isnt it". I got the map out to show him just how small it was. Then I explained how much of it was shut due WIP. It gets even smaller then!!
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: LHR/EGLL
Age: 45
Posts: 4,400
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
autothrottle,
Yes, yesterday was certainly interesting! And a sterling effort by all the VCR staff. Even a certain Ops ATCO was seen about the tower, lending the odd hand!
Yes, yesterday was certainly interesting! And a sterling effort by all the VCR staff. Even a certain Ops ATCO was seen about the tower, lending the odd hand!
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: west london
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think some people forget , or don't realise, that Heathrow is a SMALL airport interms of ground area compaired to YYZ or CDG . It is a miracle the amount of traffic handled in such small areas. The reason Heathrow has AGLCS for example , is the complexity of the operation , caused by its own size.
It is easy for people working at airports with massive amounts of space, 3,4 or 5 runways and ENOUGH parking stands to be scepticle about Heathrow controllers concerns.
You only had to have seen the traffic situation last night to realise the luxury that is Space.
It is easy for people working at airports with massive amounts of space, 3,4 or 5 runways and ENOUGH parking stands to be scepticle about Heathrow controllers concerns.
You only had to have seen the traffic situation last night to realise the luxury that is Space.
Just to question those that compare Heathrow with Toronto complexity in regards to the EFPS 'success' at the latter, some stats gleaned from the web:
Area - LHR 1,227ha (incl T5), YYZ 1,792ha
Stands - LHR 264 (excl T5), YYZ 129
mvts 2005 - LHR 478,000, YYZ 409,000
runways - LHR 2, YYZ 5
comparable?
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: North of London
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some would say that when you deal with runways only in relation to EFPS then YYZ is certainly more complex.
The argument could go on forever but one thing is for sure that EFPS works at busy and complex airports, in both the UK and Canada.
The argument could go on forever but one thing is for sure that EFPS works at busy and complex airports, in both the UK and Canada.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: YYZ via the UK
Age: 49
Posts: 321
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having heard a bit more about the situation at LL now....it dosen't really matter about how it works at YYZ and other airports..or whether YYZ is more complex etc etc. The EFPS at Toronto is geared towards their particular operation.
EFPS was designed to be flexible and to be used at various airports. LL are being made to use the system in a way that is not expeditious or appropriate for their operation. This seems to be the root of the problem. Why introduce something if you are not going to utilise it properly??
Whatever other insults that can be hurled at LL tower (loads as I'm sure the staff there know ) I think the way that the new technology has been implemented has been shoddy and I hope that it is resolved before we see delays increasing and a lot of confused Atcos...and also criticism of equipment that isn't justified...only the people who program it!
EFPS was designed to be flexible and to be used at various airports. LL are being made to use the system in a way that is not expeditious or appropriate for their operation. This seems to be the root of the problem. Why introduce something if you are not going to utilise it properly??
Whatever other insults that can be hurled at LL tower (loads as I'm sure the staff there know
) I think the way that the new technology has been implemented has been shoddy and I hope that it is resolved before we see delays increasing and a lot of confused Atcos...and also criticism of equipment that isn't justified...only the people who program it!
