Leeds Bradford: Ground Movement Control
Thread Starter
Leeds Bradford: Ground Movement Control
Many folk on pprune will know that the GMC function at LBA is handled by the Tower controller. It's becoming clearer that the Tower controller frequently has an awful lot on his/her plate these days, particularly the early morning departure rush Monday to Friday and Thursday lunchtime when there seem to be several inbound and outbound airliners all wanting to use the facilities in about a fifteen minute period. I've noticed, with the greatest respect to the ATC community, some instances of "tongue-tying" and mild fluster and every man and his dog trying to get a word in.
My question is, does there come a point when local ATC management or even SRG takes a hand and says "Right boys and girls, we now need to open a GMC position in order to take the pressure off the Tower controller".
I've heard it said that one reason LBA does not yet have a GMC is the lack of a parallel taxiway. With all aircraft having to use at least a portion of the runway for taxiing and the Tower controller obviously being in charge of the runway, responsibility for aircraft taxiing on the runway rests with the Tower controller. Hope that doesn't sound too banal. I would have thought even at the moment, there is sufficient surface traffic to justify a GMC position, taking into account the limited holding points and taxiways. It could even be a "published hours" position, say 0600-2130. I believe Edinburgh once had something similar, with the ATIS advising when GMC was non-op. I gather Bristol and Newcastle (not dissimilar airfields to LBA) now use a GMC.
It's fortunate that LBA uses SIDs, otherwise passing route clearances would occupy even more precious R/T time.
My question is, does there come a point when local ATC management or even SRG takes a hand and says "Right boys and girls, we now need to open a GMC position in order to take the pressure off the Tower controller".
I've heard it said that one reason LBA does not yet have a GMC is the lack of a parallel taxiway. With all aircraft having to use at least a portion of the runway for taxiing and the Tower controller obviously being in charge of the runway, responsibility for aircraft taxiing on the runway rests with the Tower controller. Hope that doesn't sound too banal. I would have thought even at the moment, there is sufficient surface traffic to justify a GMC position, taking into account the limited holding points and taxiways. It could even be a "published hours" position, say 0600-2130. I believe Edinburgh once had something similar, with the ATIS advising when GMC was non-op. I gather Bristol and Newcastle (not dissimilar airfields to LBA) now use a GMC.
It's fortunate that LBA uses SIDs, otherwise passing route clearances would occupy even more precious R/T time.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sunny Warwickshire
Posts: 438
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I doubt that the management at EGNM would go for a GMC position for a 15 minute period a few days a week.
If there are safety implications then reports should be filed, at which point management and SRG would have to start to take an interest.
Although I'm fairly sure that staffing issues at EGNM would be the explanation that management would offer.
If there are safety implications then reports should be filed, at which point management and SRG would have to start to take an interest.
Although I'm fairly sure that staffing issues at EGNM would be the explanation that management would offer.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK FIR South
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You mention Bristol's GMC??? It's never ever open! They promised it would be up and running this year for the busy times and its sorely needed on occasions too - lots of the above though with flustered ATCOs etc.
I'm told it hasn't happened because the Airport isn't willing to pay the ATC sub-contractor for GMC yet.
Hmmmmm........
I'm told it hasn't happened because the Airport isn't willing to pay the ATC sub-contractor for GMC yet.
Hmmmmm........
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: North
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don`t think a GMC position will be any help what so ever. The extra RT time and spare brain capacity would just be taken up by extra, pointless co-ordination between tower and ground. GMP might help though.
Thread Starter
I have considered the possibility of GMP before. Someone else to pass airways and start-up clearance would take at least some of the pressure of the ADC. It may even be possible for GMP to be manned by an ATCA, provided they've had the appropriare R/T training as there would be no actual movement of aircraft governed on that frequency.
I have to say I'm not surprised Bristol GMC is seldom manned. It's often been said that Bristol and Leeds are two very similar airports (layout, lousy weather etc) and lack of GMC is another similarity ! Yet Bristol is a busier airport. I dare say the tower is equipped for GMC, it's just a case of having someone to occupy the seat. Same at LBA since the tower refit. Lovely new switch and console but nobody home
.
I'm not familiar with a CA4114 report. Who gets to file these ? Is it ATC when they feel the pressure is on or is it aircrew ? I suppose the latter could file an ASR if they experience serious frequency congestion.
It's Thursday so I'll have to listen at lunchtime and see what goes on. Thankyou for your replies everybody.
I have to say I'm not surprised Bristol GMC is seldom manned. It's often been said that Bristol and Leeds are two very similar airports (layout, lousy weather etc) and lack of GMC is another similarity ! Yet Bristol is a busier airport. I dare say the tower is equipped for GMC, it's just a case of having someone to occupy the seat. Same at LBA since the tower refit. Lovely new switch and console but nobody home
.I'm not familiar with a CA4114 report. Who gets to file these ? Is it ATC when they feel the pressure is on or is it aircrew ? I suppose the latter could file an ASR if they experience serious frequency congestion.
It's Thursday so I'll have to listen at lunchtime and see what goes on. Thankyou for your replies everybody.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: LHR/EGLL
Age: 45
Posts: 4,392
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CA4114s are part of the ATC reporting scheme. Safety MORs as well as 'observations' can be filed. I would encourage aircrew to file their own ASRs if they feel sufficiently concerned.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sunny Warwickshire
Posts: 438
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rachb01, why not give them a call, ask to speak to the SATCO, arrange a visit and have a chat with them about operations, future plans etc.
Show willing and interest and you never know!!
Show willing and interest and you never know!!
