Suspension of conditional clearances - Glasgow ATC trial
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
<<If they have been a contributory factor in incidents, then why are we bothering with trials?! If they have been proven unsafe, then ban them. >>
I do not believe that conditional clearances are unsafe in any way, shape or form. What may be unsafe is the way controllers issue them and crews respond to them. A conditional clearance issued correctly, with due emphasis on speed of delivery, especially to foreign crews, with careful attention to the read-back and eyes outside the tower window, should be as safe as any other ATC instruction. I was pedantic in the extreme when issuing them but I know that some controllers gabble instructions at warp speed, which is asking for trouble. Slow down.... take an extra second to issue the instruction, listen for the read-back and watch what's going on and there should be no problems..
I do not believe that conditional clearances are unsafe in any way, shape or form. What may be unsafe is the way controllers issue them and crews respond to them. A conditional clearance issued correctly, with due emphasis on speed of delivery, especially to foreign crews, with careful attention to the read-back and eyes outside the tower window, should be as safe as any other ATC instruction. I was pedantic in the extreme when issuing them but I know that some controllers gabble instructions at warp speed, which is asking for trouble. Slow down.... take an extra second to issue the instruction, listen for the read-back and watch what's going on and there should be no problems..
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: On a foreign shore trying a new wine diet. So far, I've lost 3days!
Age: 75
Posts: 394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At single runway airports, where you are at max. capacity, conditional clearances can provide a great deal of situational awareness.
As an example, if you have very tight departure gaps in a constant stream of landing traffic you might use the phrase "Behind the landing XXXX, line up and be ready immediate". This immediately implies that a degree of urgency is required on lining up and I would like to think that the aircrew then look out of the cockpit, see the stream of landings and make a quick assessment of whether they can complete their take-off checks in time. At the same time it gives a verbal heads-up to the first landing aircraft that they should not delay their exit from the runway. Finally, it gives the following landing aircraft an indication that there will be an aircraft departing before them and implies that they will probably receive a late landing clearance. It also indicates to anyone else on frequency that this is a busy airport trying to shift as much traffic as can safely be done.
Suspension of conditional clearances sounds like a knee-jerk reaction to a one-off incident where the full implications of not using them haven't been thought through properly.
As an example, if you have very tight departure gaps in a constant stream of landing traffic you might use the phrase "Behind the landing XXXX, line up and be ready immediate". This immediately implies that a degree of urgency is required on lining up and I would like to think that the aircrew then look out of the cockpit, see the stream of landings and make a quick assessment of whether they can complete their take-off checks in time. At the same time it gives a verbal heads-up to the first landing aircraft that they should not delay their exit from the runway. Finally, it gives the following landing aircraft an indication that there will be an aircraft departing before them and implies that they will probably receive a late landing clearance. It also indicates to anyone else on frequency that this is a busy airport trying to shift as much traffic as can safely be done.
Suspension of conditional clearances sounds like a knee-jerk reaction to a one-off incident where the full implications of not using them haven't been thought through properly.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Somewhere only we know...
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good post OTB! 
We do seem to be a reactive rather than proactive business - the amount of supplements to documents, procedure changes and temporary instructions is getting silly.
Management - stop messing about with a system that works.
We do seem to be a reactive rather than proactive business - the amount of supplements to documents, procedure changes and temporary instructions is getting silly.
Management - stop messing about with a system that works.
As a pilot can I ask a question? How often do your managers actually do any controlling?
Tom Peters, an American management guru, in his classic book "In Search of Excellence" says that managers need to get their "daily dose of reality". He goes on to explain that what he means by this is that they need to go down to the "shop floor" and find out what is going on and even (shock horror!) do the job themselves for a while to get back in touch with reality. It's too easy for those that sit in offices and issue crazy edicts which are not practical.
Tom Peters, an American management guru, in his classic book "In Search of Excellence" says that managers need to get their "daily dose of reality". He goes on to explain that what he means by this is that they need to go down to the "shop floor" and find out what is going on and even (shock horror!) do the job themselves for a while to get back in touch with reality. It's too easy for those that sit in offices and issue crazy edicts which are not practical.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I now have a new choice of threads for your consideration.
"How often would you WANT to let one of your managers do any controlling?"
or alternatively,
"How often would you want to let one of your managers do any managing?"
"How often would you WANT to let one of your managers do any controlling?"
or alternatively,
"How often would you want to let one of your managers do any managing?"
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
fireflybob. At major units managers cannot control because they do not have the necessary validations on their licences. Unless things have changed, they are not required to maintain those validations upon promotion. When I say "managers" I mean the upper levels. At some airfields, watch managers do put an electric hat on sometimes.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: On a foreign shore trying a new wine diet. So far, I've lost 3days!
Age: 75
Posts: 394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Question for Glasgow Atcos
What is your current max. hourly runway capacity? Are you shifting over 40 per hour? Do you or airport management have a declared capacity?
As an aside and not in any way meaning to compare, I understand VHHH shifted 52 aircraft in the hour after the recent A330 incident that closed one of their two runways.
As an aside and not in any way meaning to compare, I understand VHHH shifted 52 aircraft in the hour after the recent A330 incident that closed one of their two runways.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: I Wish I Knew
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A lot is being said about operating at or near to runway capacity, which I'm not going to argue with. The point here is that Glasgow is nowhere near operating at runway capacity so these arguments are not applicable in this case.
Anyone who believes that conditional clearances have not been a contributory or causal factor in runway incursions is either burying their head in the sand, or being deliberately misleading. I can recall 2 such incidents in the recent past which simply would not have happened had a conditional clearance not been issued.
Conditional clearances are not inherently dangerous, but they do introduce an extra risk into the operation which cannot be justified by anyone who puts safety above all else. Does anyone here recall the phrase "SAFE, orderly & expeditious" in that order?
Expedition may suffer slightly if you are at or near capacity, but safe ATC isn't about just firing off as many aircraft as you possibly can, regardless. At least it hasn't been so far in my 20+ year career, and I sincerely hope it never will be.
As for operating GMC & AIR plus vehicles etc...If you're doing the work that would normally be done by 2 or more controllers, then anyone who thinks they can flash traffic around like they do when the positions are split is just an incident waiting to happen.
Ultimately the outcome of the trial isn't going to affect the way I control. I haven't used conditional clearances on the runway for years.
Anyone who believes that conditional clearances have not been a contributory or causal factor in runway incursions is either burying their head in the sand, or being deliberately misleading. I can recall 2 such incidents in the recent past which simply would not have happened had a conditional clearance not been issued.
Conditional clearances are not inherently dangerous, but they do introduce an extra risk into the operation which cannot be justified by anyone who puts safety above all else. Does anyone here recall the phrase "SAFE, orderly & expeditious" in that order?
Expedition may suffer slightly if you are at or near capacity, but safe ATC isn't about just firing off as many aircraft as you possibly can, regardless. At least it hasn't been so far in my 20+ year career, and I sincerely hope it never will be.
As for operating GMC & AIR plus vehicles etc...If you're doing the work that would normally be done by 2 or more controllers, then anyone who thinks they can flash traffic around like they do when the positions are split is just an incident waiting to happen.
Ultimately the outcome of the trial isn't going to affect the way I control. I haven't used conditional clearances on the runway for years.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Lamb and Flag
Age: 69
Posts: 189
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An interesting contribution, Mad.
Is there any way you would pass traffic information if I were sitting at the A1 hold? I'd quite like to know when I was going to go, e.g. after landing EZY A319 on 2nm final, as it can be annoying sitting at A1 not knowing when I am going to get going, due to in-cockpit preparations.
Cheers
Is there any way you would pass traffic information if I were sitting at the A1 hold? I'd quite like to know when I was going to go, e.g. after landing EZY A319 on 2nm final, as it can be annoying sitting at A1 not knowing when I am going to get going, due to in-cockpit preparations.
Cheers
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mad... Interesting. Unfortunately your profile reveals nothing. Where do you work? Are you an ATCO at a licenced ATC Unit at a major airport.
I used conditional clearances all my life at two major airports and one training airfield and never had any problem at all. I was properly trained to employ the technique and trained many ATCOs to do the same. It's a very valuable tool in achieving the movement rates demanded by the airlines and the airport authority.
I hope you don't fall into the same category as a trainee we once had at Heathrow - wouldn't ever use 3nm spacing because it was considered to be "too dangerous"!!! Needless to say a posting out resulted.
It's possible to shift a heck of a lot of traffic, aircraft and vehicles, in perfect SAFETY using conditional clearances. You just have to know what you are doing and do it well.
I used conditional clearances all my life at two major airports and one training airfield and never had any problem at all. I was properly trained to employ the technique and trained many ATCOs to do the same. It's a very valuable tool in achieving the movement rates demanded by the airlines and the airport authority.
I hope you don't fall into the same category as a trainee we once had at Heathrow - wouldn't ever use 3nm spacing because it was considered to be "too dangerous"!!! Needless to say a posting out resulted.
It's possible to shift a heck of a lot of traffic, aircraft and vehicles, in perfect SAFETY using conditional clearances. You just have to know what you are doing and do it well.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mad....you do make some very interesting points but I have to say that I agree with Heathrow Director. I do put safety above all else, but the arguement that you make could be taken even further. There have been numerous incidents involving a/c in the circuit....should we ban circuit traffic? Should we leave all departing a/c on their SID because giving vectors/climb throughs to expedite departures is less safe? Facetious I know, but the only way to make ATC 100% safe would be to not allow a/c to get airborne at all!
I can actually think of incidents where the situational awareness provided by a conditional clearance would possibly have prevented an incursion. Imagine a vehicle calling to enter the runway, which the ATCO assumes to be the one he can see at A1. Actually it is another vehicle at an intermediate holding point. An "after the landing..." clearance would not result in a runway incursion and would be quite safe...the "wrong" vehicle would wait until the landing a/c had passed before entering the runway. However, a direct clearance to enter the runway as the landing a/c touched down could be disastrous, as a vehicle has now been cleared onto the runway ahead of it!
Sir Herbert...we tend not to pass any traffic information to a/c at the holding point which could be misconstrued as a conditional clearance eg "I'll get you away after the next inbound". I know that the chance of such info being mis-interpreted is remote, but it's less safe than using an actual conditional clearance. It's Catch 22! Thanks again for taking such an interest, it's great to have a pilot's perspective on all this
I can actually think of incidents where the situational awareness provided by a conditional clearance would possibly have prevented an incursion. Imagine a vehicle calling to enter the runway, which the ATCO assumes to be the one he can see at A1. Actually it is another vehicle at an intermediate holding point. An "after the landing..." clearance would not result in a runway incursion and would be quite safe...the "wrong" vehicle would wait until the landing a/c had passed before entering the runway. However, a direct clearance to enter the runway as the landing a/c touched down could be disastrous, as a vehicle has now been cleared onto the runway ahead of it!
Sir Herbert...we tend not to pass any traffic information to a/c at the holding point which could be misconstrued as a conditional clearance eg "I'll get you away after the next inbound". I know that the chance of such info being mis-interpreted is remote, but it's less safe than using an actual conditional clearance. It's Catch 22! Thanks again for taking such an interest, it's great to have a pilot's perspective on all this
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: behind the fruit
Posts: 233
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sir Herbert...we tend not to pass any traffic information to a/c at the holding point which could be misconstrued as a conditional clearance eg "I'll get you away after the next inbound".
after all it is quite common to hear "can you accept an immediate? 737 on X mile final". I don't think that's ever been misconstrued as "Cleared for immediate.. etc etc"
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: home and abroad
Posts: 582
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was recently asked if we were ready for an immediate between 2 A/C on final. We replied we were, and then the gap proved insufficient and we had to wait for the 2nd one to land before cleared to line up.
Total waiting time at holding point about 10 minutes, and because we were aware of the big picture we did not mind a bit, as that is what happens every now and then.
However, had we only been told to hold short and report ready, we probably would have queried after the first one landing and taken up R/T time with another A/C on final.
So to me it is a no brainer, conditional clearances are a major source of information to keep everyybody in the loop and allow them to anticipate with minimum R/T chatter. Keep them.
As a side note I am getting a bit tired of all these "improved safety" changes. We used to be considered professionals capable of taking responsible decisions, both pilots and Atcos alike. If there is a need for safer (dumber) procedures perhaps the bar for entry should be raised to only allow people in who can actually cope with the job at hand?
Total waiting time at holding point about 10 minutes, and because we were aware of the big picture we did not mind a bit, as that is what happens every now and then.
However, had we only been told to hold short and report ready, we probably would have queried after the first one landing and taken up R/T time with another A/C on final.
So to me it is a no brainer, conditional clearances are a major source of information to keep everyybody in the loop and allow them to anticipate with minimum R/T chatter. Keep them.
As a side note I am getting a bit tired of all these "improved safety" changes. We used to be considered professionals capable of taking responsible decisions, both pilots and Atcos alike. If there is a need for safer (dumber) procedures perhaps the bar for entry should be raised to only allow people in who can actually cope with the job at hand?
Last edited by S76Heavy; 17th Jun 2010 at 13:31.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
<<We used to be considered professionals capable of taking responsible decisions, both pilots and Atcos alike. If there is a need for safer (dumber) procedures perhaps the bar for entry should be raised to only allow people in who can actually cope with the job at hand?>>
VERY wise words, S76Heavy.
VERY wise words, S76Heavy.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Lamb and Flag
Age: 69
Posts: 189
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a side note I am getting a bit tired of all these "improved safety" changes. We used to be considered professionals capable of taking responsible decisions, both pilots and Atcos alike. If there is a need for safer (dumber) procedures perhaps the bar for entry should be raised to only allow people in who can actually cope with the job at hand?
Brilliant post
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Up North
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi
Havent been on here for a while so sorry for the late response.
From July EDI are also going to be trialling this over the top reduction in flexibility. I am sure over the years we have had no runway incursions caused by conditional clearances so the trial will be proved a great success.
If pilots feel so strongly that this tool in an atcos bag of tricks is worthwhile can you complain to your attendee at our flight ops committee to raise it to our inept management types. They will probably ignore you however as this then will not justify someones role in the over bloated NSL safety department.
Havent been on here for a while so sorry for the late response.
From July EDI are also going to be trialling this over the top reduction in flexibility. I am sure over the years we have had no runway incursions caused by conditional clearances so the trial will be proved a great success.
If pilots feel so strongly that this tool in an atcos bag of tricks is worthwhile can you complain to your attendee at our flight ops committee to raise it to our inept management types. They will probably ignore you however as this then will not justify someones role in the over bloated NSL safety department.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Lamb and Flag
Age: 69
Posts: 189
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have received a good one at Edinburgh before, "Hold A1, two to land". Can't this be used more when your management act like a bunch of tw@ts ??? It is better than simply "Hold A1".