Suspension of conditional clearances - Glasgow ATC trial
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: GB
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I heard about this a few days ago and thought it worthy of some attention.
Firstly, the trial is NOTAM'd so pilots operating in/out of Glasgow should be aware of it.
The trial was not thought up by some manager some where who had nothing better to do. There was a safety survey done by an ATCO on the unit (granted this was done at the request of management) and the result was recommendation of a trial.
It has been run at a time when traffic has been quiet and to be honest I'm not sure how you prove the trial to be a success- when you stop doing something whatever might have happened won't happen.
I have to agree with Standard Noise, it hasn't impacted on my controlling at all. I have adapted what I do, but I'm not less expeditious or more distracted. (I also think 'ring of reds' is a good idea, but thats a debate for another day!)
Harley 7985, you hit the nail on the head for me. We have had issues with conditional clearances at Glasgow, one was the closest thing I've seen to their being a mound of twisted metal on the runway- so when people say, if used correctly they are fine, they should know this particular incident involved a conditional being correctly given and read-back.
The idea behind this is not to make life more difficult (and I don't think it does), it is to take away the possibility, however slim, of that type of incident happening again.
There are lots of things at the moment that we have to put up with that are far from perfect that pilots will know nothing about, and that we should be debating (not on an internet forum right enough!). This 'trial' is well intentioned and done for the best of reasons so why not just feed into it over the next few months (and I don't mean making your mind up you don't like it from the start) when traffic will increse a bit, and we may then see any impact on the operation?
Firstly, the trial is NOTAM'd so pilots operating in/out of Glasgow should be aware of it.
The trial was not thought up by some manager some where who had nothing better to do. There was a safety survey done by an ATCO on the unit (granted this was done at the request of management) and the result was recommendation of a trial.
It has been run at a time when traffic has been quiet and to be honest I'm not sure how you prove the trial to be a success- when you stop doing something whatever might have happened won't happen.
I have to agree with Standard Noise, it hasn't impacted on my controlling at all. I have adapted what I do, but I'm not less expeditious or more distracted. (I also think 'ring of reds' is a good idea, but thats a debate for another day!)
Harley 7985, you hit the nail on the head for me. We have had issues with conditional clearances at Glasgow, one was the closest thing I've seen to their being a mound of twisted metal on the runway- so when people say, if used correctly they are fine, they should know this particular incident involved a conditional being correctly given and read-back.
The idea behind this is not to make life more difficult (and I don't think it does), it is to take away the possibility, however slim, of that type of incident happening again.
There are lots of things at the moment that we have to put up with that are far from perfect that pilots will know nothing about, and that we should be debating (not on an internet forum right enough!). This 'trial' is well intentioned and done for the best of reasons so why not just feed into it over the next few months (and I don't mean making your mind up you don't like it from the start) when traffic will increse a bit, and we may then see any impact on the operation?
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: uk
Posts: 1,122
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When I used to issue conditional line up clearances,there was always a problem with them.
You tell the pilot ''After the landing xxx line up xxx'' and they would readback ''Line up xxx''.
That happened many times.If you missed the readback (another Hot topic) then it was Tenerife/Milan time.
When our trail started I stopped using them,and found no real difference.As long as you had gaps provided from radar.Oh course you had the experts you would pack,and then try to launch outbounds.
Enough said.
You tell the pilot ''After the landing xxx line up xxx'' and they would readback ''Line up xxx''.
That happened many times.If you missed the readback (another Hot topic) then it was Tenerife/Milan time.
When our trail started I stopped using them,and found no real difference.As long as you had gaps provided from radar.Oh course you had the experts you would pack,and then try to launch outbounds.
Enough said.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: My views - Not my employer!
Posts: 1,032
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok feedback from a mate who is a training Captain.
He was training a new to type f/o who is on sector 2. Arrive at holding point, no clearance. Stop, then gets clearance to line up. New f/o is now doing the line up checks in a hurry and forgetting one or two which my mate is pointing out whilst himself doing all the traditional airmanship duties associated with entering a runway. He found he was working hard.
Going back to the conditional clearance received to line up whilst still a little way to go to the holding point - he could chat the newbie through the checks on the taxyway and then enter a runway with his eyes outside.
However, I agree that multiple conditionals aren't needed.
He was training a new to type f/o who is on sector 2. Arrive at holding point, no clearance. Stop, then gets clearance to line up. New f/o is now doing the line up checks in a hurry and forgetting one or two which my mate is pointing out whilst himself doing all the traditional airmanship duties associated with entering a runway. He found he was working hard.
Going back to the conditional clearance received to line up whilst still a little way to go to the holding point - he could chat the newbie through the checks on the taxyway and then enter a runway with his eyes outside.
However, I agree that multiple conditionals aren't needed.
so when people say, if used correctly they are fine, they should know this particular incident involved a conditional being correctly given and read-back.
Of course, one factor that could be considered is the UK following ICAO phraseology for this procedure. Can you think of a more inappropriate time to have our own, parochial, phraseology?
2 s
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Scotland
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1. "Continue approach, you're number two with a 737 to depart in the gap" provides, I would suggest, situational awareness to both the inbound and outbound traffic on frequency, without using the phrase "line up".
2. I was surprised to hear some positive comments from some crews after the suspension of conditionals at a biggish airport some time ago - more than once they felt it removed any ambiguity, and left them merely with the choice of "hold position" or "cross runway xx". I had expected everyone to claim reduced situational awareness but that didn't seem to be the case.
3. Ultimately it boils down to common sense - there are times when conditionals are extremely useful, especially if you can let a heavy adjust their speed to continue rolling or minimise line-up time. But I only need to use them occasionally, and there are some crews (no names / nationalities here) that I wouldn't dream of using one with, especially having witnessed a nasty incursion as a result of a conditional clearance being misunderstood.
2. I was surprised to hear some positive comments from some crews after the suspension of conditionals at a biggish airport some time ago - more than once they felt it removed any ambiguity, and left them merely with the choice of "hold position" or "cross runway xx". I had expected everyone to claim reduced situational awareness but that didn't seem to be the case.
3. Ultimately it boils down to common sense - there are times when conditionals are extremely useful, especially if you can let a heavy adjust their speed to continue rolling or minimise line-up time. But I only need to use them occasionally, and there are some crews (no names / nationalities here) that I wouldn't dream of using one with, especially having witnessed a nasty incursion as a result of a conditional clearance being misunderstood.
