Suspension of conditional clearances - Glasgow ATC trial
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Suspension of conditional clearances - Glasgow ATC trial
For over six months Glasgow ATC has been conducting a trial, whereby conditional clearances cannot be issued to a/c or vehicles wishing to enter or cross the runway. Although there has been a lot of debate about the merits of this trial on unit, there appears to have been very little pilot feedback. Do any pilots out there wish to comment on the trial, or express their opinion (either positive or negative)? Are there any ATCOs who have participated in a similar trial who could add to the debate? Of particular interest...
* Is it preferable for pilots to be given a conditional line-up clearance with a landing a/c still on final, or to be told to "hold at A1" and lined up once the a/c has landed? Is there any real difference in terms of situational awareness/coming to a complete standstill at the holding point/final checks etc?
*How do pilots feel about instructions to enter the runway being given as they start their take off roll or are in the flare? Is this potential distraction mitigated by pre-fixing such instructions with a holding point, eg "At A1, line-up and wait"?
*For a queue of a/c waiting to depart...during the trial we can only clear you to line-up when the a/c ahead is rolling or airborne. Does this have any impact?
The trial has thus far been conducted during a period of unusually quiet traffic. It is due to continue throughout the summer, and will no doubt become a permanent procedure if it is deemed to be "safer" than the alternative. In the interests of a fair trial, would pilots please consider expressing their opinions either on this forum, through their ops department or directly to Glasgow ATC. Any opinions on potential safety impact, either positive or negative, would be hugely valuable.
Thank you in advance
Grim
* Is it preferable for pilots to be given a conditional line-up clearance with a landing a/c still on final, or to be told to "hold at A1" and lined up once the a/c has landed? Is there any real difference in terms of situational awareness/coming to a complete standstill at the holding point/final checks etc?
*How do pilots feel about instructions to enter the runway being given as they start their take off roll or are in the flare? Is this potential distraction mitigated by pre-fixing such instructions with a holding point, eg "At A1, line-up and wait"?
*For a queue of a/c waiting to depart...during the trial we can only clear you to line-up when the a/c ahead is rolling or airborne. Does this have any impact?
The trial has thus far been conducted during a period of unusually quiet traffic. It is due to continue throughout the summer, and will no doubt become a permanent procedure if it is deemed to be "safer" than the alternative. In the interests of a fair trial, would pilots please consider expressing their opinions either on this forum, through their ops department or directly to Glasgow ATC. Any opinions on potential safety impact, either positive or negative, would be hugely valuable.
Thank you in advance
Grim
StandupfortheUlstermen
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Peoples' Democratic Republic of Wurzelsetshire
Age: 53
Posts: 1,182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I used to be one of those who used conditionals on a regular basis but we stopped using them over a year ago and quite frankly, it hasn't made any difference. The operation is no slower and no more difficult as a result.
Does such a trial reduce runway incursions? I'm not convinced, but obviously someone somewhere does. Better off with a 24/7 ring of red.
Does such a trial reduce runway incursions? I'm not convinced, but obviously someone somewhere does. Better off with a 24/7 ring of red.
Who comes up with these ideas? The madness seems to be spreading too. Everywhere we look the rules are weighted in favour of getting rid of flexibilty and delaying traffic - it really does delay traffic on a runway working near capacity. At the same time the traffic keeps coming. Something has to give. How are we supposed to move the traffic with our hands being tied ever further behind our backs?
Conditional clearance are safe if they are used properly. They have also saved my bacon on a number of occasions - where the situational awareness that they afford has mitigated against errors in reporting runway entry point. I can not remember any time that an appropriate conditional clearance has contributed to an incident.
I wish the nats department of silly ideas would stop meddling.
Conditional clearance are safe if they are used properly. They have also saved my bacon on a number of occasions - where the situational awareness that they afford has mitigated against errors in reporting runway entry point. I can not remember any time that an appropriate conditional clearance has contributed to an incident.
I wish the nats department of silly ideas would stop meddling.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
<<Who comes up with these ideas?>>
In my modest experience, people who have done little or no work at the coal face. Waaaay back a senior man at Heathrow decreed that it was unsafe to launch northbound traffic off the southerly runway whilst landing traffic on the northerly runway was inside the outer marker (4 DME). This edict was issued late one Friday afternoon (like several of his similarly daft ideas) and the airfield almost ground to a halt. The instruction was cancelled very shortly thereafter!!!
PS How did we get away with using conditional clearances for so many years without problems?
In my modest experience, people who have done little or no work at the coal face. Waaaay back a senior man at Heathrow decreed that it was unsafe to launch northbound traffic off the southerly runway whilst landing traffic on the northerly runway was inside the outer marker (4 DME). This edict was issued late one Friday afternoon (like several of his similarly daft ideas) and the airfield almost ground to a halt. The instruction was cancelled very shortly thereafter!!!
PS How did we get away with using conditional clearances for so many years without problems?
Last edited by HEATHROW DIRECTOR; 10th Jun 2010 at 16:11.
On a fam flight from Heathrow one day, I listened to Graham C issuing line ups involving at least 6 if not more conditionals; I don't see how they can operate without them. I'd like to be able to use them as a FISO as it would mean I could get departures away more efficiently when the visual circuit is busy, but as they're classed as clearances, I can't.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: LHR/Surrey
Age: 39
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Heathrow is limited now to only 1 conditional clearance at a time.. and we work like that without a problem - although I believe there was an initial flurry of opposition to the idea when it was first brought in!
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Europe
Posts: 332
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good thing we have ACE and other teams consisting of controllers and pilots at our field, and also frequent formal and informal meetings with pilots. General consensus here on both sides is favouring conditional clearances.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: London down town
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
taxied out in Zrh yesterday morning, changed to tower and was given my line up behind a swiss Rj on the other taxi way. we were number six and everyone had a clearance and new how long it would take and the aircraft they were following. No problems with it and worked really well, they were operating three runways and we were on 28 as a departures only runway with 34 departures (crossing 28) and 14 landings (independent).
In terms of GLA i`m afraid i had not noticed! but i`d rather get a line up after the next landing ***** etc as it allows me to be ready from when i`m on the runway not getting ready as i`m taxiing on to it. not a big time difference but enough to be able to be ready immediate with the power standing up as you speak to still having the last of the checks being read with a slow taxi lineup after being cleared.
Being told to line up after means you have to look and see, and find that traffic, just being told to line up may mean a quick scan of final and tcas and may miss something.
In terms of GLA i`m afraid i had not noticed! but i`d rather get a line up after the next landing ***** etc as it allows me to be ready from when i`m on the runway not getting ready as i`m taxiing on to it. not a big time difference but enough to be able to be ready immediate with the power standing up as you speak to still having the last of the checks being read with a slow taxi lineup after being cleared.
Being told to line up after means you have to look and see, and find that traffic, just being told to line up may mean a quick scan of final and tcas and may miss something.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for the comments everyone, really appreciate your input.
I get the feeling that conditional clearances have been deemed "unsafe" by the powers that be, and unless there is a body of evidence to the contrary then we will no longer be able to use them...at Glasgow. And yet a pilot flying from Glasgow to a.n.other airfield with NATS ATC CAN be issued with a conditional clearance whilst he's there! So are they safe or unsafe....accountabilities anyone??! Obviously I'm at too low a pay grade to understand
dhc83driver - thank you so much for responding. Think that a lot of the pilots flying out of Glasgow aren't aware of the trial, which probably means that they won't comment on it!
Are conditional clearances inherently unsafe? Is NOT issuing a conditional clearance any safer?? How do you prove a (double) negative?
Seems like we're dumbing down rather than educating, but I am willing to be proved wrong....anyone, please???
I get the feeling that conditional clearances have been deemed "unsafe" by the powers that be, and unless there is a body of evidence to the contrary then we will no longer be able to use them...at Glasgow. And yet a pilot flying from Glasgow to a.n.other airfield with NATS ATC CAN be issued with a conditional clearance whilst he's there! So are they safe or unsafe....accountabilities anyone??! Obviously I'm at too low a pay grade to understand
dhc83driver - thank you so much for responding. Think that a lot of the pilots flying out of Glasgow aren't aware of the trial, which probably means that they won't comment on it!
Are conditional clearances inherently unsafe? Is NOT issuing a conditional clearance any safer?? How do you prove a (double) negative?
Seems like we're dumbing down rather than educating, but I am willing to be proved wrong....anyone, please???
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Box Hill or Bust
Posts: 158
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've had six runway incursions in a twenty year career. Every single one involved an a/c crossing a lit red stop bar without clearance to do so.
Let's ban humans then there will be no human error.
Let's ban humans then there will be no human error.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Sometimes north, sometimes south
Posts: 1,809
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
1 Post
Purely from a pilot's perspective conditionals are a very good way of ATC keeping their "clients" informed about their plan. If you sit there at the holding point wondering whether ATC even remembers you exist it can get frustrating. It's particularly good if you have a student on board since it then gives them time to think about what they're about to do rather than "ohmygod I'd better move now".
NS
NS
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: in some mud
Age: 89
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Total madness. If your operating your runway at or close to capacity you cannot do without conditional clearances, especially on single runway ops. A busy AIR controller, planning, coordinating with other controllers and on phone lines does not have the luxury of the time to start issuing the line up/crossing clearance at the exact right time as the landing/departing aircraft has passed. A few seconds to late will be the difference between a gap working, or a go around. And as mentioned, pilots will be wondering whats going on. A great idea for quiet airports or for looking good in a safety meeting, but ridiculous in real operations.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Lamb and Flag
Age: 69
Posts: 189
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a pilot flying out of Glasgow could I ask that you get onto your management and ask them to STOP THIS RIDICULOUS SCHEME.
I have noticed it myself. I always looked at Glasgow controllers as being pretty damn good and they can squeeze traffic out no problem, utilising the runway perfectly. Why this stupid idea?? It is useless! I have to now sit at the hold and wonder when I'm going to get going. I see a chap approximately 3 mile final... am I going behind him? If I am, what aircraft type or airline is it? Am I going to watch him land and THEN know whether or not I'm getting the line-up, then frantically rush the end checks whilst positioning onto the runway and being told there is more landing traffic?
This is pathetic... please can the people that introduced this 'scheme' please take it back out as soon as possible before I start going up my own ranks and build up a serious case against the scheme.
We want to exercise our great situational awareness!! We cannot do that if we do not know of traffic around us and when we are due out.
I have noticed it myself. I always looked at Glasgow controllers as being pretty damn good and they can squeeze traffic out no problem, utilising the runway perfectly. Why this stupid idea?? It is useless! I have to now sit at the hold and wonder when I'm going to get going. I see a chap approximately 3 mile final... am I going behind him? If I am, what aircraft type or airline is it? Am I going to watch him land and THEN know whether or not I'm getting the line-up, then frantically rush the end checks whilst positioning onto the runway and being told there is more landing traffic?
This is pathetic... please can the people that introduced this 'scheme' please take it back out as soon as possible before I start going up my own ranks and build up a serious case against the scheme.
We want to exercise our great situational awareness!! We cannot do that if we do not know of traffic around us and when we are due out.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Norway
Age: 57
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am shocked...
How the h... can you people say that the use of conditional clearances not have lead to any problems?? As an air traffic controller for nearly 20 years and the leader of my airports local runway safety team (LRST) i am SO aware of why more and more airports stop using that type of clearances! Do you "best-in-the-world-pilots" really believe that the use of such clearances are stopped for no reason?? Read the incident rapport from Munich from some years back in time and maybe even you will understand that there is so much safety to win and so little efficiency to loose, that the stop in using conditional clearances is purely positive for the safety!
You guys should really be more worried about safety than being angry for being held at a holding point until the preceeding traffic has landed... I do hope your attitudes do NOT represent the majority of pilots in UK!!
You guys should really be more worried about safety than being angry for being held at a holding point until the preceeding traffic has landed... I do hope your attitudes do NOT represent the majority of pilots in UK!!
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
harley7985... I worked at Heathrow Tower for 22 years and never experienced any problems with conditional clearances. How come they have suddenly become a problem?
I did tower for over 30 years and never had any problems with conditionals, mind you it was better phrased in those days ie 'after the departing' or 'behind the landing'; perhaps a trial with this 'old fashioned' phraseology should take place. NB I would never give a conditional to a vehicle; there's no way of knowing how competent the driver is and when we had miltary aircrew, they asked us not to do it anyway. Also as someone else said, if you are doing air and GMC combined plus vehicles, you may need to take advance actions using conditionals in order to expedite traffic; I get the impression that the people who decide on these trials don't take RTF loading onto account.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you everyone for taking time out to respond
Sir Herbert...thank you so much for your comments. I agree with Lassie's response - if you feel strongly about this then please voice your concerns to the powers that be. Controller's who criticise the trial are not being listened to...we are simply deemed "uninterested in safety".
I am willing to be convinced that this is a good idea, but I am still waiting to be shown evidence that conditional clearances are unsafe. 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. If ANY clearance is not adhered to or mis-interpreted then safety is compromised...but surely this is a training/competence issue? I believe that a comprehensive scheme to educate airside vehicle drivers would do far more to prevent runway incursions than simply banning conditional clearances....
...but what do I know?!!
Sir Herbert...thank you so much for your comments. I agree with Lassie's response - if you feel strongly about this then please voice your concerns to the powers that be. Controller's who criticise the trial are not being listened to...we are simply deemed "uninterested in safety".
I am willing to be convinced that this is a good idea, but I am still waiting to be shown evidence that conditional clearances are unsafe. 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. If ANY clearance is not adhered to or mis-interpreted then safety is compromised...but surely this is a training/competence issue? I believe that a comprehensive scheme to educate airside vehicle drivers would do far more to prevent runway incursions than simply banning conditional clearances....
...but what do I know?!!
Last edited by grim_up_north; 16th Jun 2010 at 16:08.