When Able Higher? A pilots take (Pain in the @r$£)...
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
<<I've also done TRUCE training at Swanwick so I'm one of the more interested ones. Any chance of shadowing you for a day? Maybe I could reciprocate and take you somewhere sunny to show you the other side?>>
I'm out of it now but I'm sure some of the current controllers will be in touch with you..
I'm out of it now but I'm sure some of the current controllers will be in touch with you..
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Location: UK, South East
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks guys. Very helpful thread... You have to love the Internet!
"Getting our oar in early" comes fairly high up the priority list after takeoff actually as we are aware that the longer you leave it the more likely you are to get stuffed.
It gets even more complicated coming out of the far east. We have to look at who is leaving around our time, who transits the airspace as we are leaving and try to work out whether to go for an economical flight level, or go for a tactically higher level on the basis that the bl@@dy A340 in front of you is going to nick your level and then fly at M0.80
Fairly easy to get stuffed all the way from Beijing to Helsinki... Not easy this piloting lark
"Getting our oar in early" comes fairly high up the priority list after takeoff actually as we are aware that the longer you leave it the more likely you are to get stuffed.
It gets even more complicated coming out of the far east. We have to look at who is leaving around our time, who transits the airspace as we are leaving and try to work out whether to go for an economical flight level, or go for a tactically higher level on the basis that the bl@@dy A340 in front of you is going to nick your level and then fly at M0.80
Fairly easy to get stuffed all the way from Beijing to Helsinki... Not easy this piloting lark
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: -
Posts: 508
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't forget, if you're not happy with what we fire up to you on ACARS then call on VHF and, provided we've got time, we'll do our best to give you a couple of alternatives; thereby enabling you to pick the best of what I'll admit may be a bad(ish) bunch. But you're absolutely right, getting in early is the key. (Keeping in mind the not more than 90mins prior to ETA over the entry fix; not such a prob ex-LL admitedly).
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Canada
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having worked in QX ACC for a number of years, being an ocean controller as well as a planner, I can offer my take on this subject.
When NY calls QX with an estimate, if the aircraft is not on a track, the QX planner has to join or cross that traffic with the oceanic track traffic. A join or cross requires 15 minutes of procedural separation. Vertical is always the easiest answer, if a pilot indicates that he is able the requested level.
In my current unit, not QX, when we pass an estimate to NY, we are required to give them the highest level the aircraft is able to maintain prior to leaving radar coverage. This again, is to allow NY to accept the aircraft against the primarily east-west flow. It is easier to use vertical sometimes than to figure out the crossing point, determine if you have the required time standard, then monitor it constantly. In my experience, however, the requested FL is the one that is usually approved.
Unless things have changed in QX, the planner would have the actual altitude and requested altitude for the ocean in the database. They don't receive the max altitude. Fedex is a prime example of the problem. They regularly flight plan the same routing across the ocean, about 5 minutes apart, and both requesting FL330 in the daytime. So that means, either reroute or level change to FL290 for one of the flights.
When NY calls QX with an estimate, if the aircraft is not on a track, the QX planner has to join or cross that traffic with the oceanic track traffic. A join or cross requires 15 minutes of procedural separation. Vertical is always the easiest answer, if a pilot indicates that he is able the requested level.
In my current unit, not QX, when we pass an estimate to NY, we are required to give them the highest level the aircraft is able to maintain prior to leaving radar coverage. This again, is to allow NY to accept the aircraft against the primarily east-west flow. It is easier to use vertical sometimes than to figure out the crossing point, determine if you have the required time standard, then monitor it constantly. In my experience, however, the requested FL is the one that is usually approved.
Unless things have changed in QX, the planner would have the actual altitude and requested altitude for the ocean in the database. They don't receive the max altitude. Fedex is a prime example of the problem. They regularly flight plan the same routing across the ocean, about 5 minutes apart, and both requesting FL330 in the daytime. So that means, either reroute or level change to FL290 for one of the flights.
More than just an ATCO
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Up someone's nose
Age: 75
Posts: 1,768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am REQUIRED to put my max achievable flight level in the clearance request
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Location: UK, South East
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If it was right at the top corner in terms of weight and we were expecting turbulence then you are quite correct and no, I would not be putting down as an achievable level.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: australia
Posts: 606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On the Beach
Bit hard with CPDLC.
Jumpjim, we ask what is the highest level you can achieve for forward planning. If you say you can accept F XXX now, and by putting you up to this level NOW it opens a lot more options for separating others, we will probably do it. That problem is solved for us and we move on to fixing others. If you can't accept the level, tell us. The squeaky wheel gets the oil.
Most times we (the experienced ones) can tell when pilots are saying we can't take a level because they really can't or it is a huge stretch for them, or because they are trying to stay close to their optimum level, e.g. you have been in my airspace at FL360 for the last 2 1/2 hours (and have been flying for 7 hours) and tell me you can't accept FL380 ( I think you are a self centred git that is unwilling to divert from your flight profile to help out those around you). When I tell them that they will have to go down to FL 320 they do a recalculation and realise that they actually can accept FL380.
Who wudda thunk it?
Jumpjim, if it is really pushing the friendship say no. If it is not that great for you but achievable say yes. I have always tried to reward the pilot who helps me out with something better down the track. Saying that, sometimes nothing comes up down the track and the pilot feels that they have been dudded the whole way.
Sometimes your the windscreen, and sometimes your the bug!!!!
It really boils down to being aurally aware of what's going on around you.
Jumpjim, we ask what is the highest level you can achieve for forward planning. If you say you can accept F XXX now, and by putting you up to this level NOW it opens a lot more options for separating others, we will probably do it. That problem is solved for us and we move on to fixing others. If you can't accept the level, tell us. The squeaky wheel gets the oil.
Most times we (the experienced ones) can tell when pilots are saying we can't take a level because they really can't or it is a huge stretch for them, or because they are trying to stay close to their optimum level, e.g. you have been in my airspace at FL360 for the last 2 1/2 hours (and have been flying for 7 hours) and tell me you can't accept FL380 ( I think you are a self centred git that is unwilling to divert from your flight profile to help out those around you). When I tell them that they will have to go down to FL 320 they do a recalculation and realise that they actually can accept FL380.
Who wudda thunk it?
Jumpjim, if it is really pushing the friendship say no. If it is not that great for you but achievable say yes. I have always tried to reward the pilot who helps me out with something better down the track. Saying that, sometimes nothing comes up down the track and the pilot feels that they have been dudded the whole way.
Sometimes your the windscreen, and sometimes your the bug!!!!
Just a thought on the ME carriers and their future plans for crossing the pond. Imaging a GC track, and I hasten to add I don't know if such a track is practically possible, wouldn't they be able to fly north of the tracks and thus suffer from less restrictions/more freedom in planning an optimum track?
Route displayed is GC ORD-DXB
Route displayed is GC ORD-DXB
