New NATS airspace change tonight
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: etha
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
New NATS airspace change tonight
NATS are introducing a fairly major airspace change at 1 minute past midnight tonight: NATS Airspace Change To Go Live
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: farfaraway
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
fingers crossed then for tonight. The thing that always amazed me about the tunnels was how the concept could have got so far "down the line" and not been kicked into touch. Well before the end of the first week of a MASSIVE simulation it was blindingly obvious it was never going to work. I'm tempted to say "Pie in the Sky"but I wont.
fingers crossed then for tonight. The thing that always amazed me about the tunnels was how the concept could have got so far "down the line" and not been kicked into touch. Well before the end of the first week of a MASSIVE simulation it was blindingly obvious it was never going to work. I'm tempted to say "Pie in the Sky"but I wont.
Remember the plan to introduce 'E & S?(Executive and Support workstations) I can remember seeing all the radar consoles lined up at West Drayton ready for installation then the Beeker plan came along and TC was born. So what did we end up with at Swanwick En Route and on Thames Radar? E & S of course!!
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Cheshire, California, Geneva, and Paris
Age: 67
Posts: 867
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have no doubt that according to Professor Pangloss, the author of NATS News it will be a resounding success,triumph and bonuses all round.
HURRAH!!
HURRAH!!
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Cheshire, California, Geneva, and Paris
Age: 67
Posts: 867
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HD.
Good point, well made.
I suspect the powder is being kept dry for another day.
Fortunately for you and I we are both retired, HURRAH!!
Good point, well made.
I suspect the powder is being kept dry for another day.
Fortunately for you and I we are both retired, HURRAH!!
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: The foot of Mt. Belzoni.
Posts: 2,001
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having watched the little video, with funky music........if they have to re-route EGSS traffic to the east, so that EGLC inbound can do the 'Point-Merge' thingy, how does this reduce costs/CO2 etc?
Oh, hang on........You need fewer ATCOs, thereby releasing more funds for little videos, with funky music.
Oh, hang on........You need fewer ATCOs, thereby releasing more funds for little videos, with funky music.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: On the wireless...
Posts: 1,901
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HD and I have been watching the Point Mergers. EGLC arrivals certainly now have quite a scenic route compared to the BRAIN SND ALKIN STAR, and especially after having enjoyed the 'LAM 140 at 4' short-cut. Hey, Nats could go procedural...
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: The foot of Mt. Belzoni.
Posts: 2,001
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, I've just been looking at the AIP charts, it doesn't tell you much about what happens after the holds though. I remember being the central London a couple of years back and watching the EGLC inbounds darting under the EGLL inbound stream. It seemed a very slick operation.
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Earth
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It seems the LCY arrivals from the south east are doing about an extra 20 miles each. Traffic from the north is really being scr---d. TC East are having to be very creative with the Stansted departures that used to route via DET.
I assume when they have a bit more experience with these changes the controllers will find ways of short cutting the routes most of the time. The operators are probably hoping they will!
I assume when they have a bit more experience with these changes the controllers will find ways of short cutting the routes most of the time. The operators are probably hoping they will!
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Rapunzel's tower
Posts: 441
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Although, from watching on PlaneFinder (other Apps available!), it does look very structured and obviates the use of the low-level "washing machine".
Would be interested how the radar guys & gals are finding using the new system (generalised comments only - don't want to fall foul of social media policy!).
It'd also be interesting to know what effect it has had on co-ordinated arrival spacing accuracy (better/worse).
A comparison of 3DI scores/fuel burn before and after the change will be interesting too - does the structure improve performance overall? More track miles but higher altitudes/levels.
I did note the impressive climb performance on southbound departures - no longer (occasionally) stuck at low-level beneath the arrivals.
Although not directly ATC-related, will these changes also mean that flight performance is more accurately aligned with flight scheduling? I.e. That arrivals (particularly from the north) arrive closer to their planned time - instead of getting the shortcut and arriving early - and therefore don't occupy the finite number of stands for longer than they should? (Thereby reducing ground congestion during busy periods.)
Again not particularly ATC-related, I wonder what effect the changes will have to noise levels of people under the flight paths (new and old)...and how this will be reported in the press - scientific study vs. Mrs Miggins at No.42 who said "xyz"...on reflection I doubt there'll be any balanced media commentary about the changes to people at ground level!
Would be interested how the radar guys & gals are finding using the new system (generalised comments only - don't want to fall foul of social media policy!).
It'd also be interesting to know what effect it has had on co-ordinated arrival spacing accuracy (better/worse).
A comparison of 3DI scores/fuel burn before and after the change will be interesting too - does the structure improve performance overall? More track miles but higher altitudes/levels.
I did note the impressive climb performance on southbound departures - no longer (occasionally) stuck at low-level beneath the arrivals.
Although not directly ATC-related, will these changes also mean that flight performance is more accurately aligned with flight scheduling? I.e. That arrivals (particularly from the north) arrive closer to their planned time - instead of getting the shortcut and arriving early - and therefore don't occupy the finite number of stands for longer than they should? (Thereby reducing ground congestion during busy periods.)
Again not particularly ATC-related, I wonder what effect the changes will have to noise levels of people under the flight paths (new and old)...and how this will be reported in the press - scientific study vs. Mrs Miggins at No.42 who said "xyz"...on reflection I doubt there'll be any balanced media commentary about the changes to people at ground level!
Last edited by good egg; 5th Feb 2016 at 07:59. Reason: Contemplation
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Rapunzel's tower
Posts: 441
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Slight exaggeration as Canvey Island is about 18nm final for RW27. That'd actually be a shortcut on new route so could have been vectored I suppose. However one of the main points of the point merge transition is that aircraft don't need to be vectored...
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: T.C.
Age: 56
Posts: 275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Good Egg, good first post, both airlines and the airport want predictability, for fuel planning and passenger comfort ( not being strapped in and flying around for 20-30 miles at 4000ft) the airport for stand planning.
Yes the PM design means that less vectoring is required, however the TMA means that aircraft will arrive in bunches, this vectored may be required to ensure the sequencing legs and RMA are properly used.
Message me if you want more info.
Yes the PM design means that less vectoring is required, however the TMA means that aircraft will arrive in bunches, this vectored may be required to ensure the sequencing legs and RMA are properly used.
Message me if you want more info.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Rapunzel's tower
Posts: 441
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks nimmer, I'm fairly well versed in the project 
I thought the 2 holding stacks would sort out the order (when little short-cuts can't quite cut the mustard) and hence little need for vectoring? (Except for non-RNAV aircraft.)
Haven't noticed much holding at JACKO/GODLU but maybe that's due to reduced flow rates?
I thought the 2 holding stacks would sort out the order (when little short-cuts can't quite cut the mustard) and hence little need for vectoring? (Except for non-RNAV aircraft.)
Haven't noticed much holding at JACKO/GODLU but maybe that's due to reduced flow rates?