Today at EDI and always....
 

I felt sorry for the ATCO this afternoon at EDI.
He was under pressure from all sides. There were light aircraft coming and going, there were 6 or 7 jets/turboprops trying to leave AND worst of all a bloody Calibrator flying the WRONG way up 24 when 06 was in use, which has caused idiotic delays.

Now what I don't understand is:

Why did the "person in authority" whomever it may have been, pick the busiest and most unpopular time to caliberate the ILS?
Why could it not wait for an hour or so, when everyone would have been gone????? Why Why Why???

Why is it that always at EDI the controller waits until the landing aircraft almost vacates, before issuing a line-up clearance to the next waiting/eager aircraft? Why? And... often says "be ready for an immediate"???? Why can WE always see these things coming but "they" can't? It's most frustrating to us knowing that the next aircraft on approach will be tight and he/she COULD have lined us up earlier. Don't they think/anticipate or what then???

That's enough for today, more tomorrow!

mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmoist

eastern wiseguy + HEATHROW DIRECTOR

Both of you are out of order as neither have given even a smidgen of a reply to quite an irritating situation at EDI as moist is not the only one to feel frustrated about the lack of "rhythm" at EDI.

Remember, we operate into 3 other fields each day potentially as you just sit at the same office day in day out. You pick up habits from one another and it doesn't half come through the "operation" quite transparently.
We get to experience the difference daily and thus have the gauges to judge "your" performances. Unfortunately moist is quite right.

eastern wiseguy -

I thought that moist has actually made THAT point inasmuch as saying that the ATCO was being worked too hard by the situation he's found himself in:

Not blaming the chap but questioning the validity of a possible stupid decision to caliberate the ILS at that very time by someone else!

Edited this thread to remove the pointless banter which always follows pointless 'spelling police' posts.

POLICE

Remember also that we see different operators day in and day out. Some of our judgements and instructions are based accordingly :E

Some tell porkies about their indicated speed (must be a 20 minute turnaround thing), some native English speakers can't, some can't be trusted to follow published tracks (an aircraft equipment problem we are told), some immediate departure pilots then want to sit on the runway for a few minutes, and so on and so forth.

All that can be said is that there are levels of performance at both ends of the scale and on both ends of the mike. It's just life.

Seems we have all been edited ......my previous posts will now be removed ....Stelios maybe if you had tried that approach rather than the inflammatory approach the situation could have been discussed in a civil fashion .

I've only just seen this thread and already all the juicy stuff seems to have been deleted!

Can't comment on the specific case, but instead of lining one up in a tightish gap, I've found it often worth waiting a few extra seconds to see just how fast / long the previous lander touches down, ie if it's going to make a particular (or the only!) turn-off. This always was the case if the difference was between a go-around for the next inbound, or saving 2 minutes for a waiting departure, no matter how eager to roll!
Naturally this depends on spacing, wind, aircraft type etc. Friends who fly commercially admit that there is a perceived difference over what's acceptable, depending upon whether you're lining up and ready to expedite, or winding back to minimum approach speed and waiting for a landing clearance.....

As for the Calibrator - ILS's don't actually need any calibration at all. The aircraft is employed to travel round the country providing live TRUCE training for ATC staff....

Just a couple of points.

The current calibration of the 24 localiser is not a normal inspection but because it is a brand new installation. It has taken 2 full days to complete ( therefore holding off for a hour would not have made any difference.) Therefore the decision was made to do it at the weekend rather than 2 consecutive weekdays.

Also dont forget that until the shiny new control tower becomes operational, the controllers at EDI cannot see the 06 end of the runway. Landing a/c disappear behind the terminal building at about 1 mile final and do not re-emerge until the midpoint of the runway. Given these circumstances it is forbidden for the controllers to use conditional clearances and should the SMR be out of service ( as it has recently) cannot instruct an a/c to line up until the lander becomes visible to the controllers eye halfway down the runway.

Hope thats helped to clear a couple of points up.

Apologies - my comment was intended to be humorous. However, may I respectfully suggest that far more would be gained if the originator took time to visit Edinburgh Tower for a few hours to appreciate the ATC problems? There are reasons why certain procedures are employed and Wheelybin has detailed them. Perhaps now we may be spared the next instalment of Mr Moist's rantings?

it would be very simple for ATC in EDI to send an e-mail to the airline ops rooms in EDI entitled.

'How to get the best out of EDI ATC'

in it you could mention all the usual point raised in these topics. As an EDI based Pilot I reckon it'd stop half the guys moaning if they understood the limitations on ATCO's and the airport itself.

most of the base captains / crew managers would be only too happy to pass it on.

as for the bickering. well done, very helpful. I'll give you all a hand putting your toys back in your pram when you've finished...:ok:

Although I don't fly into EDI frequently I have always found ATC helpful and efficient. Keep up the good work.

Scotsman;

I agree with you that the facility should have a users meeting to let folks know what is going on, however, having been to a few of these, I expect that they may have and that airline management may not have gotten the word out to the troops. But even if not, how many flight crews have bothered to take the time to stop by the facility to see what actually goes on??? In the US it is almost criminal to see how few "professional" flight crews take the time to come and learn a little bit about the other side of the mike. We do classes at our facility for pilots and for the most part, it is all GA pilots wanting to learn more and be more professional. I would say that 99.6% of the paid pilots couldn't be bothered to come out on a day off. We see a lot of this at safety conferences that we put on too... I see far many more controllers going to these events than I do pilots.

regards

Scott H. Voigt
NATCA Southwest Region
Safety Committee Chairman

Wheelybin

Thanks for your informative reply.

It seems there are some others that are simply there to snap at anything!

I for one didn't realise you couldn't see the 06 end and that you are not allowed to issue conditional line up clearances. That is a reply I can live with.

Not sure about the calibration at exactly that time, but I am sure it wasn't the ATCO's decision.

I look forward to the big tower's improvement!

mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmoist

Delays
 

On the subject of EDI, whats with all these departure delays first thing in the morning?

Stopp The Climb, I am sure my friends and colleagues at Scottish control will correct any inaccuracies here but this is my understanding for the reasons for the delays in the morning.
A resectorisation Of the Talla sector has taken place, such that at the busiest times of day a new sector called Talla North opens up. Unfortunately there were no new frequencies available for this new sector to utilise and so instead they use a frequency that is normally used to split the Dean Cross high sector.
The Talla North sector is considered the busier of the two during the morning rush and so gets priority over use of the frequency. However Dean Cross is almost as busy dealing with the Southbound flow and so Scottish Control impose Minimum Departure Intervals (MDI's) between successive departures from Edinburgh via the Galloway sector. These are usually of the order of 1 a/c every 4 minutes. These MDI's take priority over any slot time that your flight might hold but does not mean that the slot can be ignored. Therefore if the MDI restriction puts your flight outside of the normal slot tolerance then a new slot must be negotiated.
What with this, remote holding, restrictive pushback procedures and trying to work out whether it is more expeditious to get a Talla departure away between 2 Galloways, all within minutes of first arriving on shift, if you listen very carefully to the frequency you can just about hear the ground controllers brains trickling out of their ears!

Well said Scott-same deal over here.

Be nice though if we can also get on a flight deck once in a while without having to give 3 years notice!!

Wheelybin

Good explaination of the rather ridiculous Talla sector split we have at the moment. The frequency of Talla North is shared with Deancross North (not high) so it is a case of fingers crossed that we don't need both sectors open at the same time. How they've got away with this half-arsed arrangement God only knows.

However, the MDIs you are talking about are applied because the Galloway sector, which handles the bulk of the outbound traffic, gets overloaded. Splitting the deancross sector would not normally make any difference. Galloway sector is, in effect, full between 0700 and 0730. It can handle 42 movements per hour but the morning rush can put most of these 42 movements in half an hour. Hence slowing the departure rate to spread 'em out a bit.

Splitting the Galloway sector needs to be looked at. Hopefully they will do it right this time :rolleyes:

This issue of MDI's has always puzzled me, the traffic is forecast to flow through the relevant sectors at the relevant times, therefore flow control should be applied if the potential for exists.

Therefore is this NATS was of meeting its destination with regards to NATS attributable delays by imposing MDI's which are no doubt not counted as delays since they are not measured by Brussels

Not exactly Radar707. A sectors capacity is measured in movements per hour ( as in Balix's example of 42 movements per hour for the galloway sector). If demand for a sector exceeds its capacity over that hour, then a flow restriction is imposed. Therefore by the very nature of this calculation a flow restriction must apply for a minimum of sixty minutes.
However it can sometimes occur ( such as during the morning rush) that a large number of departures are expected through a sectors airspace within a short period of time.( Say 36 a/c in 30 minutes). Although the number may be less than the sectors capacity, the concentration of flights demands a restriction be applied, hence MDI's are used. MDI's are therefore always applied for less than 60 minutes, typically 30 to 45 minutes. This is a practice that has been going on for many years at Southern airfields. It is just that with the growth of traffic North of the border we are starting to see them more frequently here too.

Radar 707: Wheelybin has adequately explained the reasons for MDIs. However, your apparent disapproval of this method of managing traffic intrigues me.

If we can use MDIs or speak to neighbouring units and get them to give us radar headings or miles in trail or whatever, and thereby protect the sectors whilst moving the traffic with minimal delay then surely that is a good thing. A flow restriction is actually a very blunt tool, for the reasons Wheelybin has already explained. If we were to put in a flow measure to achieve the same result as is managed with an MDI you would probably find the delays are much larger than a 1/3 or 1/5 MDI will create. The workload for ATC and Airline ops in managing the slots would also increase.

Traffic management is developing, and flow restrictions are only one of the methods. It has nothing to do with fudging it to meet delay destinations, and everything to do with balancing the demands of the airlines with the limitations of the sectors and protecting the controllers from overload.

Minor point here..

Sector Capacity = The absolute limit

Target Sector Flow (TSF) = What can be safely handled by the sector team leaving room for emergencies etc.

TSF is (or should be) the "limiting factor", not the absolute capacity of a particular sector.

There are no prizes for those that raise rates above TSF and then have incidents occur.

BEX