Bad day at Manchester?
 

Not pointing any fingers, just sharing an interesting link with friends ;)

YouTube - MAN/EGCC Manchester Tower Argument with Emirates Pilot

A five minute delay for a routine rwy inspection, I think Ek018 had every right to be hacked off.

To be fair to the Controller he DOES tell the Emirates the reason for the delay...he also explains that it's up to the Airport Authority when they do runway inspections and that there's nothing he can do about it.

Also, when asked to standby the Emirates continues to transmit on the frequency..oblivious to the fact that the controller is co-ordinating the weather avoidance turn that has just been made by the previous departure.

Frankly, i think the Emirates pilot comes across as a complete muppet...what a nightmare a five minute delay must be! :rolleyes:

I think the pilot has a right to be somewhat annoyed, his aircraft is sitting at the hold, ready to go only to be delayed for a minmum of 5 minutes because of an inspection.

What does a 777 burn at idle? I would reckon something along then lines of 12 tons per hour, so sitting at the hold would be burning a ton of fuel, just because a "routine" inspection was needed. When we have routine inspections, the take place between movements, vehicles off the runway when aircraft movements take place. Only when a priority inspection is needed do we delay aircraft.

Someone hasn't read the thread Listening to UK ATC Communications : the law.

Is it the airport authority that drove the requirement to totally stop movements on LHR's runways for the routine twice daily inspections or did that come from somewhere else?

Somewhere else :ugh:

We did the same.

As a controller I have to say it sounds to me very much like the controller was spoiling for an argument. He (or she!) went back time and again to keep the conversation going. Was the controller hacked off at losing some control of 'his' runway? Can't griz at the boss so took it out on the pilot? Whatever the reasoning behind it, it's hugely unprofessional for anyone to behave like this over the R/T. Controller winds the pilot up to FL500, pilot seething misses some vital check either on departure or on arrival back at EGCC on hearing same controllers voice.

Worst case? Distracted pilot spears in. With me on it. :uhoh:

As has been mentioned, landline is the place for this discussion. Even better, face to face, people get on better like that.

Already running, [in the Airports forum (Manchester)] with some fairly informative answers.
bb

A bad week for Manchester ATC. Not sure if anyone managed to see the BBC local news at lunchtime yesterday,but Fiona Bruce was upset because aircraft noise was spoiling the filming of Antiques Roadshow at Tatton Park.

Apparently she was expecting that flight noise would be "diverted," but to no avail.

Come on chaps, is nothing sacred. Spoiling The Roadshow and upsetting Fiona Bruce.

Shirley you can't be serious.

The controller firmly blamed MA and said he had no control over when they did it and they should make a complaint to the airport authority.
Something is wrong there. Either the inspections are, as they should be, flexible, or, they are at a set time and cannot be delayed.
Even after it's started they could have vacated let the aircraft depart and then continued.
Maybe the controller was just having a bad day, they are not immune.
Routine runway inspections are mandatory, however timing of them is flexible and should cause minimum disruption.

Sorry Call100 you're behind the times :)

Flexible runway inspections are things of the past at some airfields like MAN.
Health and Safety and the Concorde accident changed the thinking!

Anyway I hope the new procedures get reviewed and if this incident brings about a review then most ATCOs would welcome it.
Like the Emirates pilot ATCOs at MAN and NPC despair at the new regime as it causes a backlog in traffic that affects the Area Controllers as well.

From Grabbers;
He must have used so much fuel waiting that he was able to get that high!!! :}

Not behind the times actually:rolleyes: ...I work with a runway inspection regime second to none.....Another post clearly indicates that MAN Ops contact the ATC watch manager prior to the inspection to enquire about convenient times.....http://www.pprune.org/airlines-airpo...ml#post5697440
Therefore showing flexibility exists at MAN as at other airports.
We do 10 to 12 routine inspections per day on top of all the other inspections, Bird strike, surface change etc. I'm sure the flexibility is appreciated by both sides.
If you listen to the tape again there is nothing on approach and nothing behind him. The Emirates could have gone and the inspection done without disruption to anyone.
I'm sure it's been sorted at MAN now and everyone is happy and singing from the same hymn sheet..:)

Hi,

approx delay seemed to be 7 mins, 40kg per min with both engines at idle.

Shame its gets like that on the RT, a bad day for all concerned that hopefully got better as the day went on.

Rgds.

What the :mad: has H&S got to do with it?

Questionable attitude by the ATCO. Tea and biscuits with the Supervisor perhaps :E Having said that I understand his frustration. Many pilots have absolutely no idea what goes on in the Tower in terms of incoming/outgoing phone calls and the numerous co-ordinations which are continously going on. They see nothing and hear nothing and assume that the ATCO is up there picking his nose! However, it was no excuse for the ATCO to lose his composure so quickly.

Take a lesson from this guys, when an ATCO tells you to stand-by, it means he's busy doing something else equally important; so have a little patience and do just that.

Just a small matter of an EasyJet in front of him though or do they not count?

No, it was neither on approach or behind him. As they both went within a couple of minutes the controller could have delayed the inspection that long......

I am under the impression that at Manchester the decision for the runway inspection is undertaken by the Airport Authority. The controller cannot delay it to make his life easier.

There might have been nothing on final if the inbounds had been taken into the holds to provide the 5-minute gap, so there could have been quite a few on the APP freq just starting into the radar circuit, all also burning several t/hr.....

The inspections require six minutes.

The planned times are published.

The actual time is flexible (within reason) and is coordinated with the watch manager in advance to avoid/reduce disruption.

I could be missing something here ... but doesn't Manchester have Dual Rwy Ops .... normal mode of operation 1 for Arrivals and 1 for Deps?

Therefore no need to take into consideration any inbound traffic (unless non dependent dual rwy ops would be comprimised) and with nobody else taxiing out for departure, the most logical solution would be to delay a Rwy inspection by 2 mins rather than the EK dep for 5 mins.

Just a thought.

Manchester only uses both runways during peak periods. Otherwise it is normal to only use 23R/05L.

HTH

What does the Emirates say to the Easy at 5:30? I can't make it out.

He is asking for a pirep (pilot report) on the weather that was in the climb out after departure

Ah, thanks for that. I worked out it was weather related from the exchange later on, but couldn't decipher the initial request.

Cheers :ok:

Perhaps the request for a PIREP concerning the weather after departure was a factor in the Emirates pilots angst at being delayed for the runway inspection. Thunderstorms? Just a thought!

Hm, I suspect we've all had bad days, and allowed that to be conveyed very occasionally in transmissions. The Manc guy just kept on going with it. I, personally, wouldn't.

Yes, certain runway inspections are required, but in MY opinion, only when they can be reasonably accommodated in full. Otherwise, piecemeal is it.

That's the way it works at my place, and we all rub along with that theory quite amicably. :ok:

If the requirement is to have a more detailed runway inspection, lasting five minutes or whatever, to take place, wouldn't it make more sense to have two Ops vehicles to do the inspection. They could position themselves at either end of the runway and meet up in the middle, thereby reducing the delay to a/c by half. Just a thought.

daring theory...
 

Runnway inspections have alway fitted around traffic unless there were specific safety reasons to give them more priority. Runway inspections are one of the only regular events where vehicles come close to the runway. It was then seen that the majority of runway incursions and incidents involving vehicles were during runway inspection - runway inspection must therefore be dangerous.

Rather than looking at why these incidents were occuring and ensuring that everyone complied with the procedures already in place which have evolved over decades to work very well someone in an office in Manchester decided it would be much safer to mandate that all runway inspections should be completed all in one go (ensuring only one clearance to enter the runway) and that all arriving and departing traffic should be delayed in to a big bunch so that the controllers will be busy. This seemed like such a jolly wheeze that it was brought to a Middlesex airport near you with the arrival of a wave of new management brought in from Manchester along with the end to conditional clearances. It looks as though it will spreead further until the next clique of management have other ideas...

The controller in question appeared to me to be inviting official comment from UAE - perhaps with the motivation of getting silly rules recinded. Perhaps his motivation was lost in the exchange due to the communication limitations of the radio, but increased blood pressure via the RTF is never a good idea. Sometimes we do all have bad days though, so give the guy a break!

thanks for reading this far - its very cathartic to get rants like this off my chest. Almost makes me feel like there is chance of changing our silly systems

.
No, they are NOT...They are "advised".

The "Inspection" can take up to 20 mins......
To avoid "disruption"...Try talking to [ex] MACC ATCOS who have to hold the traffic miles away, especially when the Holds are full
The last "proper" Ops 3s left eons ago. The only one with any sense is R**, and he is often over ruled..
When ATC did the r/w inspections, there was very little delay...but money talks....unfortunately.

Forgive me but that sounds quite high for a major international airport that made a massive play of needing a new runway while they were hardly Gatwick-ing out the old one. Why is this?

When I was a "Runway Controller" [ATCA11] at Manch, I was instructed to do FOUR runs on the Active Runway...Up and Down to the Left/Right of the centreline and same again to the opposite side. Two mile runway x 4 equals eight miles. At the posted "Airside speed limit of 15MPH" I think is "about" the 20 min mark. that does not include stopping/circling to look at "suspicious" objects...dark stains, etc
I also did the Taxyways and aprons...:ok:

The "scheduled" runway inspections are based on a six minute run at a speed of approx 30 mph.

Prior to a sked inspection ops3/checker should currently be talking to the watch mgr 30 mins before to allow suitable planning and to be advised when a suitable actual time is available.


The normal scheduled inspections do not usually take 20 minutes on a runway... with two exceptions:

in the middle of the night when nothing is actually moving there is a detailed inspection which also involves driving up and down all the RET's/crossing points, shoulders etc... that one can take 20 mins .. but there's nothing actually using the runway at the time, not really difficult at night to find the time ... if there is it's broken off and resumed :=



The only time that might happen during daytime ops is if during an inspection something untoward is found.... but in that case it's technically a suspension of ops on that runway until it's declared OK again.


There are usually quite a few other inspections/bird runs which take place ... these runs can (and are) quite often be piecemeal and off/on...... but most of those doing the runs try to check the relevant traffic before calling up and will often use a phrase such as "traffic permitting" etc.

If, for example, a run is required for specific bird control/poss hazard etc then this again is usually identified in the call.


Any current watch manager/tower controller at EGCC knows all this already .....

wiccan I'm afraid your info is very out of date ... R** is actually ops1 these days and these are his requirements.

Personally I don't mind either way if it's one go or piecemeal .. that decision is for others to make.

I can also see that a/c may end up in the hold .. well that's for the folks that make the decisions :suspect:

I've pointed out before there is a very simple local process for this being addressed if it really is a problem ... the procedures have already been modified this way before.

30mph? Buy faster cars and employ better drivers :P.

:D


It's been decided that apparently that gives a reasonable balance between time vs spotting things ..... :}

Fortunately our duty officers can spot things driving more than twice as fast :P

Wow .... have to say I'm a bit surprised at that speed for an inspection... :ooh:

Debris or stuff fine ... that's generally OK to spot but how would you pick up on the start of surface deterioration or AGL fittings ....... :confused:

spotting this stuff at the first signs of a possible problem allows it to be monitored and an early repair scheduled to avoid a more serious issue or disruption.

I agree a very quick run would work for checking wet/damp/dry or obvious FOD.