Airfield departure times
 

Can somebody educate me please! (Someone from EBBR flow control would be ideal.)
Situation - Departing Spanish airport yesterday for flight to UK. No slot (ctot) issued.
Passengers arrive early for 1200 departure. Perfect!
Arrive at holding point at 1153. No other aircraft about. Given a time check and told to hold position as earliest airborne time is 1200.
I understand that if we had a slot of 1200 we must depart between 1155 and 1210.
But why do we have to wait till 1200 if we have no slot? I thought plus or minus 15 minutes was the requirement in this situation?
Only seems to happen in Spain. Why? What are the actual rules?

Go to the thread "Spanish ATC-Feedback requested" and read item 51

Because you have to comply with your slot at 12:00. Can depart -5 +10 min only if there is TFC using the rwy, that window of 15 min is used only by control.

I think he said in this situation there was no Slot issued.

Working tower I've received releases for aircraft with the proviso "not before time xxxx", could be whats happened here and the time only coincidently matches the fp time.

Thanks for the replies.
With respect - you have not understood my question.
There was NO slot - so why the delay?

Spainish ATC are sticking absolutely rigidly to thou shalt no take off before your STD slot or no slot. My understanding of this is that they are saying that in the absence of a CTOT your STD becomes your CTOT. Not sure if this in an official rule or something the Spanish have made up, probably the latter.

I was told by someone, so this is second possibly third hand, that Spanish ATC management were fighting the work to rule by totally enforcing the work to rule. I.E. Instigating discipilinary action should they be broken. Hence no directs or earlier departures. "Overloading sectors with unplanned or extra movements" I believe is the official reason.

I just assume my earliest airborne is now my STD. If you're early just tell the pax it's the dirty dagos again and have another cuppa !

I've given up getting annoyed by the Spanish it is a pointless exercise they aren't going to change no matter how irrate you get with them. All you do is wind yourself up which is exactly what they want. As Clint would say "Don't give the ******** the satisfaction !".

If no slot issued, you must still take off +/- 15min either side of your filed departure time, but the Spanish seem to make up their own rules!

CheektVisual,
Thank you for that. What I need is a link to the actual, official rules for this situation. If the Spanish are so intent on complying with regulations then they need to know what they are - and so do we!

Chevvron,
+ or - 15 mins is my understanding of the situation. Seems to apply everywhere except Spain. Can you be a real star and guide me to the official document. Thanks.

Splitduty.... There are many reasons why your "problem" could have occurred. Local traffic, for example. Just because the runway is empty does not mean anyone can just take off. Most times one can, but there will, inevitably, be times when other traffic will dictate what happens. Where I worked there were numerous aerial activities which sometimes delayed our traffic - military surveys, police and ambulance helicopters, Royal flights, even loonies doing sky-diving! Crews never questioned us because they knew would get them away as fast as poss.

I know that things are different in other countries, but where I worked there was always a perfectly good reason for how the traffic was handled and the only people who knew the reason were the controllers.

splitduty: it's in the UK AIP, in the ENR section I think. I'll try to have a look but I'm FISOing at the moment.

HD,
Had the Spanish Controller explained any of the hypothetical reasons you mention above that would have been acceptable.
However, he made it perfectly clear that we were not departing because our FPL time was on the hour and as it was time 53 when we arrived at the holding point, we had to hold.
I am trying to ascertain if he was complying with the rules or not.

It's just time for the guess what, next time ask them for the reason

ENR 1.9 page 2 para 5.1. sub para e. says it's a European requirement that any modification of EOBT more than +/_ 15 mins shall notifiy the change to CFMU through EFPS, which implies if you're within +/_ 15 you can go.

Blissbak - we did ask the reason and were told our earliest departure time was on the hour because that was our FPL departure time. I repeat - no slot.

Chevvron - thank you again for your efforts. What I now need to find is some more detail :-
1) is this purely a British procedure,
2) does the + or - time apply to off blocks time or to an airborne time?

I think this may be the crux of the problem. I am hoping someone with flow control knowledge will supply the answer and reference to this.

splitduty,
Your scheduled depature was at 1200, you took off at 1200...

You did fly your flight plan route to the French entry point, got a 450NM direct to the UK entry point, which saved you a bit less than 1 min, got another direct with UK, which saved you another minute.

Then you had to turn once or twice for the sequencing at arrival (here, you lose 2 mins)... and you're just on time to see a departing plane vacate your gate, for him to depart just on time...
This is a part of the big picture.
That's the way flow management works.
With or without CTOT. Your flight is counted, even though not slotted.
If you're too early on an almost overloaded sector, then slot allocations will be implemented for those who are still on the gate. One of them could be the one who is at your gate...

If you're early, you will probably have to wait on arrival. For your gate if you're on the ground, for the runway if you're still airborne.


PS : I reckon there's a +/- rule in every CFMU country. At least, there should be.

BrATCO,
I thought for a moment you were agreeing with the Spanish operation until your PS comment that all CFMU countries should have a + or - departure rule.
That is my point entirely - we were not allowed to depart early. Why not?

I would hazard a guess it's just Spanish controllers annoyed with being shafted by their employers and trying to make a point.

The +-15' is not British but a IFPZ procedure applied to the EOBT, thus your taxi must be in accord and your departure within ETOT and by any chance not earlier than EOBT -15'.
If you wonder why, that's 'cause CFMU process your flight according the time you give him and the system decide whether you need to be regulated or not, any time the schedule is not respected the system got ******.

My guess, maybe spanish require you to be airborne exactly at your ETOT .....:sad:

Splitduty,
I don't agree, nor disagree. I just wouldn't like being in their shoes.

You complain about Spanish service... wait for SESAR and its semi-automated control system. I forecast that the rule will be +/- 1 min all over Europe, otherwise the system will screw.
Don't worry, this is not for tomorrow.

Guys,
Thanks for all the replies. I understand all the possible reasons why our Spanish friends might behave the way they do - but that is not good enough.
I need to know with what authority they act the way they do. Can a Spanish controller please advise where it is written that no aircraft can depart before its FPL time? Where are your operating procedures coming from? Are you complying with them and if not, why not?

I'm a radar ATCO. The rules have changed many times lately and I'm tired of rereading all the changes so I tend to overlook the aerodrome parts and focus on what I really need to know (APP and en route), so I won't answer your question.

However, so that you get an idea of AENA's attitude, when I came to work last monday there was a new sheet of paper in the APP position titled "Report of non-compliance with the SID procedures of Spain's AIP for LExx". It must be filled EVERY time an aircraft doesn't fly the full SID and at the end of the day it must be attached to the superviser's daily report folder.
We must write the time, call sign, reason (only four possible reasons to select: traffic separation, meteorology, navaids calibration and air works, no option for the "we're running a bit late, any direct available?") and comments.

So I wouldn't be surprised if my twr colleagues are also being forced to fill a similar paper everytime an aircraft doesnt comply with the exact departure time or CTOT.

So yes, we are working to rule... forced by the company to do so and being called to the office if we don't.

aldegar, that's interesting and thanks for the information.

As professional aviators and controllers our lives seem to be plagued by more and more bureaucratic nonsense, more often than not spewed out by someone in the EU.

Roll on the Revolution - Orwell must be looking down on us and laughing or maybe even weeping.

Aldegar,
I thank you as well for your reply.
What is now required is a similar response from one of your ADC controllers confirming that they act in accordance with the rules when they delay departures in similar circumstances to the situation I was in.
Anybody?

You "gents" do know that the UK AIP does not apply in Spain? check the spanish one, its all in there. One has never been able to depart before their EOBT in Spain as long as ive flown there.

CancelIFR,
I have spent ages trawling through the Spanish AIP! I can`t find it. I need the reference. My very first post said `I need to be educated`. I still do.
But nobody seems able to give me the refernce!.

splitduty,

I worked in a twr from 2000 to 2008. Back then we had an internal document from our regional flow office (which management posted all around the twr) stating two things: The first one, that if there is no departure sequence all acft must depart at the exact CTOT time (can't make use of the -5/+10). The second one, that no acft can depart before the EOBT time, the explanation given for that was that the taxi time couldn't have a negative value. I don't remember if there was anything about it in the spanish AIP.

But I still haven't answered your question, because as I said before I'm not updated, I'm just telling how things were before but changes have been going on.

splitduty,

I'm still trying to wade through some Spanish legal documents posted on another thread. It's heavy going, but as far as I can make out Spanish controllers are now hung out to dry by AENA for any action or decision they make that results in an irregularity of any sort. This is regardless of whether the incident happens in their airspace or further along the line. So let's imagine the controller who made you wait had been a good egg and cleared you for take off when you arrived at the holding point. You are now 7 minutes early. So some time later you arrive at a very busy sector boundary 7 minutes before they are expecting you and this contributes to an overload. When complaints are made AENA trace your flight and find you departed early. Who gets shafted for causing the overload? Under the new rules it's the poor Spanish controller who generously allowed you to depart before schedule. As BrATCO said, CFMU calculations are based on FPL departure times. Depart early or late and these calculations (and all other flights) get screwed. So the only way for Spanish controllers to safeguard their jobs is to take every conceivable action to ensure their @rses are covered, even if this means inconveniencing flights under their control. There is probably no particular Spanish regulation saying you can't depart before your FPL dep time, just the controller worried there could be a come-back if he let you go early. Making you wait till 1200 made sure he cleared his backside and kept his job.

Aldegar,
Interesting. Do you think that Spanish tower controllers are still complying with outdated rules. If they are then they are not complying - and I thought complicity is what they demand.

Radarman,
I have been expecting this excuse from somebody at some time.
If I had been subject to a CTOT, I could accept your argument. However, I was on an UNREGULATED flight. If, indeed, there was a problem with overloads further down the line I would expect to be issued with a CTOT. Is that not the whole point of flow control? So I cannot accept your reasoning.
Other countries do not appear to have a problem with unregulated aircraft departing before FPL time.
So, I am left thinking:_
1) Are the Spanish complying with some rule that nobody else needs to comply?
or
2) Are standards so low they do not understand what they are doing?
or
3) Are they simply being bloody minded and deliberately trying to disrupt flights, costing operators time and money?

Which ever way you look at it, seems like non compliance to me!

CFMU Handbook

Therefore I read that as no requirement to file a DLA or CHG message with IFPS (and thus CFMU) if you are +/-15 minutes from EOBT. Outwith the 15 minutes, or if you have a slot, then you do have to make the changes known as per the CFMU Handbook. However, it does not directly mention whether the CTOT has a similar tolerance.

Now, this is something which can be used and is a CFMU 'rule', so it will keep the Spanish happy. The aircraft is allowed to taxy 15 up to minutes early (with no slot) as per 5.1.4 above. ATC should therefore be able to work out how early the aircraft might be able to depart and can 'easily or efficiently' co-ordinate this with FMP/CFMU. Simple. You make a call and then the Flow people give you the 'permission' you need to let the flight go early. Everyone is in the loop, especially in the wider ATCFM sphere, and the pilot is happy. It's called providing a service. AENA, the Government, and anyone else with an axe to grind can't do anything against the ATC controller. He has complied with the European wide procedures. If Spain (AENA or the Government) don't want to abide by the European procedures laid down, then don't bother to be part of the CFMU system. Sort it out yourselves. That would of course be a very backward step, but if you're in the game, you should play by the rules which are available to you in order to provide the best and most efficient service to your CUSTOMERS.

Flight plan adherence:

Why a campaign and even a trial ?

http://www.eurocontrol.int/gallery/d...ent/spacer.gifWhen investigating those occurrences described earlier, it is found in most cases that the additional flights entered the concerned sector as a result of: http://www.eurocontrol.int/gallery/d...ent/spacer.giful.firstlevelbulletlist, ul.secondlevelbulletlist {list-style-image:url(/gallery/design/content/square02.gif);} .firstlevelbulletlist {padding-left: 30px} .secondlevelbulletlist {padding-left: 20px}

• not flying at the initial requested flight level (RFL); or,
• departing at times different from the original estimated off block time (EOBT) or calculated take off time (CTOT); or,
• arriving in the sector earlier or later than originally planned; or,
• deviating from their original planned route; often direct routeing (DCT).

You can see the rest of the info in Eurocontrol website:
EUROCONTROL - Flight Plan & ATFCM Adherence

So the departing time should be as acurate as possible. And the exact time is the most accurate possible!

10W,
My understanding of the situation exactly. Just need clarity on what time I can get airborne.

Akhorahill,
You still do not understand the situation. Let me put it in a practical situation for you.
1) A CTOT flight must be airborne within -5 to +10 of the slot . No problem.
I understand and am happy to comply with that
2) An UNREGULATED flight can TAXI + or - 15 mins from FPL time. As I am sure you are aware taxi times at most airfields vary. EG.Malaga. Taxying for RW13 takes far longer than taxying for RW31 from the GAT. So I comply with the rules and am off blocks 15 mins early. Taxi time is short and I arrive at the holding point 5 mins later ready to depart. There are no other aircraft around, I have NO CTOT, I am an UNREGULAED flight - so why does the Spanish ATCO appear to take great delight in making me wait another10 minutes for departure. It would not happen anywhere else in our European CFMU region, so why in Spain? That is the simple question I asked many posts ago and nobody can give me a simple and definitive answer. OVER!

Splitduty,
There could be no purely-technical reason for your departure "on time" from Spain, but you might find a part of the answer here :
http://www.pprune.org/atc-issues/459...ml#post6667292

Not sure they take any delight...

10W,

Can't fault your impeccable NW European logic, but it doesn't apply much when you get south of Paris. Unfortunately Spain, along with some other Mediterranean characters, sees compliance with international regulations as optional. Very nice to have the rules to hide behind when they suit you, but otherwise ignore. There are pages of commercial and business EU regulations which we Brits slavishly follow, only to see our fellow Europeans shrug and carry on doing things their own way. Same applies to aviation unfortunately. Seems to be directly proportional to the amount of garlic and olive oil in the local cuisine. :E

Yes, it should be as accurate as possible. So Spanish controllers should be picking up the phone and organising improvements with FMP/CFMU when they can. The flight can then depart early and CFMU has an accurate 'revised' CTOT. If your workload permits, why wouldn't you ? Or maybe your management can't read and understand the simple procedures in the CFMU Handbook ?

And I don't buy an excuse that a 'Royal Decree' won't let me comply with CFMU rules. If the 'Royal Decree' tells you to disregard what is published for the CFMU Region, then Eurocontrol and the European Parliament needs to start taking serious action against the Spanish Government or AENA. Perhaps withholding Route Charges for a period might be appropriate until the apparent Spanish non-compliance is dealt with ? Or Spanish Controllers can be proud of their profession and hold up the CFMU Handbook in front of their management and ask why they are not allowed to comply with the rules which are published ?

Let's also be clear about capacity in the system. There is approximately 30% more capacity available than the declared Traffic Volume. That is there to allow for emergencies and other contingencies, as well as to cater for the fact that traffic delivery is not an exact science. Even when a volume is regulated, the aircraft entering it can (simply by the rules of the system) be anywhere within a 15 minute 'slot' around the calculated time of sector entry and this is deemed acceptable by the system. Unregulated traffic should therefore be expected under the same criteria. Until we get precise 4D flight management, in the ground and the air, that's the way it has to be.

Can we just be clear on this? If the reason for your being 15 mins or more later than EOBT is a CFMU imposed slot, you don't need to send a DLA message. If that slot is subsequently cancelled, leaving you unable to get off blocks within 15 mins of the original EOBT, then you do need to send a DLA.

Hadn't seen this thread before

First of all, spanish regulation regarding departure times is exactly the same as in civilized Europe (that is ETOT +/- 15) ... since aproximately two months.

Don't nail me on the exact date but around the last week of June there was a norm stating that in Spain no aircraft could be airborne before its EOBT.

As an example, if you are in an airport with 5 min taxitime and you filed ETOT at 1200 then in Spain you could not have been airborne before 1155. In the rest of Europe and nowadays also in Spain the earliest airborne would be 1145.

From a strictly normative point of view the ATCO did therefore not act correctly.

The above is probably the sentence you wanted to read and I must stand to it but would like to offer 2 caveats:
1) As Heathrow Director already said, there could be other reasons for the delay.
I do not know the specifics about the airport where you had this issue, perhaps it is customary in order to avoid conflict with whatever other issue... nevertheless I take from your posts that you already questioned the ATCO to verify that.

2) ATC situation in Spain is not what it should be, not by a long way. Do you know how I was informed of that regulation change? By an RYR pilot who also was not precisely happy to have his departure delayed.
We had recieved about 2 months earlier an internal memo from AENA in which the change of procedure was mentioned, but it did not include any fixed date and in any case we took it as yet another internal change. Since there was a written norm stating otherwise we asked for clarification stating that obviously between a company norm and spanish law we would follow the latter.
Never heard again of that untill that conversation with the pilot and afterwards it took me about an hour to get confirmation of that change.

Does this excuse the delay you suffered? Not really but it does offer explanation on how this deficiences in service may arise... other than the controller simply trying to overcompensate an acute inferiority complex.

Let me apologize on his/her behalf and in any case I would ask you for some patience. If this should happen again I kindly ask you to ask precisely why you are being delayed and to inform the atco if the explanation offered does not apply to you ... prefereably not on the main frequency. It will probably not help you but might be of value to the next flights when the atco has time to reflect on what you said.

And we try to do so, but AENA has taken away even that. All the flow management decisions are now taken in an office in Madrid, and not in the Ops Room. Surprised?

That´s in its way already. About two months ago two spanish controllers were in the EU PETI Comission to speak for us about the situation in Spain. They took note and submitted the issue to the EU Parliament for an investigation. But the EU is slow, and we (and you) have to deal with this everyday.

I definetely would vote for you.

We do that almost everyday with no effect. Any other suggestion?

You should see how AENA determines the sector capacities here. Let´s say they are... "imaginative".

You are completely right, and no controller should be pursued or menaced because of that. Agree?

Best regards.

Thanks for the further information Daermon ATC and Sonnendec. You are truly in a poor situation, thanks to your management and government. It is indeed a shame that the European beaurocracy which could help you and the customers is such a slow and impotent beast :(

Bookworm, you are right, but the scenario being discussed was for a non regulated flight. :ok:

It was your ", or if you have a slot," that confused me. Sorry if I misunderstood.