Help with some crazy NATS abbreviations
 

Hi all,
I am fully aware that I might get laughed at, but here's the deal...
I am a certified translator of English based in Warsaw, Poland. The reason for why I became a translator and not something more lucrative is because I know absolutely nothing about technology and such. Little did I know that courts in Poland don't care - I have been ordered (ordered, not asked...) to translate some ATC docs into Polish. Been at it for numerous...numerous hours now and somehow, thanks to the help of a pilot friend, I have managed to trudge through most of the terms. Finally got stuck on a a file called NATS-terminal control TC Provisional daily report. It's pretty wild, really with things like:
1. 03:35 BAW10 has suffered hydraulics failure. If not fully serviceable, will divert to either CC or FF (question: what are CC/FF?)

2. 06:28 Holding at 39 mins and TEAM reduced to 2/60 from 0700. LLTCWX reduced to reflect the reduction in LR and to assist in erroding airbourne holding (question here is: what is LLTCWX? Later on in comes up again in the following sentence: LLTCWX cap increase as air holding has reduced to 21 mins)

3. LRP 42 (no further context, no clue what this could stand for. Anyone...?

This is pretty long and I am sure I violated a ton of some unwritten forum rules and probably my questions will have you frowning with disdain...but I am desperate at this point. Please, before you chose to disregard this request for help, do keep in mind that it's a district court in some ominous eastern-European country that has ordered me to find these terms... ;-) I will much appreciate any pointers! And sorry again if I broke any rules here. Maja

CC, abreviated ICAO code for EGCC Manchester
FF, abreviated code for EGFF Cardiff
LLTCWX, broken down as follows, LL abreviated code for EGLL, Heathrow, TC Terminal Control. WX= Weather. Therefore reads Heathrow Terminal Control Weather. Cap = Capacity
LRP 42. Landing rate prediction of 42 per hour

Hope this helps

It does help me, indeed! Quite amazing actually, I guess I didn't believe these hieroglyphs can possibly carry any relevant meaning :)

So... (I know, this might be pushing it...), if I can bother you for yet one more clarification, how could I possibly interpret Heathrow Terminal Control Weather? As in, where it says that LLCTWX cap increased - does it mean that weather conditions are getting better and therefore more planes can land?

Again, amazing and thank you SO much! ;-)
Maja

I'm intrigued to know what a district court in an ominous Eastern European country would want with a NATS TC Daily Report ... and how they got it in the first place :}:confused:

Im intrigued how a moderator can call a country omnious no matter whats the reputation of that country. And let me figure it out for you since you obviously can't .
Someone sued an airline company cause of a large delay . The company blamed the ANSP . The court demanded the report from that day from one or more flights involved in that specific airspace , which NATS had to deliver .

There it is in 5 lines omnious moderator !

malakajin he was just quoting the Original Poster. I'd beware flaming a moderator in any forum, especially when you clearly haven't fully read the thread.

That's a dangerous tactic, no matter what country you're sitting in.

Well played Phil:D

Phil

You are right :ok:

One hopes the poster pays more attention to detail in his vocation than demonstrated here, especially if it is ATC. :O

But back to the protestations.

If the country is in the EU, then the airline passenger has rights to compensation under EU Regulation 261. There is no need to go to court. However, if the delay is due to bad weather (which it appears it is), then the airline can argue it is a circumstance not under their control and they do not have to pay the compensation. I would hope any court outside the EU would adopt similar sensible principles. If the passenger is suing a foreign ANSP for weather delays, I would say good luck with enforcing that one, and in this case, NATS is primarily subject to UK and European law, and not necessarily that of non EU countries where it does not operate.

Under the same jurisdiction, NATS would not necessarily have to deliver a report to a foreign court. They may chose to provide it to one of their airline customers though, to assist as part of their defence. Or it may have been provided through Eurocontrol who have overall responsibility for managing the ATFM network and regulations throughout the ECAC Region.

And finally, to assist you with the 'ominous' detail, here's what the original poster said:

:=

Now, that was obviously a joke with the name-calling. As in, he - he.... sorry to have caused such upheaval.

And yes, the answer is exactly that. Someone is suing an airline for a cancellation, and they probably don't believe that the reason for it was weather. I don't have the full picture and even if I did, unfortunately I probably would not be at liberty to reveal it.

So, with the LLCTWX in an actual sentence....? ;-)

Cheers,
Maja

No harm done :ok:

LLTCWX is the name of the Regulation applied by Brussels CFMU associated with a Traffic Volume or Airfield. It will normally then have the day of the month appended e.g. LLTCWX01. If it is amended then a letter is added e.g. LLTCWX01A.

This allows everyone to be able to refer to the correct Regulation specifically when making queries or changes.

Let me give a bit of context which makes it easier to understands this funny language.

The number of landings that an airport can handle in an hour depends on a number of factors. One of these factors is the weather, others are for example the staffing of the Air Traffic Control unit, the availability of runways (e.g. maintainance) etc)
When more aircraft fly to an airport than can be handled, Air Traffic Control will start to put aircraft into a holding. This is a place where aircraft fly circles to wait until it is their turn to land. If there are more planes arriving than can be handled for a long time, the number of aircraft in the holding increases, and the time than they have to fly circles does increase as well. This is inefficient because it costs a lot of fuel, it can become critical when they have to stay there so long that they start to run out of fuel, and if the airport suddenly needs to close down for whatever reason all these aircraft need to divert to other airports causing chaos/unsafe situations, especially when there are many of them.
In order to prevent these situations, Air Traffic Control assesses the situation regularly and makes an estimate of how many planes can be handled in the next couple of hours. Combined with the number of aircraft already holding to wait for their turn to land, ATC declares a capacity. This capacity is then sent to the Central Flow Management Unit in Brussels. CFMU then puts a so called Regulation into their system. In your example this is LLTCWX capaticity, meaning that London Heathrow Terminal Control has a capacity of only X aircraft per hour for weather reasons.
CFMU is also the unit that processes all European flightplans, so they know who is planning to fly to London Heathrow. They will count all the flights going to London and when they see that the number of aircraft are planning to fly to Heathrow exceeds the declared capacity, they start to issue slot delays to individual flights. This could for example mean that the flight from Frankfurt is told not to depart on its planned time, but wait for another 30 minutes. Unfortunately for the passengers they are now sitting in the aircraft on the ground and have to wait for 30 minutes, but it is better than flying circles for 30 minutes.

I wasn't flaming anyone by the way . I noticed when i read the post that OP said it first .And the thing with quoting ... oh well !! If I call my friend a **** , it doesn't give the right to anyone to do the same....

Many thanks!
 

Your replies have been of immense help to me and, possibly, to the sued airline as well :)
Maja