Holding into Gatwick
 

Why has there been so much holding into LGW this summer? Lovely cavok days seem to produce up to twenty minutes and even quiet periods produce entering the hold at 120 or higher and up to ten minutes as we descend in the hold? On all these occasions the director has been earily quiet!!
Comments from the other side please.

A lot to do with the airport authority dictating that departures have priority over the inbounds, thus the majority of time it is 8 mile approach spacing.

The tower controllers are still very good at changing the spacing but are hamstrung by process and GIP. Sometimes the best we get is alternate gaps of 6 miles then 8 miles.

Before this we provided 6 mile spacing at busy times thus sharing the pain between inbounds and out bounds, obviously larger or smaller gaps were provided at high inbound or outbound flows.

Unfortunately this is not the SOP anymore.

All to do with runway utilisation.....and GIP (Gatwick owners) trying to increase it's value before selling it on.....

A deliberate ploy - maintaining an airborne delay gives you a constant supply of aircraft to achieve max runway capacity.

Let the airlines pay for the fuel.........

Bl**dy hell, we used 7 mile gaps at EGCC back in the 1980s. I think they now use about 4 or 5, without the link taxiway geography that 'KK have.
This is one of the problems you get when APP and ADC are sitting 70+ miles apart.

Nimmer has it spot on, Zooker I don't understand your argument!

Nimmer , I am surprised that the airport is prioritising departures as there also seems to be an increasing amount of delays at the holding points on the ground.We used to factor that arriving at the runway with a slot for departure meant getting away ahead of the rest of the queue but that doesn't seem to work any more and it is not uncommon to be number ten or higher for departure.
It would have been nice for the airport owners to inform the based airlines of the change in policy.
We are encouraged by the airline to single engine taxi and this process can take up to seven minutes to get the second engine going and ready for take off .(2 min start and a 5 min warm up).It would be helpful if we knew where we were in the queue and an approx line up time as we taxi out to help our planning.

Nimmer your right but only for the first rotation. Otp is a big factor in this plus if the aircraft dont get airbourne then theres no stands for the first set of arrivals.

Tubby, this summer gatwick has broken its own world record 4 times. The summer has been exceptionaly busy compared to last and its only going to get busier. The airport has scheduled back to back 55 hours, at points during the day. With schedule slip this regularly means constantly busy hours through out the day. Aircraft are also not as expeditious as in previous years. An imediate take off used to mean the sound of engine theottles in the background with a read back, now some aircraft sit their for 10 seconds before rolling. Many used to land and make the first exit. Now to save breaks and or passenger comfort aircraft constantly roll to the second. Gatwick can operate tighter gaps but everyone has to play their part.

As for being number 10 at a hold, on 1 in 1 out thats 20 minutes. Which is usually no delay. You can usually see the order going ahead of you itd be prudent that as you approach the front of a que either number 3 or 2 you start your engines. Id like to think thats common sense.

Rest assured the guys in the tower and at tc are working as hard as they can to utilise the runway to its maximum and keep delays as low as possible. But in the future holding in the air and at the holding point will be higher. And to put it into context the next busiest single runway airport does over 450 less flights a day!

Er haven't they recently changed ANSP at Gatwick Airport (tower only, approach still at Terminal Control Swanwick).
I know the NATS controllers were 'ace'; I can remember arriving on a fam flight (when they were still permitted before 9/11), when we were at 4nm, they still managed to get 2 departures away ahead of us without giving us late landing clearance.

We brief where we will start the second engine based upon how many we think are at the hold or having asked atc.It is often difficult to see how many are at the hold and it is impossible to guess how many will arrive. It is not unusual to be told to be fully ready on reaching by atc and then spend ten minutes waiting when you get there.
The opposite applies when airborne. It is impossible to tell how many departures there will be, but only tobe told xx minutes delay.
I wonder how long it will be before you start hearing aircraft wanting to come out of the departure queue to go back on stand and refuel and how many aircraft you hear calling Min Fuel or declaring a Mayday Fuel?
I very much doubt that the airport owners care!!

TBH
What is this WR ? I can't seem to find it on GWR on-line edition !!

It is called "squeezing a quart into a pint pot". Gatwick is by no means unique in over ambitious scheduling by the airport owner. What might work in a computer model when everybody does what they are supposed to do at the time they are supposed to do it may not stand the test of the real world. Unfortunately ATC and pilots have to deal with the consequences.

I understand that, due to many complaints about noise for the westerly arrivals, the final approach spacing is one of the things currently under review.

In my opinion the Gatwick owners seem to be throwing their toys out of the pram after being turned down for a second runway and are creating this situation as a result. There has been a huge increase in enroute holding this summer (i.e. further out from TIMBA/WILLO) which is really only supposed to be used as a contingency, not for normal traffic. It has resulted in several not particularly pretty situations this summer.

As a regular operator here I find the insight of the actual controllers very welcome .

I agree holding delays inbound are particularly problematic this year.

The airlines have a lot to answer for as well ,it is pretty obvious that the airport is beyond its capacity , not its theoretical capacity , its actual sh1t happens capacity.

A 20 min delay at the hold to get airborne almost every time and several spins round the hold inbound are not indicative of an airport that has got it right .
There are a lot of deluded people in ATC management , Handling agent and airline management who seem to think that is they wish for something and rub the magic lamp it will happen .

I doubt any of them have ever sat in the tower or the front seat of an aircraft.

Current world record stands at 934 movements

If so, that's very impressive. LGW's previous record, set within the last couple of months, was 913 movements.

https://www.canso.org/controllers-ga...eir-own-record

Previous posters have hit the nail on the head. Quite simply, the airport is too busy. Next summer is only going to get busier. In the nicest, most favourable MET conditions we can push about 58-60 movements in an hour, provided everyone plays the game. To try and do this for 3 hours in a row about 3 times a day, every day for 4 months in the 'Great British Summertime' might work on a computer, but all of us at the coal face know the reality.

This is the first year I can remember TC and AC struggling with the amount of inbounds during some peak times. Bunching can and does happen. There is now an A380 movement 6 times a day which creates additional inbound delay. Last year we had an ADNID SID trial which increased the departure rate off of 26L as it could be used as an extra departure split. We didn't have that SID this summer, but the schedule had been increased from last years :D Due to the nature of the airport business model, it has extreme peaks and troughs in the traffic levels throughout the day, when bunching occurs, then the peaks almost become unmanageable without resorting to flow measures. All of these factors play their part. I'm surprised the airlines haven't had more of a go at the airport about the delays, because travelling into and out of the place as a passenger isn't a nice experience these days and I'm sure will lead to some pax perhaps looking at other airports like Southend or City to fly from soon.

If more punters want to travel from this airport, there are 3 options:-

1, For each flight, larger aircraft are used.

2, You make full use of the 1440 minutes that are available in each 24 hour period. (Pax may have to fly at unsociable times, but the M25 might be quieter at that time of day).

3, Build another runway.

It's not rocket-science.

Looking at the GAL board website, the limited aviation experience of those at the top is lamentable. Several have other jobs besides running the airport. At least one of the individuals lives in America. Hardly surprising problems occur.

P.S. What happened to 'Red'? He ran NATS for a few years. Interesting to note that the GAL HQ is called 'Destination Hose'. :E

ZOOKER
Limited aviation experience of those at the top is nothing new. It has been my experience throughout my 37 years in ATC. Wherever I've been it has been the same with ATC having to educate Management & struggle to get effective procedures & equipment & manning in place.
When you hear Management speak, sometimes it is just plain embarrassing ! Wishful thinking seems to take top place in their management strategy !

The Brotherhood

If by the next busiest single runway airport you refer to Stansted, then your record day is less than 400 more than their busiest day this year. If by all time it is 200 more. However, some GA airfields in the past have done huge numbers in a day.

kcockayne,
the first 10 years of EGNX seemed to work fairly well, I think most of those at the top knew what they were doing.
You're spot on about 'management-speak' though, some of the stuff I read on the company intranet, (not EGNX), was bizarre. I remember looking at a American management textbook in Waterstones around 2003, 2 years later all the gobbledegook it contained appeared at work.
It does amaze me how these top neddies wizz around from one organisation to another. I remember one CAA chairman asking what time our H24 airfield closed. 3 years later he was sending me cheques for my building-society share dividend.

GA airfields can rack up huge numbers - I worked at Kidlington in 1971 and we would rack up 1100-1200 movements in a day. Difference was that they were clockwork mice and not A380s!

I agree with comments on management - the top people, that is, not the watch managers. I have zero respect for any "manager" who has not worn an electric hat.

ZOOKER
Agree with what you say. I was principally on about the non-ATC, non-aviation draftees who, as you say, seem to drift from one job, which they know nothing about, to another, which they know nothing about - cocking everything up everywhere that they go in the process.
I have no particular gripe with any of the ATC management at the different places I worked.

The problem with these outside managers is they try to apply industrial methods to a safety based organisation, trying to cut costs and corners etc.

kcockayne,
With you 100%. The watch/unit management everywhere I worked were superb, it's when you go above that level that it all turns to jelly. It seemed to start in the late 1980s I think. And chevvron, yes, very much.

What a load of utter trash :ugh::hmm:

The ANSP has changed but the actual transition date isn't till next year.

Regardless, all ATCOs are trained to the same standard, regardless of their employer. Indeed, many of the ex NATS KK ATCOs will probably stay on at KK so just cause they begin working for a new ANSP their standards will drop? :bored:

No, Gatwick controllers could do this consistently. If the airport operators wish to change this, it's not ATCs fault.

Holding into Gatwick
 

Do they really use 6mile gaps to get a departure away?

1Charlie, it depends on the wind. With little or no wind 6 miles is about right, as the wind increases we'll decrease this. 5 miles is used regularly with a decent headwind. Sometimes even down to 4.5 miles with a strong enough wind.

Holding into Gatwick
 

I wish our approach controllers were so generous!

Just to clarify a point made earlier by the brotherhood, 8 mile gaps and larger is not just for the first rotation. Yesterday afternoon we regularly provided 8 mile gaps, a fair few 10 milers also. Plus we had the opportunity for 5 miles and 3 miles alternates, plus the 6 and 8 option also!!!

A real mixed bag as a single runway airport traffic dictates.

ADNID SID was brilliant gave the tower a minute split on Sam and ADNIDS(previously BOGNAS), TMA loved it as it facilitated a an earlier climb.Only complainer was a resident who loved in WARNHAM and stirred a lot of trouble, unfortunately the airport owners were not up for the fight and basically caved in, they did want bad press before they were awarded a second runway.

EGG ON FACES I PRESUME.

New ANSP, a few GAtwick controllers staying with NATS, a few joining DFS, 6 new DFS trainess started this month. Interesting times ahead.

Old thinking
 

Wow<><>all debate and those contributing appear to have been retired for at least 5 years.Your comments are welcome and you are respected,but random phrases about no respect for any non-atco managers speaks volumes of your individual lack of knowledge of atc today.

Keep up the comedy posts ! !

Oh and maybe the new self induced delays show a need for another runway....?(what have I said ?!)

As there are now going to be two different commercial enterprises involved how will departures and arrivals be prioritized? I would hope that landing traffic would have priority as they have less of a margin to play with, but equally departures need to know so that we can load an appropriate taxi fuel. If I were a LGW shareholder I would be spending money on more remote holds as the demand for them is only going to go up as airlines try to preserve their OTP.

Tubby, with the airport running at capacity for much of the day we have to balance inbounds and outbound as far as possible. There may be periods when inbounds have priority (and times when outbounds do) but if inbounds always had priority the whole place would grind to a halt because there'd be nowhere to park them....and yes, it's happened. As for remote holds, they're quite frankly often a pain in the arse for ATC. The extra rt workload they generate is a problem and more often than not the aircraft moving to remote during peak times is just delaying other traffic during the move. And withe airport trying to increase the movement rates you can expect more of the same to come....

Slight thread creep ... many thanks to LGW director for efforts on Friday 18th during Cb activity in the early evening .

I was one of the inbound EZY and we enjoyed great collaboration and professionalism from our Director controllers.

Many thanks guys .

Tma did not love the adnid. You are confusing that Sid with the doken from egll. That was loved. The adnid was 50/50 at best for tc South

I know that its nor permissible under existing rules, but what would be the effect of operating the existing two runways as close parallels similar to Seattle when it had two runways or half an Atlanta (when it had four) or LAX?

I suspect that the declared hourly capacity would be increased and delays would be as great.

I'm no expert, but I suspect if allowed to do that the movement rate would actually reduce because the space between the runways is not adequate to vacate one withouit infringing the other (never minding obstacle clearance slopes and other awkward factors).

Gatwick already has more passengers than Seattle in an airport half the size. I think they're doing alright with what they have.

Two A380s abeam each other on the two runways would have less distance between them than the aircraft's wingspan.