Carnage Matey!

The ATR was not on stand 125. That is where the ryanair was going. The ATR approval was "ryanair 737 to park on stand 125 behind you. When they're on stand push and start approved".

alwaysmovin:

You heard correctly. Worth noting that the Stobart ATR was not to push back until the ryanair was on stand, so had the BA been ready (as they are meant to be before requesting push) they should have been pushing back before the ATR and the ATR would not have been able to move until BA taxied from C. I believe that is what the controller had in mind.

I haven't heard the entire recording so my thoughts are just on the edited version......
Apparently it doesn't matter what actually happened anyway because in the Irish online world a decision has been made .... she is a hero and he is the villain....Its like a witch hunt . The lack of professionalism by the other pilots adds to an already tense/ stressful situation imho and I'm just glad nothing happened . I didn't actually find him too arrogant at all ( I'm am ATCO) , I just thought he sounded exasperated with the situation and I felt that she was the one who had accusatory tone to her voice . First blaming the other pilot and then blaming him. If he did take too long to push back then she was right to be annoyed however none of us will know until that is clarified in a report and in the meantime a guy is being vilified on social media without facts.

On a recording I just heard the BA got a clearance to push at time 0332 ( on the recording)..... The Stobart got a clearance to push a the recording time of 0428 and was told that there would be a RYR parking behind...... So the Ryanair had at that time not yet passed the Stobart or the BAW who would have been after the RYR ( traffic was passing right to left behind and the BA was to the left of the Stobart)..... At 06:20 the BA says he'd already been in discussion with ground about why his push had been stopped...... So in those 2 minutes the RYR still has to pass and the Baw has had his push stopped and has been in discussion..... So where do you get the 4 mins from? Unless the timings on the recording are also edited which I admit could be a possibility......
Also on another point in this recording the Stobart never seemed to acknowledge the later conditional clearance issued by the controller re the BA so maybe they didn't actually hear it....

Am I really missing something in this Kangaroo court? We don't have the full tape recording, or the reports from the individuals concerned, therefore any total condemnation of either party seems very premature and excessive. As for the comments from the other pilots I really give up.

Some facts. Yes, facts.
1. The YouTube clip is heavily edited.
2. The amended clearance to the Stobart ATR was partially blocked, crucially their callsign was blocked. This IS captured in the YouTube clip, and was also confirmed by DUB duty ATC manager to the ATR Captain later that evening after the tapes had been reviewed in the ATC listening room.
3. Because the amended clearance to the ATR was blocked it was never acknowledged by the Stobart crew, and as such the initial "subject to RYR" remained their valid clearance.
4. The BA took 5 mins to commence pushback, by which time the Stobart was well underway.

All facts, all verified.

Very useful.

Are you also able to verify how much time elapsed between the BA being conditionally cleared for pushback, subject to the Ryanair having passed behind, and the RYR actually entering its stand?

The RYR was on stand (as per the clearance) before the Stobart pushed. The BA was stationary when the Stobart commenced its pushback.

Yeah gods, who really cares, the controller made an error, the BA pilot was slow to push, the stobart pushed before he was meant to, as he got sick of waiting for the BA. The controller tried unsuccessfully to rectify the error, the BA pilot got stroppy.

Basically this sort of thing happens at busy airports, most ATCO's just live with it and don't feel the need to post on u tube, pprune, facebook or whatever. Enough.

Nimmer- please read post #45, it's not far away:ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh:e

Well yes, both of those facts can be deduced from what happened. It's the elapsed time between the BA's pushback clearance and each of those subsequent events that I was attempting to ascertain, but if that timeline hasn't yet been established, fair enough.

Neither of those statements is as yet an established fact. See above.

DaveReidUK - Sorry, I don't have those precise timelines. Any guesstimates on my behalf would not be accurate.

alwaysmovin

Okay seeing as you ask. My timings are from atc.net. For clarity here is the timeline:

1503:50 Ryanair 737 cleared to stand 125, cross 34, M1, Link 4.
1504:20 BA push back approved when the Ryanair clear
1505:20 Call from ATC placing the Ryanair in vicinity of Link 4
1506:20 ATR push back approved when the Ryanair on stand
1507:50 Clipped tx from ATC "ATR pushing back behind you to point B"
1508:20 The call from BA advising that push back stopped by gnd crew


So, it was 3:30mins already after approval the BA had still not moved - or possibly just barely begun to move. That's where I got "it took BA the best part of 4 minutes to get moving". Obviously the BA could not move until the Ryanair was past. But at the very least the BA was slow enough for the Ryanair to get parked after passing the BA and the ATR to then move from its stand to "behind" the BA. That is not to justify the ATR jumping the qeue. It may be that BA's proximity to stand 125 was such that they too effectively had to wait until Ryanair was actually on the stand. I don't know.

Not necessarily. The controller said to the ATR "Ryanair 737 to park on stand 125 behind you". We don't know where the Ryanair was at that point - only that it was not yet parked on stand. But the Ryanair was quite possibly past the ATR because this was 1 minute after the controller made a call to Stobart 26M placing the Ryanair at Link 4. So it seems likely the Ryanair was past the ATR, possibly even past the BA, but not yet on stand when the ATR got their approval.

All of this leaves 2 possibilities:

Either the Ryanair was on the stand (likely) and BA still hadn't moved so the ATR jumped the qeue and pushed back before BA. Or, the ATR started to push back before the Ryanair was even on the stand (unlikely). What is clear is the controller did not approve the ATR to move behind the BA and simply neglect to inform them, which is the complaint the BA made.

Anyway, I think nimmer has it:

...so yes, that's enough for me.

Edited to say having just seen diver69's post:

Sure that makes sense. The end.

BA pilot gets the last word in and says "we will be filing a safety report".

For what ?

His lack of monitoring the radio?

This is getting increasingly surreal.

That's not clear at all. In fact, the ATC transcript (per LiveATC) is entirely consistent with the controller having done exactly that.

If you are suggesting that the transmission you quoted at 15:07:50 was the controller informing the BA that the adjacent Lingus ATR was also about to push, you are mistaken:

What the controller actually said was: "Aer Lingus ATR about to push back behind you to Point B, when they're clear your push and start approved to Point R".

But this was addressed to RYR7316 (requesting push from of the 12x stands) and duly acknowledged, not to the BA on the 200s (which in any case was cleared to Charlie, not Romeo).

So, based on the transcripts so far available, there is no evidence that the controller warned the BA that the ATR on an adjacent stand had also been cleared to push.

Exactly.

It never, ever, bothered me that enthusiasts were listening in to what I did at work, because that's how I became interested in ATC.

I miss the job, the mental mechanics of doing the job, being involved in aviation, the wonderful people I had the privilege of working with......Even the bizarre stuff that came from 'management'.

But when I read sh*t like this, spread over 4 or 5 separate web-sites, I'm very glad I got out when I did.

Move along folks......Nothing to see here.

DaveReidUK


Is that you Speedbird 81D?

I've already made my point and I don't wish to labour it. But I'm happy to correct you. So:

Perhaps review the tape again before drawing this out any further. The transmission I quoted is not the one you think. It occured at the time I quoted +/- a couple of seconds. The one you quoted occured a minute before. Worth noting it was another one the BA crew didn't hear, if as they claim, the first they knew about the ATR was when the tug alerted them. Let's just sum those up:

1506:20 When the ATR got their approval
1506:40 When Ryanair 7316 got their approval conditional on the ATR
1507:50 When ATC transmitted "[clipped]ATR pushing back behind you to point B"

So:

Based on the transcripts available the call was there. Based on what you heard, it wasn't. Same problem as at Dublin :ok:

Descend when ready
 

Hi

When cleared to descend when ready are you required to report when actually leaving your current level for the new level.

Anyone have a reference to the master document.

Thanks for help

Pin

What I don't like is that one of our fellow professionals is under high pressure/stress and then it is increased markedly by the spat on the radio - that is the safety issue here not that the push back team had to do their job (no brainer - don't push the aeroplane back into the one behind) !!

Seriously minor issue which could have been dealt with off air.

Ahh PPRuNe, the place where you can make up things and call them facts.

How about you listen tk EIDW frequency some day, and see how long you hear a single frequency without being crossed over.

And I'd like you to verify these "facts". By stating many times that they are facts, doesnt make them facts, it makes it indoctrination.

AerRyan, the above post is based on a conversation between the Captain of the Stobart 96PL and the DUB duty ATC Manager.

In this regard, given that the conversation took place after the ATC Manager had time to review the tapes I offer it as fact.

If you elect to believe that no such conversation took place, or that the details of the conversation are falsified then that is your prerogative.