Automated Terminal Information Service serves the purpose of giving aircrew any relevant information that the ATSU is obliged to report, regardless if it is NOTAM'ed or not. Many don't read NOTAMs anyway...

"Too much rubbish on the ATIS" can be a frequent complaint made by pilots at many UK airfields and was the subject of a PPRuNE thread fairly recently IIRC, however this simply reflects the growing complexity and challenges facing ever-busier airfields with more external constraints - Danger Areas, drones, wildlife, noise abatement etc.

Unfortunately in the "where there's a blame there's a claim" culture that we now live in the ATIS is more regularly being used as an arse covering exercise....."Well the airlines can't say we didn't warn them.....it's on the ATIS"

It's a shame as pertinent messages often get lost amongst the rest of the unnecessary stuff.

I'm of the orange persuasion but not particularly pleased at getting tarred with this brush.

I never call ready until contact has been made with the ground crew, but even then every few weeks for some reason a tug driver will miss the call. It's annoying because it makes it look like we've called before establishing comms.

I will often say 'request taxy, able charlie' if I'm parked along Quebec because on many occasions the controller says, it does help either to get us away quicker or to keep us out of the way of the traffic jam at A2/A3. Most of my colleagues will never plan a Charlie intersection departure so I've always found it worth mentioning.

Will always be ready immediate, can't understand why anyone would accept a line up clearance if they weren't ready immediate. I'm very mindful that the Tenerife Accident had a captain that was keen to advance the thrust levers prior to take off clearance and I'm loathe to do that so my engines may take 2 seconds longer to spool up.

Push and Hold requests, I used to ask in line with company procedures but as soon as the ATIS requested that we didn't I stopped that.

160 to 4 is often very tricky without dropping the gear. Sometimes you get asked to reduce to 160 in excess of 10 miles out which is a long way to drag it in with gear down. If only we were reduced to 160 before we got on the glide it would be easy. Personally I'll strive to do it and will use speed brake on the glide slope which is something our manuals advise against doing. If used very carefully it's fine and will help the speed to come back, but as I said our manuals advise against it and if you move the speed brakes too quickly the aircraft pitches all over the place. If it's not happening I will of course drop the gear because I believe a speed instruction carries the same weight as an altitude instruction. I do know that a lot of our guys n gals will just sit there with the power at idle and accept 178kts if that's what it gives. But one thing's for certain, they're not deliberately trying to fly faster, they're avoiding dropping the gear too early. Also if I've struggled to get the speed back and was closer to 170 than 160 I'll slow up a bit earlier to try and average it out. I'm sure the environmentalist and the airports neighbours would soon complain if we all started dropping the gear at 10 miles. The solution is give us 160 prior to catching the glideslope or give us 170 to 5.

Gatwick could do a lot to help itself. If we've already called ready on delivery why do we need to call ground? Many other airports get you to monitor the ground frequency and the controller calls you when they're ready for you to push. RT transactions could be almost halved.

When vacating the runway, why not have automatic frequency transfer to reduce tower congestion?

I've been up to the tower on a couple of occasions, and would love to come up again but like everything it's so much more difficult now. We used to just ask Airlinks to take us there but that costs money and no one wants to pay. On the flip side, I've been flying 10 years and have never once had an ATCO on a famil flight with us. If the orange brigade is a problem, then perhaps seeing a few more controllers on the jump seat would help gain a better understanding of each others operation.

O, and yes I'd hate to have to listen to the ATIS as it is at the moment :oh:

LGW based here and certainly don't envy your job on a busy day!

Sorry for the thread drift but I'm interested in coming up the tower for a visit, is this possible and how would I arrange it?

Cheers,

AP

Morning Average Punter,

Easiest way to to call the Supervisor desk - main tower number in the AIP.

We get a few airport standby crews coming over as well as those calling in to arrange on days off. It's really up to you.

We would love to see more of the flight deck upstairs, it helps us and has proved just as valuable for the crews.

As long as we get notice and you can arrange transport to us, it shouldn't be an issue. We may occasionally have to say no due to operational reasons (checks/situation) but it's rare.

The only caveat - bring biscuits 🤓

Good suggestions that have been discussed and are under consideration. Unfortunately change takes a long time to happen.

It's not really derriere-covering, there are things that the ATSU are obliged to promulgate purely for safety reasons. If information is not promulgated - something "pointless" like nearby DA activity, steel plates, cranes, WIP etc. and an incident occurs directly because of this then the first question that will be asked is "Why was the info not promulgated?".

Telsboy,

The things you mention all relate to safety, are pertinent and in my opinion do have a place on the ATIS. I'm talking about duplication of non safety related information. For example a change to a procedure that has been amended in the AIP, promulgated in advance to Airlines but the powers that be still insist on it being added to the ATIS.

I just wish more common sense could return to the job.

Ratatat,
Have you spoken to your union reps about this? Do you have a union now? Wasn't 'Red' involved in the ANSP transition? He certainly believed in his workforce having "a strong union". I have the document with that quote in the loft.
If EGKK GMC/GMP is that busy, (and I don't doubt that it isn't), surely another 'sector-split' is required.
What about Chirp, or the MOR system?

Zooker

We still have the same Union who listen to us and take our concerns to management, who to be fair to them, are also listening and are trying help.

GMC 2 is being actively discussed but will take time.

MORs are filed and results have been achieved partly due to them.
Chirp - we are not quite there yet.

The issue for me is 55/hr which is only achievable in good wx and with a 50% or greater weighting of departures.
The tea time rush is 2/3 arrivals so 50/hr is good.
The airport need to realise this and apply appropriate airport capacity flow, not be looking at ways ATC can increase the movement rate.

Tower visit?
 

Visiting the Tower on a day off if a nice idea but using your Airside pass except when on duty is a big no, no. When on airport standby I don't see how we could visit either, we're meant to be on immediate readiness to leap into action...not possible, unless we parachute from the Tower :p

Ratatat,

Thanks for the reply. All good stuff to hear. I haven't been down to EGKK for many years, but you folks do a grand job down there, and the folks 70-odd miles down the road.

ATIS content is prescribed by ICAO Annex 11.
For those of us "lucky" enough to be in the Single European Sky, most of it is also copy-pasted into the European Rules of the Air.