QF94, You just don't get it: or MAESTRO and the "Mates Rates" button.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Aust
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So what are the critical "fields" that MAESTRO looks at from the flight notification ??
Our company uses a generic TAS for each a/c type and a nil wind time interval. Would fine tuning these items in the notification help MAESTRO better sequence us ?? (The differences are rarely more than 2 to 3 mins on the TI and maybe 5 kts TAS)
Do radar derived groundspeeds and ETI's come into play ??
Our company uses a generic TAS for each a/c type and a nil wind time interval. Would fine tuning these items in the notification help MAESTRO better sequence us ?? (The differences are rarely more than 2 to 3 mins on the TI and maybe 5 kts TAS)
Do radar derived groundspeeds and ETI's come into play ??
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Planet Plazbot
Posts: 1,003
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Radar speed is not used at all. The times are based on your estimate for the feeder fix calculated via you flight plan TAS and the forecast winds. That 3 minutes you talk of will shunt you back.
I note Virgin aircraft plan an economy cruise often but don't actually fly that slow (around a 380 TAS). Even though you may really be doing 440 TAS, unless you tell us and we change the flight plan, Maestro will calculate you order in the sequence using the actual TAS in the flight plan and you will find yourself being pushed back down the line.
Times when you are being sequenced with aircraft around you, it is obvious when the TAS is wrong but if you are following a stream from the other direction, you will just have no chance of us picking it up.
Additionally for Eastern Dash 8 types, when you change aircraft and the change is to get a 200 or 300 when initially flight planned as a 100 series, your company usually changes the rego and type but not the TAS resulting in your TAS being 240 as opposed to the usual 270 for the other types. This often costs you slots as well. We have no need to check it and coming into Sydney from the north it is not obvious as usually some are from the north west and others from the north east and with the prevailing wind, your groundspeed wont give it away unless you are following directly in trail.
All of this said, we as do physically update the feeder fix time using the ground speed but in a full runway situation a wrong TAS will still cost you when you are dead heating with 1 or more aircraft.
I note Virgin aircraft plan an economy cruise often but don't actually fly that slow (around a 380 TAS). Even though you may really be doing 440 TAS, unless you tell us and we change the flight plan, Maestro will calculate you order in the sequence using the actual TAS in the flight plan and you will find yourself being pushed back down the line.
Times when you are being sequenced with aircraft around you, it is obvious when the TAS is wrong but if you are following a stream from the other direction, you will just have no chance of us picking it up.
Additionally for Eastern Dash 8 types, when you change aircraft and the change is to get a 200 or 300 when initially flight planned as a 100 series, your company usually changes the rego and type but not the TAS resulting in your TAS being 240 as opposed to the usual 270 for the other types. This often costs you slots as well. We have no need to check it and coming into Sydney from the north it is not obvious as usually some are from the north west and others from the north east and with the prevailing wind, your groundspeed wont give it away unless you are following directly in trail.
All of this said, we as do physically update the feeder fix time using the ground speed but in a full runway situation a wrong TAS will still cost you when you are dead heating with 1 or more aircraft.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is somewhat simplistic to state that the radar data is not used by Maestro. Maestro is sold by Sofraevia with a version that does update from radar, however in Australia this would be of limited use as there is only limited radar coverage.
Maestro receives updates from the electronic flight plan that is held in the Eurocat system. The electronic FP in turn receives regular updates from RADAR, ADSB, ADS and Controller input.
If you are on a long sector it would probably be worth updating Cruisin TAS / MACH which the controller can then input to the TAAATS electronic flight plan. Even better review the company FP so that it is correct when submitted.
Maestro receives updates from the electronic flight plan that is held in the Eurocat system. The electronic FP in turn receives regular updates from RADAR, ADSB, ADS and Controller input.
If you are on a long sector it would probably be worth updating Cruisin TAS / MACH which the controller can then input to the TAAATS electronic flight plan. Even better review the company FP so that it is correct when submitted.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Planet Plazbot
Posts: 1,003
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
True but those updates only say I am 'here' 'now' and then calculates the onwards times using the Flight Plan TAS. With respect to Radar, nothing gets locked in until well into Radar coverage so i reckon that that Radar version would rock. In true AsA fashion, the buy the wrong tools.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tobzalp. I have never seen a TAS anywhere near that low (380 knots), either on a flight plan or in the FMC with a very low cost index. Perhaps with a u/s pack and we are flying at or below FL 250, but certainly not at normal cruise levels.
Typically with a strong head wind, cruise TAS would be around 450-460 and with a strong tail wind around 430 - 440 (depending on weight , level and type etc).
Not trying to be smart, just letting you know what we see.
Typically with a strong head wind, cruise TAS would be around 450-460 and with a strong tail wind around 430 - 440 (depending on weight , level and type etc).
Not trying to be smart, just letting you know what we see.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Planet Plazbot
Posts: 1,003
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Coit. We do indeed see such things. Many times there are TAs's in the 380s 390s. It seemed to start with the De Icing issues out of Tassie in the mornings but recently the speeds have occured again. Some of my minions have asked the crews and they claim it is economy speed. Always in 7 or 800s. Sometimes these speeds are actually flown and when a QFA 800 73 gets behind you and has 50 or so knots closing it becomes very obvious.
QFA sometimes plan not above M.68 and F260 but more often than not go above that level and faster with no revision of the plan.
QFA sometimes plan not above M.68 and F260 but more often than not go above that level and faster with no revision of the plan.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Bleak City
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Coit,
Backin' up tobz on the tas issue, have seen it in the 380's often.
iss7002,
If it uses radar data at all it does a very bad job. One of the other problems with the FPOFS (Farkin' Piece Of French Sh!t) is you 'lock in' an estimate for the fix, and the FPOFS keeps re-calculating the estimate and continues to change it. Then you change it back and then it changes it back and then you change it back etc etc etc.
Backin' up tobz on the tas issue, have seen it in the 380's often.
iss7002,
If it uses radar data at all it does a very bad job. One of the other problems with the FPOFS (Farkin' Piece Of French Sh!t) is you 'lock in' an estimate for the fix, and the FPOFS keeps re-calculating the estimate and continues to change it. Then you change it back and then it changes it back and then you change it back etc etc etc.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry to keep this away from the original topic but there is some good info here.
ATCO's, perhaps you could PM me with some actual stats next time the low TAS scenario presents itself.
The only time I can imagine a low TAS being the norm is if a ECON cruise is planned at low level (approx FL 280) or below due to strong headwinds up at altitude.
To quote some figures from a B737-700 performance manual at LRC (long range cruise), (which is slightly faster than ECON most of the time).
At an average of 60 tons the following applies,
FL 310 Mach 0.721 / TAS 429
FL 330 Mach 0.751 / TAS 437
FL 350 Mach 0.765 / TAS 441
FL 370 Mach 0.779 / TAS 447
FL 390 Mack 0.790 / TAS 453
In a 800 series a/c a 65 ton average would be applied so the speeds would be slightly higher. (These figures are based on short sectors. Longer sectors would have considerably higher weights and therefore higher speeds).
It would be nice if we were all singing from the same hymn sheet to enable a more pro-active assessment of traffic processing.
ATCO's, perhaps you could PM me with some actual stats next time the low TAS scenario presents itself.
The only time I can imagine a low TAS being the norm is if a ECON cruise is planned at low level (approx FL 280) or below due to strong headwinds up at altitude.
To quote some figures from a B737-700 performance manual at LRC (long range cruise), (which is slightly faster than ECON most of the time).
At an average of 60 tons the following applies,
FL 310 Mach 0.721 / TAS 429
FL 330 Mach 0.751 / TAS 437
FL 350 Mach 0.765 / TAS 441
FL 370 Mach 0.779 / TAS 447
FL 390 Mack 0.790 / TAS 453
In a 800 series a/c a 65 ton average would be applied so the speeds would be slightly higher. (These figures are based on short sectors. Longer sectors would have considerably higher weights and therefore higher speeds).
It would be nice if we were all singing from the same hymn sheet to enable a more pro-active assessment of traffic processing.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Planet Plazbot
Posts: 1,003
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thta is the point as Hempy made. How the actual aircraft flown is neither here nor there. It is when the way it is flown and the flight plan are different. these slow TASs are done at normal levels(planned).
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The point I was trying to make is the plans we are issued with NEVER have a 380 kt TAS at normal cruise levels. NEVER! At the heavier weights the stick shaker would be having a field day.
As a general rule most pilots do not change the ECON configuration either, so there is quite obviously a difference in the info you are given and what we operate to.
As our EBA drags on you may find more and more crews upping the speed to burn more gas and get the morons in head office to listen to our concerns.
I just want to know why you have a 380 etc TAS on your paperwork and we do not.
P.S. ANY time you want us to go faster , please ask. Most will only be too happy to oblige. (0.81/335)
Tks for the feedback.
As a general rule most pilots do not change the ECON configuration either, so there is quite obviously a difference in the info you are given and what we operate to.
As our EBA drags on you may find more and more crews upping the speed to burn more gas and get the morons in head office to listen to our concerns.
I just want to know why you have a 380 etc TAS on your paperwork and we do not.
P.S. ANY time you want us to go faster , please ask. Most will only be too happy to oblige. (0.81/335)
Tks for the feedback.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Brisbane, Queensland
Posts: 618
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do any VB drivers know what the FPL interface is from COY despatch to NAIPS / TAAATS?
I wonder if you as the driver are getting a cockpit copy that is different to whatever is punching in to the ATS system?
Not doubting what your FPL and CI says - just what our system is capturing. Out of interest I looked this morning at a few VB DEPS out of BN and noticed quite a spread in the FPL TAS.
Todya would have been all academic anyway due to the inability of the FPOS to handle the varying westerlies.
As someone who used to do Flow the 'old' way, there is a common sysing that if the FPOS was being checked on most days it would 'fail' the rating check! I think if it had the ability to dynamically update it's descent profiles through real-time 'actual' winds aloft (via ACARS or other DATA link) it would do a much better job.
But then again I am just a dumb controller.
I wonder if you as the driver are getting a cockpit copy that is different to whatever is punching in to the ATS system?
Not doubting what your FPL and CI says - just what our system is capturing. Out of interest I looked this morning at a few VB DEPS out of BN and noticed quite a spread in the FPL TAS.
Todya would have been all academic anyway due to the inability of the FPOS to handle the varying westerlies.
As someone who used to do Flow the 'old' way, there is a common sysing that if the FPOS was being checked on most days it would 'fail' the rating check! I think if it had the ability to dynamically update it's descent profiles through real-time 'actual' winds aloft (via ACARS or other DATA link) it would do a much better job.
But then again I am just a dumb controller.
Uncommon Sense and others,
The issue that presents itself is that the flight plan will always be planned at ECON no matter what the level may be. Therefore with say a CI of 15 up at FL410 you may get a M.77 CRZ while down lower at FL260 or thereabouts it will drop it back to M.64 in the interests of fuel conservation.
The problem lies when the drivers blast off and reach a planned CRZ LVL of FL260 for example and see that the CI is only giving them M.64 that they then intervene and wind up the speed on their accord.
A headache for you guys as whatever was planned to go through MAESTRO you may as well discard. To top it off some drivers then question why the planned fuel burn was different from actual
The drivers get the same copy as is punched through the ATS system via the AFTN.
Hope this helps
Here is a question for you guys (ATC) now. If we ask an aircraft enroute to make best speed due curfew or whatever then what is the best way to inform ATC of the new TAS? Via a CHANGE MSG? I don't know if that would apply for an already airborne aircraft.
Look forward to your replies
The issue that presents itself is that the flight plan will always be planned at ECON no matter what the level may be. Therefore with say a CI of 15 up at FL410 you may get a M.77 CRZ while down lower at FL260 or thereabouts it will drop it back to M.64 in the interests of fuel conservation.
The problem lies when the drivers blast off and reach a planned CRZ LVL of FL260 for example and see that the CI is only giving them M.64 that they then intervene and wind up the speed on their accord.
A headache for you guys as whatever was planned to go through MAESTRO you may as well discard. To top it off some drivers then question why the planned fuel burn was different from actual
The drivers get the same copy as is punched through the ATS system via the AFTN.
Hope this helps
Here is a question for you guys (ATC) now. If we ask an aircraft enroute to make best speed due curfew or whatever then what is the best way to inform ATC of the new TAS? Via a CHANGE MSG? I don't know if that would apply for an already airborne aircraft.
Look forward to your replies
Last edited by Dookie on Drums; 14th Sep 2005 at 00:59.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Brisbane, Queensland
Posts: 618
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for the answer.
I am not an ENR controller, but I would say the quickest way is the pilot simply telling the controller (VHF or CPDLC). He/She can quickly punch it in to TAAATS. Perhaps a sector dude/dudette can confirm/deny?
I am not an ENR controller, but I would say the quickest way is the pilot simply telling the controller (VHF or CPDLC). He/She can quickly punch it in to TAAATS. Perhaps a sector dude/dudette can confirm/deny?
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The issue that presents itself is that the flight plan will always be planned at ECON no matter what the level may be.
The verbal requests from ops are probably the ones that cause some confusion by ATC as the original plan was at ECON (as is usually the case).
Dookie, perhaps if the drivers were informed of this info it may enhance the level of understanding. We are given nothing and are told nothing. The whole relationship between ATC/flight planning (submission and execution) and our operation should be in writing for all to learn. The information vacuum in both training and line operations is a disgrace. We read dozens of pages of BS daily and along with the forrest of amendments, it is becoming farcical. I would like some good gen we can actually use as opposed to memorising cabin crew evacuation commands.
coitus,
Apologies. You are in fact correct. What I should have stated is that a flight plan will
normally be planned at ECON. Yes, a MINTIME plan will be given for curfew restraints whilst the aircraft is still on the ground and as you say sometimes verbally should we foresee an issue down the line and you are already en route.
As far as I know your department is supposed to inform you guys and keep you up to speed but as it turns out it is not always the case.
Totally agree with your sentiments. I would love to see more interaction between the drivers and our operations but more often than not the drivers are more interested in their rosters!
Apologies. You are in fact correct. What I should have stated is that a flight plan will
normally be planned at ECON. Yes, a MINTIME plan will be given for curfew restraints whilst the aircraft is still on the ground and as you say sometimes verbally should we foresee an issue down the line and you are already en route.
As far as I know your department is supposed to inform you guys and keep you up to speed but as it turns out it is not always the case.
Totally agree with your sentiments. I would love to see more interaction between the drivers and our operations but more often than not the drivers are more interested in their rosters!