QF94, You just don't get it: or MAESTRO and the "Mates Rates" button.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: brisvegas
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My thoughts on this whole speed stuff!
1. On reaching TOC ATC are informed if your TAS will be say+/- 10kts from FPL. We can then amend the FDR in the blink of an eye and all sectors down the line will have the info. So will MAESTRO.
2. With respect to descent speeds and the current situation i.e. Raffertys Rules. If you are not asked what your speed will be on descent prior to TOD then when assigned descent clearance read back the assigned level and your planned descent speed.
Simple stuff really. Maybe i`ll start the paperwork tomorrow. We should have something in AIP by 2007.
1. On reaching TOC ATC are informed if your TAS will be say+/- 10kts from FPL. We can then amend the FDR in the blink of an eye and all sectors down the line will have the info. So will MAESTRO.
2. With respect to descent speeds and the current situation i.e. Raffertys Rules. If you are not asked what your speed will be on descent prior to TOD then when assigned descent clearance read back the assigned level and your planned descent speed.
Simple stuff really. Maybe i`ll start the paperwork tomorrow. We should have something in AIP by 2007.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Asia
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't be too harsh on the old Q.
Let em have their glory down under as anywhere else they are just that little airline from down there somewhere.
Up our way they are generally well behaved as the fish bowl is a whooole lot bigger and I guess their chests a little less puffed.
Let em have their glory down under as anywhere else they are just that little airline from down there somewhere.
Up our way they are generally well behaved as the fish bowl is a whooole lot bigger and I guess their chests a little less puffed.
Mostly Harmless
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Oz (cold & wet bit)
Posts: 457
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Erm. I may be displaying my profound ignorance of the system here, but what effect would FPL TAS have on the descent?
Taaarts processing uses FPL TAS & GRIB wind data for calculations in the cruise, and this is why AIP says please tell us if you are doing other than planned. The fix time MAESTRO posits would be largely based on this also I expect (don't know, don't care).
But for climb or descent Taarts uses the performance data files from the bowels of the system plus GRIB rather than anything in the flight plan, and I understood MAESTRO does much the same, from it's own performance data files that know there's a difference to how CSN & QFA fly the same aircraft type.
Whatever the pilot says and we punch in to the flight plan won't change what the machine says. Unless I'm wrong again...
Taaarts processing uses FPL TAS & GRIB wind data for calculations in the cruise, and this is why AIP says please tell us if you are doing other than planned. The fix time MAESTRO posits would be largely based on this also I expect (don't know, don't care).
But for climb or descent Taarts uses the performance data files from the bowels of the system plus GRIB rather than anything in the flight plan, and I understood MAESTRO does much the same, from it's own performance data files that know there's a difference to how CSN & QFA fly the same aircraft type.
Whatever the pilot says and we punch in to the flight plan won't change what the machine says. Unless I'm wrong again...
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Planet Plazbot
Posts: 1,003
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But it all gets locked in prior to descent. The descent speed is only an issue as it is so inconsistent from day to day. 2 like type company (Q) aircraft can be descending at 40 or so knots different. TARTS is not smart enough to know that.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Nearby
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
While we are on the subject, I just love these columns:
From: http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/190503-1.html
By the way - almost unique to Australia - there is no 'D- side'. It's a one-man(woman) show.
"Center, you mean to tell me we've got to hold for 30 minutes to get into Hickory?"
Let me be blunt here, folks: This is not a good way to start a relationship with a controller you just checked in with. If you get a 30-minute hold into a small airport, I can understand that you might be surprised. What you -- the pilot -- need to understand is that controllers don't hand out lengthy holds because we're bored. It's usually because we are very, very busy. The best thing you can do -- the very best thing -- is to read the clearance back and comply with it, and hopefully the controller will find a spare moment to explain the situation
Let me be blunt here, folks: This is not a good way to start a relationship with a controller you just checked in with. If you get a 30-minute hold into a small airport, I can understand that you might be surprised. What you -- the pilot -- need to understand is that controllers don't hand out lengthy holds because we're bored. It's usually because we are very, very busy. The best thing you can do -- the very best thing -- is to read the clearance back and comply with it, and hopefully the controller will find a spare moment to explain the situation
By the way - almost unique to Australia - there is no 'D- side'. It's a one-man(woman) show.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 279
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Karrank is correct- the data on speeds of a/c type for the route from the feeder to landing are defined offline by ASA's TMA gurus and are updated if they find regular inconsistencies.
TAS, SHMAZ. Put 120k as a TAS in a 738 plan and you'll more than likely still cross the feeder at the same time if you had the correct TAS in the plan. The fact is if Maestro inputs that you'll cross narelle at 34 and our Bearing and Range Line says 26 and we allow for a couple of minutes for reduced speed on descent, we manually input the revised untouched revised time of 28 and that's what goes in the system. We check every time and update as required. Once locked in, Maestro CANNOT change that time, it simply calculates the delay required to get you evenly spread at the field.
It is surprising how much controllers are focusing on TAS in this thread. The only time this may affect your slot is if things are so busy and delays are extensive, controllers may abandon revising fix times and say stuff it, we'll go with what the system says.
Most of the time the times are set by us based on our estimates from the radar data, expected time loss on descent, crappy or not so crappy descent expected speeds. Patterns are also taken into account eg. we expect the cowboys in the westwinds will go like the clappers as long as they can, Qf can lose the standard two minutes plus an extra couple for the bean counters and some carriers like PAL want to be at A090 by 65DME so we add 5 minutes for them. Pure difined data does not work.
Cheers,
R-S.
TAS, SHMAZ. Put 120k as a TAS in a 738 plan and you'll more than likely still cross the feeder at the same time if you had the correct TAS in the plan. The fact is if Maestro inputs that you'll cross narelle at 34 and our Bearing and Range Line says 26 and we allow for a couple of minutes for reduced speed on descent, we manually input the revised untouched revised time of 28 and that's what goes in the system. We check every time and update as required. Once locked in, Maestro CANNOT change that time, it simply calculates the delay required to get you evenly spread at the field.
It is surprising how much controllers are focusing on TAS in this thread. The only time this may affect your slot is if things are so busy and delays are extensive, controllers may abandon revising fix times and say stuff it, we'll go with what the system says.
Most of the time the times are set by us based on our estimates from the radar data, expected time loss on descent, crappy or not so crappy descent expected speeds. Patterns are also taken into account eg. we expect the cowboys in the westwinds will go like the clappers as long as they can, Qf can lose the standard two minutes plus an extra couple for the bean counters and some carriers like PAL want to be at A090 by 65DME so we add 5 minutes for them. Pure difined data does not work.
Cheers,
R-S.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: On a Ship Near You
Posts: 787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Once locked in, Maestro CANNOT change that time, it simply calculates the delay required to get you evenly spread at the field.
How many times have you adjusted an ETA_FF and the flow or someone else adjusts it back, because it's showing a -1 or +1 not a zero. The correct TAS can certainly help reduce the 'fiddling' by those who can't help it.
RS I can't believe that you would ever 'fall back' on system times for your sequence, even when busy...
FS, hang on a minute, he's talking about a Class D aerodrome with E airspace all around, that means no delay beacuse it's a flexible, efficient system, isn't it? Surely the NAS people haven't lied to us.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 279
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SM4 Pirate, a late night post, and I should clarify... the only time I wouldn't reinput times is when working arrivals, a runway configuration change occurs and there are no blank slots for the next 60 mins or so. Generally the flow sorts the mess out the way he/she wants it and we get on with it. I'm sure that if you've got aircraft in the hold/vectoring all over the sky and a runway change occurs, you don't go re entering all the data again.
Quite frankly I don't know anyone who looks at the + or - as that is what Maestro thinks the error is, and is probably wrong.
Cheers,
R-S.
Quite frankly I don't know anyone who looks at the + or - as that is what Maestro thinks the error is, and is probably wrong.
Cheers,
R-S.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Bleak City
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
R S,
Not quite sure where you're sitting when it comes to maestro but a time is not locked in once you change it. It's locked when the flow or maestro 'freezes' it, but not before. I find it a major pain to be changing a time to better reflect what the aircraft is doing and to have to make a note of that time and to constantly change it because maestro persists in re-calcualting it every time it gets an update.
It is a dumb system that should rely more on radar derived data and controller input rather than having about 10 different parameters input.
I just don't get it, why spend all this money on a system that requires more intervention than before? Remember prior to maestro the flow set the order and we complied, if things weren't running to plan he'd adjust the order. Now we've got maestro, the flow, an en-root controller and an arrivals controller (multiplied by three feeder sectors and arrivals sectors) all adjusting and updating the elephant????
Stupid system complicated to make it look good to the customer!
Not quite sure where you're sitting when it comes to maestro but a time is not locked in once you change it. It's locked when the flow or maestro 'freezes' it, but not before. I find it a major pain to be changing a time to better reflect what the aircraft is doing and to have to make a note of that time and to constantly change it because maestro persists in re-calcualting it every time it gets an update.
It is a dumb system that should rely more on radar derived data and controller input rather than having about 10 different parameters input.
I just don't get it, why spend all this money on a system that requires more intervention than before? Remember prior to maestro the flow set the order and we complied, if things weren't running to plan he'd adjust the order. Now we've got maestro, the flow, an en-root controller and an arrivals controller (multiplied by three feeder sectors and arrivals sectors) all adjusting and updating the elephant????
Stupid system complicated to make it look good to the customer!
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Wasteland
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
En-Rooter, has the move by the EK for their flights to operate ECON speed descents contributed to the situation or is the frequency not significant enough?
Do any other airlines appear to do the same?
Do any other airlines appear to do the same?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Bleak City
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
G'Day SandIgger,
The problem is any aircraft that does something other than what they've told us they are doing. That is, if maestro is told that you are doing 300 knots til 10,000ft and you are acually doing 265kts, maestro will sequence you and perhaps more importantly the aircraft behind you based on the 300kt data.
I tend to ask internationals what speed they are doing on the descent, it's not that we don't trust you, it's probably that if you don't operate into a port often you probably descend a little slower??
Not quite sure how many internationals have started the econ descents, but yes it does affect how you sequence. Perhaps that's what happened into CS the other day, perhaps they knew the bloke behind was going to go balls out and the other fella was going to econ descent??
The problem is any aircraft that does something other than what they've told us they are doing. That is, if maestro is told that you are doing 300 knots til 10,000ft and you are acually doing 265kts, maestro will sequence you and perhaps more importantly the aircraft behind you based on the 300kt data.
I tend to ask internationals what speed they are doing on the descent, it's not that we don't trust you, it's probably that if you don't operate into a port often you probably descend a little slower??
Not quite sure how many internationals have started the econ descents, but yes it does affect how you sequence. Perhaps that's what happened into CS the other day, perhaps they knew the bloke behind was going to go balls out and the other fella was going to econ descent??
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: no fixed address
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Roger Standby,
Sorry, a bit off thread, but please don't label Westwind pilots cowboys. Name calling can be dangerous, even if not meant maliciously.
Hops down from soapbox... you must have hit a nerve.
ABC
Sorry, a bit off thread, but please don't label Westwind pilots cowboys. Name calling can be dangerous, even if not meant maliciously.
Hops down from soapbox... you must have hit a nerve.
ABC
Once locked in, Maestro CANNOT change that time, it simply calculates the delay required to get you evenly spread at the field.
I'm with you R-S.
The estimate must be locked in otherwise, if you slow the aircraft to make good the FF estimate without locking in the time, Maestro will start recalculating the "pecking order" for landing and start bumping the aircraft back.
Once the FF is stable then the die is cast (unless the FLOW wants to rearrange things)
I'm with you R-S.
The estimate must be locked in otherwise, if you slow the aircraft to make good the FF estimate without locking in the time, Maestro will start recalculating the "pecking order" for landing and start bumping the aircraft back.
Once the FF is stable then the die is cast (unless the FLOW wants to rearrange things)
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Bleak City
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Think you blokes need a refresher, it won't change when it's frozen. Making a time stable is not making it frozen.
Next time you check a time and have to change it, check it again in about 5 minutes and let me know what happens?
Boags premium six pack in it for both of you if you prove me wrong.
Next time you check a time and have to change it, check it again in about 5 minutes and let me know what happens?
Boags premium six pack in it for both of you if you prove me wrong.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 279
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
VH-ABC,
My apologies if I offended. I love the way you guys fly your aircraft. I would love to see the world from the angle you guys do with cancel speed, no height requirement!
Back to the Maestro thing. I'll try to be more specific. Once the ETA-FF is set in place (that is the time that we think the aircraft will cross the fix untouched- all aircraft are checked and the times modified if maestro has suggested the wrong time, which is usually) it does not change. Regardless of the TAS in the flight plan, we recheck the time and enter ourselves and it stays fixed. Maestro then sorts the order it wants the planes in based on these times AND system data which the flow has determined offline for each aircraft type and the time it takes that type to reach the field from that particular fix.
The time from the fix to the field is not determined by TAS, but by data locked into the syestem which the flow ammends every now and then on a data upgrade.
Certainly times at the fix do change constantly and are a pain in the a$$, but we fix the initial estimates and maestro cannot change them unless reconfigured.
R-S.
My apologies if I offended. I love the way you guys fly your aircraft. I would love to see the world from the angle you guys do with cancel speed, no height requirement!
Back to the Maestro thing. I'll try to be more specific. Once the ETA-FF is set in place (that is the time that we think the aircraft will cross the fix untouched- all aircraft are checked and the times modified if maestro has suggested the wrong time, which is usually) it does not change. Regardless of the TAS in the flight plan, we recheck the time and enter ourselves and it stays fixed. Maestro then sorts the order it wants the planes in based on these times AND system data which the flow has determined offline for each aircraft type and the time it takes that type to reach the field from that particular fix.
The time from the fix to the field is not determined by TAS, but by data locked into the syestem which the flow ammends every now and then on a data upgrade.
Certainly times at the fix do change constantly and are a pain in the a$$, but we fix the initial estimates and maestro cannot change them unless reconfigured.
R-S.
