More efficiency without holding... duh!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: On a Ship Near You
Posts: 787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
More efficiency without holding... duh!
http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/...338526740.html
Aviation industry urged to cut emissions
February 26, 2007 - 1:59PM
Airline departure times must be better managed to reduce holding patterns and greenhouse gas emissions, Transport Minister Mark Vaile said.
Mr Vaile told parliament the aviation sector could make practical changes to reduce its emission levels.
"The aviation sector, if you think about the growth in aviation travel both here and globally, it's going to have a contribution to make," Mr Vaile said.
Mr Vaile said planes forced to hold at low altitude burned four to five as much fuel as a planes en route; and much more than a plane holding while on the ground.
"If you think of circumstances in Australia, how often have you travelled and you arrive at the point of destination and you are put in a holding pattern," Mr Vaile told the lower house.
"We need to better manage the aviation sector so if there are going to be delays on one end, the plane departure should be delayed from the port of departure.
"So there are very, very practical, real life, solutions that we can implement just through processes of management in different industries, that will help assist our nation meet its targets as far as greenhouse gas emissions are concerned."
Australia had already introduced flex tracks, a way for international carriers to identify routes that took advantage of weather conditions and wind velocity to reduce flying time and emissions, Mr Vaile said.
A recent flight from Melbourne to Dubai saved 10 minutes and burned 2.7 tonnes less fuel by identifying a better route to travel, which ultimately prevented an extra 8.2 tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions being spewed into the atmosphere, Mr Vaile said.
Mr Vaile's comments, in response to a government backbencher's query during parliamentary question time, came after Airservices Australia chief executive Greg Russell said air traffic controllers had to address emissions now or risk having harsh restrictions imposed on them.
"A failure by air navigation service providers to accept the urgency of the need for action on greenhouse emissions will ... lead to punitive action by governments," the Australian Newspaper reported he told the Civil Air Navigation Services Organisation conference in the Netherlands earlier this month.
"We must actively pursue, and be seen as pursuing, measures to reduce fuel burn and therefore reduce emissions."
The International Air Transport Association has estimated fuel consumption is cut by average of 62 litres and carbon dioxide by 160kg for every minute of flying time saved.
And an Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has estimated a 12 per cent inefficiency exists in air-traffic management globally, producing an extra 73 million tonnes of carbon dioxide and costing $US13.5 billion ($17.28 billion), the Australian reported.
The EU has already moved to tackle aviation emissions by proposing including airlines in its carbon trading scheme, forcing them to pay if they exceed their current level of emissions.
Aviation industry urged to cut emissions
February 26, 2007 - 1:59PM
Airline departure times must be better managed to reduce holding patterns and greenhouse gas emissions, Transport Minister Mark Vaile said.
Mr Vaile told parliament the aviation sector could make practical changes to reduce its emission levels.
"The aviation sector, if you think about the growth in aviation travel both here and globally, it's going to have a contribution to make," Mr Vaile said.
Mr Vaile said planes forced to hold at low altitude burned four to five as much fuel as a planes en route; and much more than a plane holding while on the ground.
"If you think of circumstances in Australia, how often have you travelled and you arrive at the point of destination and you are put in a holding pattern," Mr Vaile told the lower house.
"We need to better manage the aviation sector so if there are going to be delays on one end, the plane departure should be delayed from the port of departure.
"So there are very, very practical, real life, solutions that we can implement just through processes of management in different industries, that will help assist our nation meet its targets as far as greenhouse gas emissions are concerned."
Australia had already introduced flex tracks, a way for international carriers to identify routes that took advantage of weather conditions and wind velocity to reduce flying time and emissions, Mr Vaile said.
A recent flight from Melbourne to Dubai saved 10 minutes and burned 2.7 tonnes less fuel by identifying a better route to travel, which ultimately prevented an extra 8.2 tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions being spewed into the atmosphere, Mr Vaile said.
Mr Vaile's comments, in response to a government backbencher's query during parliamentary question time, came after Airservices Australia chief executive Greg Russell said air traffic controllers had to address emissions now or risk having harsh restrictions imposed on them.
"A failure by air navigation service providers to accept the urgency of the need for action on greenhouse emissions will ... lead to punitive action by governments," the Australian Newspaper reported he told the Civil Air Navigation Services Organisation conference in the Netherlands earlier this month.
"We must actively pursue, and be seen as pursuing, measures to reduce fuel burn and therefore reduce emissions."
The International Air Transport Association has estimated fuel consumption is cut by average of 62 litres and carbon dioxide by 160kg for every minute of flying time saved.
And an Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has estimated a 12 per cent inefficiency exists in air-traffic management globally, producing an extra 73 million tonnes of carbon dioxide and costing $US13.5 billion ($17.28 billion), the Australian reported.
The EU has already moved to tackle aviation emissions by proposing including airlines in its carbon trading scheme, forcing them to pay if they exceed their current level of emissions.
Inefficient ATC or lack of concrete to land on combined with politically motivated movement caps (80 an hour) and noise sharing plans such as LTOP?
I'm in one of those moods
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: SFC to A085
Posts: 759
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airservices Australia chief executive Greg Russell said air traffic controllers had to address emissions now or risk having harsh restrictions imposed on them.
What a great step to take. Many times we have asked for direct tracking from Port Maquarie direct to Singleton for example, only to be told. Williamtown is NOT active but it will only "muck up the sequence" and therefore direct tracking is not available. 
Surely direct tracking with speed restriction to meet a MONDO time would not be too difficult to manage.....maybe I have missed something? Obviously on the radio is not the place to argue about these things.
I know that these guys do a great job under the circumstances but I totally agree that much more could be done, particulaly at an organisational level.
This is not switching the light bulb off when you leave the room sort of stuff....8.2 Tonnes of CO2 for a 10 minute saving in flight time......that's awesome
I'm off the box now.
Surely direct tracking with speed restriction to meet a MONDO time would not be too difficult to manage.....maybe I have missed something? Obviously on the radio is not the place to argue about these things.
I know that these guys do a great job under the circumstances but I totally agree that much more could be done, particulaly at an organisational level.
This is not switching the light bulb off when you leave the room sort of stuff....8.2 Tonnes of CO2 for a 10 minute saving in flight time......that's awesome
I'm off the box now.
Mr Vaile's comments, in response to a government backbencher's query during parliamentary question time
You are right that the politically imposed movement caps and the LTOP bollocks is responsible for a hell of a lot of carbon being let loose. To p1ss all that off is obviously politically unacceptable in the Sydney context.
Whilst I am sure that there are some efficiencies that can be gained through the ATC system itself, the basic bottleneck (at least in Australia - Europe has other issues as well) is runway capacity and always will be. This is the Government that has NOT been able to get the ball rolling for a second Sydney basin airport so for them to pontificate on the evils on the ATC system being responsible for carbon emissions is laughable
For some reason it also seems to escape the government's understanding that if there is an opportunity for Airlines to save fuel in any way at all they will be onto it like a fly on shyte. I remember during the noise debate with Sydney some years ago the Government came up with the pearler of threatening to fine pilots that didn't follow the 'prescribed' flight paths! They really do seem to be in LaLa land sometimes.
Does anyone know why there are (basically) no runway specific STARs into SY? Wouldn't this be an easy way to better manage traffic, rather than the current bottleneck system?
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Bleak City
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
aaaaah, so it's alright to direct track now Mr Russell? But only if it saves money. (emissons are just a bull**** tag that they add as a bonus, because this issue would be only about money savings to be sure)
OK mate, you'd better get onto whomever promulgates the TLI's that virtually prevents us from direct tracking in the majority of cases.
My attitude has always been that it is an ATC's job to be as efficient as possible, not a f*cking roadblock to the customers who use our airspace. NOT direct tracking in certain circumstances is a safety issue in itself.
On another issue, don't blame me if you get held:
* Blame your local member who whinges to his leader about noise from an airport that was in a suburb decades before a punter or his/her house was.
* Blame your elected government and the cosy little arrangements they have with ex public servants now running YOUR airports.
* Blame investment banks who want monopolies for the airports they STOLE off you and me.
* Blame your company who schedule you and 20 of your company aircraft to be at an airport at the same frigging time, what the??????
blah, blah, blah, blah
What a load of ****e,
OK mate, you'd better get onto whomever promulgates the TLI's that virtually prevents us from direct tracking in the majority of cases.
My attitude has always been that it is an ATC's job to be as efficient as possible, not a f*cking roadblock to the customers who use our airspace. NOT direct tracking in certain circumstances is a safety issue in itself.
On another issue, don't blame me if you get held:
* Blame your local member who whinges to his leader about noise from an airport that was in a suburb decades before a punter or his/her house was.
* Blame your elected government and the cosy little arrangements they have with ex public servants now running YOUR airports.
* Blame investment banks who want monopolies for the airports they STOLE off you and me.
* Blame your company who schedule you and 20 of your company aircraft to be at an airport at the same frigging time, what the??????
blah, blah, blah, blah
What a load of ****e,
Grandpa Aerotart
And on top of all that we once again see everything that moves blamed for a completely natural phenomina...Global Warming is NOT caused by man made CO2 emissions....increased atmospheric CO2 is caused by Global Warming, not the other way around.
Even the IPCC scientists admit they have no idea what, if any, contribution jet exhaust makes. The 'estimate', read pure guess, is .06%...sounds like a problem to me
As to airport capacity problems?
Well I guess when the beancounters fall out of love with 'hub and spoke' we might see an improvement...or when pax want, or are happy, to arrive at times other than 0600LT...until then we will continue to deal with the hand we are given...that is everyone arriving at once and departing at once but not a lot happening the rest of the day.
Runway specific STARs don't work a whole lot better than what Sydney does at present unless the traffic flows are evened out over a longer time frame. The only time you get to fly STARs as published without external intervention is when you arrive somewhere at an odd time...and not even then at some places. A few nights ago arriving into BKK (SVB) we got told just after TOPD to reduce to 250 kts and then vectored off the STAR to allow a Thai flight flight behind us to get in front...he was behind (on a different STAR) and given high speed, we were in front and spent the entire descent with the speed brake out...there is efficiency for you
Even the IPCC scientists admit they have no idea what, if any, contribution jet exhaust makes. The 'estimate', read pure guess, is .06%...sounds like a problem to me
As to airport capacity problems?
Well I guess when the beancounters fall out of love with 'hub and spoke' we might see an improvement...or when pax want, or are happy, to arrive at times other than 0600LT...until then we will continue to deal with the hand we are given...that is everyone arriving at once and departing at once but not a lot happening the rest of the day.
Runway specific STARs don't work a whole lot better than what Sydney does at present unless the traffic flows are evened out over a longer time frame. The only time you get to fly STARs as published without external intervention is when you arrive somewhere at an odd time...and not even then at some places. A few nights ago arriving into BKK (SVB) we got told just after TOPD to reduce to 250 kts and then vectored off the STAR to allow a Thai flight flight behind us to get in front...he was behind (on a different STAR) and given high speed, we were in front and spent the entire descent with the speed brake out...there is efficiency for you
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: inner suburbia
Posts: 370
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Correct me if I'm wrong, but since when has it become ATCs' responsibility to schedule aircraft ?
I seem to have an (obviously) mistaken impression that the duty of ATC is to seperate aircraft, and holding is just one method that can keep the all the flying aluminium intact and seperated.
As others have noted, if the airlines schedule too many aircraft at the same time then WTF is ATC supposed to do ?.
And since when do pax get to 'choose' when flights are scheduled ?
I seem to have an (obviously) mistaken impression that the duty of ATC is to seperate aircraft, and holding is just one method that can keep the all the flying aluminium intact and seperated.
As others have noted, if the airlines schedule too many aircraft at the same time then WTF is ATC supposed to do ?.
And since when do pax get to 'choose' when flights are scheduled ?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: On a Ship Near You
Posts: 787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does anyone know why there are (basically) no runway specific STARs into SY? Wouldn't this be an easy way to better manage traffic, rather than the current bottleneck system?
Read between the lines people this is slot time for departure management, leading to slot time for arrival management; but will it work?
I seem to have an (obviously) mistaken impression that the duty of ATC is to separate aircraft, and holding is just one method that can keep the all the flying aluminum intact and separated.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: The Future
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ignorant to blame ATC for congestion caused by government imposed noise abaitment procedures! Have you ever flown into Sydney on a very quiet sunday? When these guys have the time and the room, you wont find more efficient controlling... They are there to stop us running into each other, not to jerk you around for the hell of it!
Mr. Vaille should ask his boss aka Little Johnny why there are fuel wasting Sydney departures- TO KEEP THE NOISE DOWN IN THE SEAT OF BENNELONG.
Changes made shortly after the '
96 election.
Changes made shortly after the '
96 election.
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: vic
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's time for the government to get with the times and remove the cap and curfew at Sydney. Modern aircraft, including the turboprops can be operated very efficiently if given the opportunity.
