Australian Airlines Slow down to save fuel
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Perth
Posts: 214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Man this is soo boring. Are you guys Pilots or Accountants? 
You worked so hard to get to fly the big fast aircraft just to dawdle along like a Cessna? GO FULL SPEED and buggar the fuel!
You worked so hard to get to fly the big fast aircraft just to dawdle along like a Cessna? GO FULL SPEED and buggar the fuel!
Join Date: May 2000
Location: vic
Age: 23
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
amberale and blip,
The point I make, is that Jepp ATC 700 series 1.9.1 states that a speed variation on decent of + or - 10 kts or 0.025M must be advised to ATC as RPT Jet operators are 'supposed' to nominate a standard profile. If ATC ask me 'what is your decent speed' and I say 'Oh we're at CI 10' that means f@ck all to them. If my company alters a standard decent profile (like altering CI does) and does not advise ASA then they are at fault for not advising them.
We have no room to move wrt alterning CI, if thats what is nominated, then thats what they get unless we are advised by ATC to speed up or slow down or the company advises us to the contrary. Even if we are late, early or on time, the CI stays the same, there is no room to move. Thats is the point.
The point I make, is that Jepp ATC 700 series 1.9.1 states that a speed variation on decent of + or - 10 kts or 0.025M must be advised to ATC as RPT Jet operators are 'supposed' to nominate a standard profile. If ATC ask me 'what is your decent speed' and I say 'Oh we're at CI 10' that means f@ck all to them. If my company alters a standard decent profile (like altering CI does) and does not advise ASA then they are at fault for not advising them.
We have no room to move wrt alterning CI, if thats what is nominated, then thats what they get unless we are advised by ATC to speed up or slow down or the company advises us to the contrary. Even if we are late, early or on time, the CI stays the same, there is no room to move. Thats is the point.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: australia
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Amberale
I presume you mean TAS 400-450, not IAS.
Are you really privy to our schedules, how do you know if we're running late i.e. going fast?
Sydney flow starts well before 0600 LCL, enroute speeds can be adjusted by ATC as far out as 3 hrs to dest., which would be around 0300 LCL sydney time.
I presume you mean TAS 400-450, not IAS.
Are you really privy to our schedules, how do you know if we're running late i.e. going fast?
Sydney flow starts well before 0600 LCL, enroute speeds can be adjusted by ATC as far out as 3 hrs to dest., which would be around 0300 LCL sydney time.
Another problem with going slower is that it's harder just to stay in CTA so we have to ride the speed brakes more, wasting precious energy. Not to mention inefficient altitude constraints and tracking, runway configurations that are set by the time of day as opposed to WX and traffic loads, company speed restrictions etc.
Going slower may save a bit of gas but there is a multitude of other factors that need to be addressed to create real savings.
Going slower may save a bit of gas but there is a multitude of other factors that need to be addressed to create real savings.
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Someday I will find a place to stop
Posts: 1,028
Likes: 0
Received 21 Likes
on
7 Posts
The saving of fuel / slightly slower indicated speed comes in the cruise, not for example in the descent.
On a flight with a trip time of 3hrs we are only talking a difference of some 5 or so minutes (on the Tasman), and the flight planner will use the slower cost index for the flight plan if the computer shows for a 'normal' flight it will be ahead of schedule with the forecast winds i.e with the plane going slightly slower the punter will still arrive on schedule.
Non favourable winds, means the normal company CI is used.
Do not forget ATC see groundspeed on their radar not your indicated.
On a flight with a trip time of 3hrs we are only talking a difference of some 5 or so minutes (on the Tasman), and the flight planner will use the slower cost index for the flight plan if the computer shows for a 'normal' flight it will be ahead of schedule with the forecast winds i.e with the plane going slightly slower the punter will still arrive on schedule.
Non favourable winds, means the normal company CI is used.
Do not forget ATC see groundspeed on their radar not your indicated.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: australia
Posts: 358
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think it's all small fry campared to the fuel wasted while holding and being vectored?
All too often a few hundred kg's of fuel is saved on a flight through judicious selection of crusing altitude, speed etc only to arrive and be put in a hold 50nm from destination.
CTA's (controlled times of arrival) are pretty much ignored by most pilots so the controllers just deal with whatever turns up on their screens the best they can.
I have to admit I don't pay much heed to CTA's , I don't see any point when I know most other pilots don't either.
I think that if CTA's were rigidly enforced then a lot of fuel/money could be saved. I think the rule should be that if you aren't within two minutes of your CTA then you hold until a gap opens up or you become fuel critcal. If it was that black and white pilots would know what to expect and could delay departure by a few minutes if a tail wind was forecast, or could call company and give an estimated ETA and recieve a revised CTA for a head wind. I don't think you would end up holding until reserves very often, most of the time a gap would open up pretty quickly but what it means is that the crews who meet their CTA's don't get dicked around, straight on in for them.
What do ya reckon? Am I dream'n?
All too often a few hundred kg's of fuel is saved on a flight through judicious selection of crusing altitude, speed etc only to arrive and be put in a hold 50nm from destination.
CTA's (controlled times of arrival) are pretty much ignored by most pilots so the controllers just deal with whatever turns up on their screens the best they can.
I have to admit I don't pay much heed to CTA's , I don't see any point when I know most other pilots don't either.
I think that if CTA's were rigidly enforced then a lot of fuel/money could be saved. I think the rule should be that if you aren't within two minutes of your CTA then you hold until a gap opens up or you become fuel critcal. If it was that black and white pilots would know what to expect and could delay departure by a few minutes if a tail wind was forecast, or could call company and give an estimated ETA and recieve a revised CTA for a head wind. I don't think you would end up holding until reserves very often, most of the time a gap would open up pretty quickly but what it means is that the crews who meet their CTA's don't get dicked around, straight on in for them.
What do ya reckon? Am I dream'n?
Nunc est bibendum
I'm an Aussie pilot and I'll confirm that for the past couple of years we've been flying at whatever cost index gets us there on time. Often less than the 'standard' CI of 100 for the 744. Further, 767 domestic CI was once CI125 to meet quite unrealistic schedules. Now that the schedules have been paired back to something far more reasonable then CI40 is- from what I understand- far more the norm these days.
Further, the Straits times article was published after this article in the Australian a couple of weeks back.
Further, the Straits times article was published after this article in the Australian a couple of weeks back.
Stiffwing,
Oops yes I checked today. Our copy of your FP shows TAS, usually 430- 455.
Lots of useful things we used to get are no longer available eg clias, pob..
Yes we are privy to your schedules via the CTMS and ATFM systems.
We and the airlines have access to these sysems and use them to assess peak traffic periods.
Unfortunately they are an overview system and not available to the flow at his workstation so, no, we don't know if you are late/early/on time when we are organising a sequence.
That's the problem. we don't know what speeds you are going to fly.
I say again Q, V and J have advised use in writing that while there is a standard profile they will vary it at will depending on their requirements.
The flow controller at SY does not start work much before 6am so far as I am aware.
Yes, long range sequencing is in action throughout the night to try to maximise runway use from 2000 utc and to stop 8 aircraft arriving at the same time and holding at 40 miles.
I think [but have been wrong on a semi regular basis] the nighttime flow is now done from the noc shop in canberra.
Come in to a center anytime and see how we try to do things. You will always be welcome. After all we are actually working for you. The aviation industry pay the bills and therefore our wages.
AA
Oops yes I checked today. Our copy of your FP shows TAS, usually 430- 455.
Lots of useful things we used to get are no longer available eg clias, pob..
Yes we are privy to your schedules via the CTMS and ATFM systems.
We and the airlines have access to these sysems and use them to assess peak traffic periods.
Unfortunately they are an overview system and not available to the flow at his workstation so, no, we don't know if you are late/early/on time when we are organising a sequence.
That's the problem. we don't know what speeds you are going to fly.
I say again Q, V and J have advised use in writing that while there is a standard profile they will vary it at will depending on their requirements.
The flow controller at SY does not start work much before 6am so far as I am aware.
Yes, long range sequencing is in action throughout the night to try to maximise runway use from 2000 utc and to stop 8 aircraft arriving at the same time and holding at 40 miles.
I think [but have been wrong on a semi regular basis] the nighttime flow is now done from the noc shop in canberra.
Come in to a center anytime and see how we try to do things. You will always be welcome. After all we are actually working for you. The aviation industry pay the bills and therefore our wages.
AA
dodgybrothers.
OK Although we vary the cost index and allow the FMC to command the resulting climb IAS/MN and cruise MN, we don't allow it to change the descent speed from those standard descent speeds that ATC expect from us +/- 10 kt.
I think we understand each other now
OK Although we vary the cost index and allow the FMC to command the resulting climb IAS/MN and cruise MN, we don't allow it to change the descent speed from those standard descent speeds that ATC expect from us +/- 10 kt.
I think we understand each other now
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Perth
Posts: 214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Elaine: "Would you like something to read?"
Lady: "Do you have something light?"
Elaine: "How about this leaflet? Famous Jewish sports legends".
Lady: "Thank you!"
Lady: "Nervous?"
Stryker: "Yes."
Lady: "First time?"
Stryker: "No, I've been nervous lots of times"
Lady: "Do you have something light?"
Elaine: "How about this leaflet? Famous Jewish sports legends".
Lady: "Thank you!"
Lady: "Nervous?"
Stryker: "Yes."
Lady: "First time?"
Stryker: "No, I've been nervous lots of times"
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: No longer in Hong kong
Age: 75
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To Taildragger 67
Unfortunately you are looking at a fairly complex situation through (possibly) simple eyes. It would be all well and good if you just had 5 departures to go and then NOTHING, to do what you propose. Here in Hong Kong at certain times of the day we will have up to 20 aircraft requesting start and push back within a 5 to 10 minute period, with more continually adding on at the end. If we did as you say we would never reach the end of the queue. Add to that, with the complex departure slots that are placed on much of our traffic from our neighbours to the North the whole thing would end up a total mess....if it's not that already at times! As far as towing aircraft, that would be horrendous here, the grossly different towing speeds due to differing aircraft weights, the total loss of any flexibility in juggling departures, the strain (I would imagine) that towing heavily laden gross weight aircraft would place on the nose gear, plus other negatives. One also must consider that with aircraft taxiing on less than normal engine configurations, that increases in power settings needed to manouevre would cause possible damage to aircraft behind. The reason that these delays are with us, is not ..as many captains will say to their captive audience...ATC, but the fact that so many operators and authorities are trying to ring as much moisture out of the airport blood stone, as they possibly can. I have had the opportunity to watch and participate in, the movement of aircraft around airports for 40 years, and I can assure you, that what is being done at the moment is about as efficient as we can make it.
Aircraft have to be pushed back for departure to make way for inbounds needing the bay. I would say that in HK throughout the day, at least 5 to 10% of bays are occupied by late departures and not available immediately for an arrival, despite our having about 80 pax bays and another 40 freighter bays.
As far as JFK is concerned, they are just allowing far more aircraft to be scheduled during the "evening rush hour" than the airport or the airspace is capable of handling. My only advice to any departures is to get on the queue as soon as possible, and get outta Dodge.
Unfortunately you are looking at a fairly complex situation through (possibly) simple eyes. It would be all well and good if you just had 5 departures to go and then NOTHING, to do what you propose. Here in Hong Kong at certain times of the day we will have up to 20 aircraft requesting start and push back within a 5 to 10 minute period, with more continually adding on at the end. If we did as you say we would never reach the end of the queue. Add to that, with the complex departure slots that are placed on much of our traffic from our neighbours to the North the whole thing would end up a total mess....if it's not that already at times! As far as towing aircraft, that would be horrendous here, the grossly different towing speeds due to differing aircraft weights, the total loss of any flexibility in juggling departures, the strain (I would imagine) that towing heavily laden gross weight aircraft would place on the nose gear, plus other negatives. One also must consider that with aircraft taxiing on less than normal engine configurations, that increases in power settings needed to manouevre would cause possible damage to aircraft behind. The reason that these delays are with us, is not ..as many captains will say to their captive audience...ATC, but the fact that so many operators and authorities are trying to ring as much moisture out of the airport blood stone, as they possibly can. I have had the opportunity to watch and participate in, the movement of aircraft around airports for 40 years, and I can assure you, that what is being done at the moment is about as efficient as we can make it.
Aircraft have to be pushed back for departure to make way for inbounds needing the bay. I would say that in HK throughout the day, at least 5 to 10% of bays are occupied by late departures and not available immediately for an arrival, despite our having about 80 pax bays and another 40 freighter bays.
As far as JFK is concerned, they are just allowing far more aircraft to be scheduled during the "evening rush hour" than the airport or the airspace is capable of handling. My only advice to any departures is to get on the queue as soon as possible, and get outta Dodge.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: No longer in Hong kong
Age: 75
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ta Dragger, hope I didn't sound too pompous. I guess we have about 200 towed events here in HK each day, aircraft being moved around from one place to another, and quite frankly, they are a pain in the arse. The tug drivers/operators don't speak English, so we (the controllers) have to give assistants in the tower the instructions for the tug/tow in English, then this is passed to the tug in cantonese on a discreet frequency, and then we keep our fingers crossed that the correct message has been passed and understood. The only exception is tug/tows that need to cross the South runway (07R/25L) then there must be an English speaking tug crew to receive the appropriate (runway crossing) clearance from the Aerodrome controller.
I think I know enough cantonese to understand what is being passed by the assintants, but the crews of aircraft taxiing around are pretty much in the dark as to what conflicting tows are doing.
I think I know enough cantonese to understand what is being passed by the assintants, but the crews of aircraft taxiing around are pretty much in the dark as to what conflicting tows are doing.
