GPS technology breaks Perth Airport gridlock...?
Thread Starter
GPS technology breaks Perth Airport gridlock...?
from The West:
While WARRP has done wonders for "smoothing" operations in WA outside radar coverage, and the new taxiway to the 06 threashold helps departures (by 5 minutes? 
), the GPS standards mentioned do very little for the main problem at Perth: the lack of a second runway!
The airborne holding periods and slot times for departure certainly haven't been "broken".
Call me a sceptic, but I reckon this is a GT peace-offering to WAC, letting them off the hook over the second runway after giving them a caning a few weeks ago about terminal delays.
GPS technology breaks Perth Airport gridlock
11th May 2009, 6:00 WST
Air traffic control delays at Perth Airport that have caused costly bottlenecks lasting up to 45 minutes have been eliminated by new streamlined procedures.
They take advantage of the latest navigation technology using a global positioning system with pinpoint accuracy to just a few metres — instead of kilometres.
Congestion at Perth Airport has been made worse by the morning rush period between 5.30am and 7am when up to 70 aircraft depart and arrive on peak days.
Air traffic control provider AirServices Australia launched the Western Australia Route Review Project in 2002 to clean up WA air routes and air traffic control procedures that had their origins in the 1940s.
The addition of GPS capability on modern commercial aircraft has allowed much closer separation between aircraft.
Previously, the navigation tolerance between GPS-approved aircraft was a 14 nautical mile buffer around each aircraft.
This meant that two aircraft had to be 29 nautical miles apart — with the extra one nautical mile allowance for error.
Unlike the US and Europe, most of WA has no radar coverage and error tolerances had to be built into the air traffic control system, which relied essentially on intended speeds and course and pilots reporting position.
Controllers at Perth Airport had to keep aircraft at least three minutes apart on take-off, which meant the maximum aircraft able to takeoff per hour was about 20.
The new separation has been reduced to 15 nautical miles and combined with better co-ordination of aircraft that will use different flight tracks, the number of take-offs has effectively doubled.
At the same time, Perth Airport has completed a new taxiway that allows aircraft faster access to runway 06 — the shorter cross-runway that is used in strong easterly winds.
This taxiway saves at least five minutes each departure.
Perth Airport now has on average about 350 arrivals and departures a day.
But on peak days of Tuesdays and Thursdays the number is closer to 450 a day, making it the third busiest capital city airport after Sydney and Melbourne.
GEOFFREY THOMAS
11th May 2009, 6:00 WST
Air traffic control delays at Perth Airport that have caused costly bottlenecks lasting up to 45 minutes have been eliminated by new streamlined procedures.
They take advantage of the latest navigation technology using a global positioning system with pinpoint accuracy to just a few metres — instead of kilometres.
Congestion at Perth Airport has been made worse by the morning rush period between 5.30am and 7am when up to 70 aircraft depart and arrive on peak days.
Air traffic control provider AirServices Australia launched the Western Australia Route Review Project in 2002 to clean up WA air routes and air traffic control procedures that had their origins in the 1940s.
The addition of GPS capability on modern commercial aircraft has allowed much closer separation between aircraft.
Previously, the navigation tolerance between GPS-approved aircraft was a 14 nautical mile buffer around each aircraft.
This meant that two aircraft had to be 29 nautical miles apart — with the extra one nautical mile allowance for error.
Unlike the US and Europe, most of WA has no radar coverage and error tolerances had to be built into the air traffic control system, which relied essentially on intended speeds and course and pilots reporting position.
Controllers at Perth Airport had to keep aircraft at least three minutes apart on take-off, which meant the maximum aircraft able to takeoff per hour was about 20.
The new separation has been reduced to 15 nautical miles and combined with better co-ordination of aircraft that will use different flight tracks, the number of take-offs has effectively doubled.
At the same time, Perth Airport has completed a new taxiway that allows aircraft faster access to runway 06 — the shorter cross-runway that is used in strong easterly winds.
This taxiway saves at least five minutes each departure.
Perth Airport now has on average about 350 arrivals and departures a day.
But on peak days of Tuesdays and Thursdays the number is closer to 450 a day, making it the third busiest capital city airport after Sydney and Melbourne.
GEOFFREY THOMAS
), the GPS standards mentioned do very little for the main problem at Perth: the lack of a second runway!The airborne holding periods and slot times for departure certainly haven't been "broken".
Call me a sceptic, but I reckon this is a GT peace-offering to WAC, letting them off the hook over the second runway after giving them a caning a few weeks ago about terminal delays.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The land down-under
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting to note:
The new procedures, of course, had their origins in the 1940s - as will anything that follows...
Why do we even feed some journalists?
DNC
Air traffic control provider AirServices Australia launched the Western Australia Route Review Project in 2002 to clean up WA air routes and air traffic control procedures that had their origins in the 1940s.
Why do we even feed some journalists?
DNC
Air traffic control provider AirServices Australia launched the Western Australia Route Review Project in 2002 to clean up WA air routes and air traffic control procedures that had their origins in the 1940s.
If that isn't a setup at the end of a long day in adverse conditions I don't know what is.
Regards,
BH.
Thread Starter
And despite this recent review there are still air routes into YPPH that have no connecting STARs and also STARs that have the name of another STAR as the transition identifier.
If that isn't a setup at the end of a long day in adverse conditions I don't know what is.
If that isn't a setup at the end of a long day in adverse conditions I don't know what is.
What was achieved by PM, GW and their cohorts with WARRP was nothing short of exceptional, IMO. A few ragged edges but a terrific outcome overall. Pity about the clankup at the runway...
I know how to fix it........bring back waypoint ALWYN.....that'll sort things
Paperwork is in the system Capn Bloggs. 
Agreed, but why not get it all correct.
Regards,
BH.
What was achieved by PM, GW and their cohorts with WARRP was nothing short of exceptional, IMO. A few ragged edges but a terrific outcome overall.
Regards,
BH.
Thread Starter
Thank you 767. Bugsmasher, two lengths of bitumen that cross in the middle are not classified as two runways in this context, if you get what I mean.
CONDL v GOSNL: wax job required?
CONDL v GOSNL: wax job required?
Fair point though Bloggs, would be a huge improvement if in the morning one could actually take off on one of the strips of bitumen RWY 24!. For goodness sake 24 with right turns and 21 with left turns would make a huge difference to flow rates.
But no. Noise complaints. So we spend millions of man hours, engine hours and burn more fossil fuel to keep the noise down at what..7-8am when everyone is getting up and having breakfast or driving to work anyway.
Sigh
But no. Noise complaints. So we spend millions of man hours, engine hours and burn more fossil fuel to keep the noise down at what..7-8am when everyone is getting up and having breakfast or driving to work anyway.
Sigh
GT Journalism
Conclusive proof I would think that GT is a discredited journalist who writes rubbish about aviation for a living. What on earth is he on about? There must be something he wants from either ATC or WAAC staff. This article is (yet again) complete nonsense.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Dubai
Age: 44
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There have been a few instances where pilots have flown CONDL arrivals instead of GOSNL. Unfortunately, leads to the controller being stood down until they work out what happened. Supposedly fix is in the system... CONDL will become CONNY or something like that is what I have been told. Hope it fixes it.
And just like every other airport in the world, the lack of bitumen is what causes the delays. There have been no changes to the arrival rate for years so this airspace change has done nothing to help that. The reduction in traffic we service is what has helped.
And just like every other airport in the world, the lack of bitumen is what causes the delays. There have been no changes to the arrival rate for years so this airspace change has done nothing to help that. The reduction in traffic we service is what has helped.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: The World
Posts: 136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There have been a few instances where pilots have flown CONDL arrivals instead of GOSNL. Unfortunately, leads to the controller being stood down until they work out what happened.
If something went wrong but there was no separation issue then the easiest thing is to ask the pilot whether they understood the clearance correctly, if they believe they did then it gets recorded but with no fault put on the controller.
It makes life a lot easier when you don't go to work worrying about every little minor thing that can go wrong, especially with feeding the machine and actually spend more time focusing on keeping the aircraft apart.
And just like every other airport in the world, the lack of bitumen is what causes the delays. There have been no changes to the arrival rate for years so this airspace change has done nothing to help that. The reduction in traffic we service is what has helped.
Last edited by west atc; 14th May 2009 at 09:41.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,382
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
7-8am when everyone is getting up and having breakfast or driving to work anyway.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The land down-under
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Particularly nice touch that the land reserved for a parallel runway is now rapidly filling with industrial buildings on 20 year leases. The theory being - "Tell us if you want that runway and give us 25 years notice to end the leases and build the damn thing..."
Just goes to prove that airport operators aren't interested in aviation. It just gets in the way of developing all that lovely flat industrial land relatively close to capitol cities. How many more DFOs do we need?
DNC
Just goes to prove that airport operators aren't interested in aviation. It just gets in the way of developing all that lovely flat industrial land relatively close to capitol cities. How many more DFOs do we need?
DNC
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: australia
Posts: 415
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you look at the major airports in USA and UK you will find the airport land is generally utilised for commercial property where ever it can be safely outside exclusion zones, otherwise the landing/handling fees would be manifestly higher.
A really good example of offsetting costs is the work being done at Jandakot.
A really good example of offsetting costs is the work being done at Jandakot.
I am no big fan of WAC however...
I am not sure that this is true. Have a look at this link to the WAC Perth Airport Master Plan and check out the plans and aerial photo, you will see that the racetrack is in the way but not the distribution centre, as far as I can see.
Happy to be corrected.
http://www.perthairport.com/getfile....&ObjectID=3387
Particularly nice touch that the land reserved for a parallel runway is now rapidly filling with industrial buildings
Happy to be corrected.
http://www.perthairport.com/getfile....&ObjectID=3387