Virgin on a go slow?
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: rangaville
Posts: 2,280
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HF3000,
I don't think any ATC has blamed you for the speed changes. I know where the speed changes are coming from and it's not directly from the pilots.
I can't tell you exactly when (about 3 or 4 years ago) but overnight Qantas aircraft started climbing at 280 kts. Quite a few ATC's got caught out on the one particular morning I worked. Up until that point QF used to hammer, 300-320 kts. I think your Pilot group were told we knew about it. We knew nothing! There are countless new managers in ASA that knew about this but it wasn't passed on, probably because the MBA has no understanding of the implications.
I really do not care in the end what speed you climb/cruise/descend at. It's the communication process that is the problem. Back in the 'good ole days' ATC's used to run ASA & dare I say it (?) Pilots probably had more say in how things were run. BBQ's were had at the Sydney AACC (when it was one!) and Pilots and ATC's used to chat at these informal gatherings about what was happening, going to happen etc.
I don't think any ATC has blamed you for the speed changes. I know where the speed changes are coming from and it's not directly from the pilots.
I can't tell you exactly when (about 3 or 4 years ago) but overnight Qantas aircraft started climbing at 280 kts. Quite a few ATC's got caught out on the one particular morning I worked. Up until that point QF used to hammer, 300-320 kts. I think your Pilot group were told we knew about it. We knew nothing! There are countless new managers in ASA that knew about this but it wasn't passed on, probably because the MBA has no understanding of the implications.
I really do not care in the end what speed you climb/cruise/descend at. It's the communication process that is the problem. Back in the 'good ole days' ATC's used to run ASA & dare I say it (?) Pilots probably had more say in how things were run. BBQ's were had at the Sydney AACC (when it was one!) and Pilots and ATC's used to chat at these informal gatherings about what was happening, going to happen etc.
So what's the solution?
ASA needs a serious cleanout. I bull**** you not, I could fix it in 18 months. We all know what's wrong in this place, it's a yes man's paradise. The top dog doesn't want to know what's wrong and the 'ATC hate cell' in Canberra have control.
Jacks comment
It's the communication process that is the problem.
How about looking at how ASA and the airlines communicate this info, and then (perhaps more critically) how that info then flows to the operators ie the controllers and the pilots. what is the current system? Is there one?
How about ASA management post a quarterly summary to controllers of the outcome of meetings with the airlines in conjuntion with a 'sign-on notice sheet' that describes any short notice changes coming from the airlines. An MOU with the airlines mandating that any profile changes are communicated to ASA with at least one weeks notice should give them time to get it into the 'sign-on notice sheet' for you guys.
Something simple like that.
For interests sake, when you guys sign on, are you also signing for having read the latest changes as published by ASA in any sort of 'sign-on notice sheet'? Like pilots do.
I know nothing about ASA so all of the above may be rubbish, would be interesting to see where the actual problem lies though.
Framer
I'm sorry, I don't really get what the problem is here.
I don't know many controllers who are not mindful of speeds when clearing two to the same level. Too many types and too many operators.
If the V bean counters are stupid enough to fly as slow as they can up and down the coast, let them go. They will screw the slot time up for themselves and waste even more time holding somewhere over NSW burning the shareholders gas.
I realize now how good the airlines have it is australia. Some places around the place you can start you decent 380miles from destination. ATC couldn't give a crap if you decide to fly slow, they will just move you out the way of the big one behind you. And you would have been no. 4 in the sequence but now will be 20, expect holding. Not enough gas, too bad, what is your alternate?
I don't know many controllers who are not mindful of speeds when clearing two to the same level. Too many types and too many operators.
If the V bean counters are stupid enough to fly as slow as they can up and down the coast, let them go. They will screw the slot time up for themselves and waste even more time holding somewhere over NSW burning the shareholders gas.
I realize now how good the airlines have it is australia. Some places around the place you can start you decent 380miles from destination. ATC couldn't give a crap if you decide to fly slow, they will just move you out the way of the big one behind you. And you would have been no. 4 in the sequence but now will be 20, expect holding. Not enough gas, too bad, what is your alternate?
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My airline (QF) has standard descent speeds - for most fleets it is 280kt. We are told that ATC knows that. I have never witnessed a fellow crew member intentionally descending at a speed other than 280kt unless requested or authorised by ATC, so I don't understand the comment that you never know what speed we are doing.
Are we ALL doing 280kts as per this agreement or is this all a load of crap?
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: rangaville
Posts: 2,280
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Framer,
Sorry, allowing my obvious frustration to show through
There are airline liaison people in ASA. If V or QF are communicating changes to these people the message is NOT getting through to controllers at the work face.
We have a new information book that we must read and sign before plugging in. These 'useful' snippets of information are not being inserted into this book. This book is a continuous stream of changes that is virtually impossible to keep up with unless you have a photographic memory anyway.
As I said in a previous post, I really don't mind if these speeds are changed etc even on a day to day basis. My point is: If something changes overnight that hasn't changed for two or three or 10 years previous, shouldn't the people that this affects be briefed?
What I'm suggesting is that the 'liaison' people either have no idea how these changes affect the day to day workings of both of our jobs or the communication process is failing. I'd also suggest that these liaison jobs appear to me to be more about talking ****, spinning about how good ASA is and how 'we're listening to you as our valued customer'
Changes I would make are: at least a fortnightly operational briefing from both sides, not about the fluffy **** that ASA continues to promise the airlines and not deliver. About ACTUAL operational changes that you may be making or changes that we are making and how it affects the day to day operations.
This would be pilot manager to ATC manager, people who have had operational experience and understand the implications of any proposed changes.
Whilst ever the empires that I spoke of continue to be built, there will be precious little resources from this side to achieve that. ASA is all about spin, the rubbish that spews from the higher levels is hard to take when you've been around a while and see how problems were solved in 'the good ole days' before there was a 3 to 1 worker/manager ratio.
I'd also make available to the airlines recordings of what actually happens during 2 or 3 hour sequences. Along with this recorded data, you could sit down with a flow and have them explain to you what is happening and why. You could sit down and watch what affect flying slow and supposedly saving fuel has on your company's sequencing. It may work in some instances but you have the right to this data to make an informed decision.
I'm also interested in keeping my licence for as long as I choose to exercise it. I'm also interested in keeping my record as clean as possible whilst I exercise it
Sorry, allowing my obvious frustration to show through
There are airline liaison people in ASA. If V or QF are communicating changes to these people the message is NOT getting through to controllers at the work face.
We have a new information book that we must read and sign before plugging in. These 'useful' snippets of information are not being inserted into this book. This book is a continuous stream of changes that is virtually impossible to keep up with unless you have a photographic memory anyway.
As I said in a previous post, I really don't mind if these speeds are changed etc even on a day to day basis. My point is: If something changes overnight that hasn't changed for two or three or 10 years previous, shouldn't the people that this affects be briefed?
What I'm suggesting is that the 'liaison' people either have no idea how these changes affect the day to day workings of both of our jobs or the communication process is failing. I'd also suggest that these liaison jobs appear to me to be more about talking ****, spinning about how good ASA is and how 'we're listening to you as our valued customer'
Changes I would make are: at least a fortnightly operational briefing from both sides, not about the fluffy **** that ASA continues to promise the airlines and not deliver. About ACTUAL operational changes that you may be making or changes that we are making and how it affects the day to day operations.
This would be pilot manager to ATC manager, people who have had operational experience and understand the implications of any proposed changes.
Whilst ever the empires that I spoke of continue to be built, there will be precious little resources from this side to achieve that. ASA is all about spin, the rubbish that spews from the higher levels is hard to take when you've been around a while and see how problems were solved in 'the good ole days' before there was a 3 to 1 worker/manager ratio.
I'd also make available to the airlines recordings of what actually happens during 2 or 3 hour sequences. Along with this recorded data, you could sit down with a flow and have them explain to you what is happening and why. You could sit down and watch what affect flying slow and supposedly saving fuel has on your company's sequencing. It may work in some instances but you have the right to this data to make an informed decision.
I'm also interested in keeping my licence for as long as I choose to exercise it. I'm also interested in keeping my record as clean as possible whilst I exercise it
Jack……..I realise this is about QF and VB but in CX a descent speed of 300 kt shall be programmed, however for operational reasons this may be varied to suit the circumstances with ATC approval.
So, we all do 300 KIAS and the locals do 280?
So, we all do 300 KIAS and the locals do 280?
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: rangaville
Posts: 2,280
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nitpicker,
I used to do arrivals but not any more! I don't have a lot of jets descending in the airspace I now work (mainly climb & cruise). To my knowledge the domestics are all doing 280 on descent. It used to be 300 but once again, when it changed we were the last to know.
I used to do arrivals but not any more! I don't have a lot of jets descending in the airspace I now work (mainly climb & cruise). To my knowledge the domestics are all doing 280 on descent. It used to be 300 but once again, when it changed we were the last to know.
Ok, I dont think anyone has told CX!!
Moot point anyway I guess as the MISTRO ( spelling? ) changes all the speeds anyway
Better?
Moot point anyway I guess as the MISTRO ( spelling? ) changes all the speeds anyway
Better?
Last edited by nitpicker330; 6th Aug 2011 at 08:26.
Dear Nitpicker,
Your 300kt descent is compatible with domestic 280kt because the long haul heavies seem to commence descent a bit further out which means at any point along the way you are a bit lower which negates the extra 20kt IAS
Your 300kt descent is compatible with domestic 280kt because the long haul heavies seem to commence descent a bit further out which means at any point along the way you are a bit lower which negates the extra 20kt IAS
The scarebus certainly does descend a bit earlier but Boeing widebodies don't
mmmmm let me see…
A QF 738 descends from .78 into 280 KIAS
Thats about 445 TAS increasing until .78 = 280 KIAS where upon the TAS is about 457 ishhh at FL330
A CX A330 descends from .82 into 300 KIAS
That's about 470 TAS increasing until .82 = 300 KIAS
where upon the TAS is about 482 ishhh at FL 320
So, the A330 is about 25 kts faster all the way down to 10,000' where apon they both do 250 KIAS. ( actually 32 kts faster at FL320 )
The later descent point of the 738 wouldn't offset the faster A330 in my opinion, we would still catch you up.
mmmmm let me see…
A QF 738 descends from .78 into 280 KIAS
Thats about 445 TAS increasing until .78 = 280 KIAS where upon the TAS is about 457 ishhh at FL330
A CX A330 descends from .82 into 300 KIAS
That's about 470 TAS increasing until .82 = 300 KIAS
where upon the TAS is about 482 ishhh at FL 320
So, the A330 is about 25 kts faster all the way down to 10,000' where apon they both do 250 KIAS. ( actually 32 kts faster at FL320 )
The later descent point of the 738 wouldn't offset the faster A330 in my opinion, we would still catch you up.
Last edited by nitpicker330; 7th Aug 2011 at 10:15.
I do this every day, my nitpicker friend; believe me, a CX (or anybody else's) A330 two minutes behind a B737/A320/E190; no problems; any domestic narrowbody two minutes behind an A330 requires intervention!
Totally agree TFBT. I typically allow at least an extra minute (more likely two) for a non-domestic heavy.
A CX A330 will usually be around 10,000ft lower than the domestic at 100 miles - scraping the steps into ML.
A CX A330 will usually be around 10,000ft lower than the domestic at 100 miles - scraping the steps into ML.
I've run a lot of numbers courtesy of the trusty flight touch app on my i Pad and come to the conclusion you may be right.......Damn plastic Jet. 
The Bus is around 6,000' lower each nm on average and about 17 kts slower on average as a result. The 25 kts faster speed above 32000' would probably be lost lower down later.
Next trip I'm delaying my descent to 3 x profile!! Then I'll get ya
Until ATC screw my plans!!
The Bus is around 6,000' lower each nm on average and about 17 kts slower on average as a result. The 25 kts faster speed above 32000' would probably be lost lower down later.
Next trip I'm delaying my descent to 3 x profile!! Then I'll get ya
Until ATC screw my plans!!
Last edited by nitpicker330; 8th Aug 2011 at 23:55.