Perth Airport - CEO Geatches on radio.

[Jack Ranga]

Just out of interest, can anybody name me an organisation that has it's headquarters in a separate city to it's two major centres?

[airdualbleedfault]

It's great to hear cool headed, reasonable replies from the ATCs, its certainly changed my opinion of them (in a good way).
I agree this has to go much higher than us grunts, and the incompetence at the top of ASA and CASA never ceases to amaze me.
I don't believe this discussion is at all wasted and its good to see that it is coming to the attention of people like AJ and the mining companies, as you would expect since they are losing big coin each week, so it might take a while but maybe something will actually get done.
In the mean time at least this thread might alleviate some of the ill feeling between ATC and pilots.
Cheers

[le Pingouin]

Just sometimes though I think that this is a case of 'perfection is the enemy of good enough'. If there is a large amount of holding looming, maybe its better to just pluck an order and sequence early, and leave the occasional gap as a contingency. Maybe its better to get a 30 minute delay 500nm out than only a 27 minute delay at 250nm?

I don't disagree and that's what Metron is aimed at. The one that really gives me the screaming sh!ts is SY as the curfew is lifting. I can have a wall of aircraft coming at me at the end of the doggo that I could be getting in some semblance of order 500 miles out. Except that SY doesn't do Maestro overnight so there's no easy way of integrating ML and BN traffic into a sequence. Instead I'm left with a fur ball of traffic and working unnecessarily hard.

[Capn Bloggs]

Originally Posted by airdualbleedfault

Yes Icarus, I believe Bloggs has joined Geaches in smoking crack

Are you going to acknowledge your faux paw with those Gatwick numbers of yours or can we just assume you are smoking crack??

As for

nowhere else in Asia do they use COBTs, when you are approaching airports in Asia and China they slow/vector you as required, Australia is unique in requiring a COBT AND a time at a waypoint with less than 1 minute buffer (depending on your watch/clock), so not sure what you are on about

You obviously have very little idea how the WA airspace runs because if we just got "slowed/vectored as required" without COBTs it would be a total shambles.

I wonder if they use COBTs/CTOTs/slots in busy places like Europe...

Originally Posted by Iccy

Bloggs you are either being mischievous or plain silly. You know that even with COBT one still has to vary the speed to reach the feeder fix at the required time. It is happening so not that hard. As you know once airborn the system becomes tactical rather than strategic and aircraft are processed on receipt.

Well der, that's obvious. I was merely saying that from a pilot's point of view, it is far easier to just taxi at a COBT than work backwards from a Feeder Fix time: how long to get there, how long for the departure, how long for the taxi, oh hang on another aircraft is inbound, drat, that'll be an unplanned extra 5 minutes to get to my Feeder Fix while we wait for him to land, bugger. Why you would prefer that over "just taxi as close as you can to XXXX and we'll sort it out airborne" is beyond me.

Originally Posted by Squawk 7600

It's difficult to take any ATC system seriously that follows an aircraft for 4 hours as it crosses continental Australia, then advises shortly before top of descent of a requirement to lose 10 minutes before the next waypoint

I've done a lot of flights into Perth (departing with less than 2hr flight time, as you're abeam ADL) and I cannot remember when I got a 10 minute delay "shortly before top of descent".

Originally Posted by Squawk7600

My point being if the perception is that METRON is working well I think you'll find considerable dissension amongst the final users.

It's working a damn-sight better that the previous system, especially now that most operators are complying with their COBTs. If there is still extensive holding with good compliance (and I've never had more than 15 minutes recently) then the Metron rate needs to be slowed-down a tad.

Originally Posted by Ops Normal

Problem is Bloggs is that after adhereing to a COBT, wheels-up at specified time some operators are still getting between 5-25+ mins enroute holding on CAVOK days then watching the two preferred operators get track shortening plus 300KIAS on descent and we watch them fly over the top at 15nm to run the VOR as we have been sitting on our "gifted" 210KIAS for the last 50nm. We then get to sit behind them at half the speed we want to be down their vectored long final. We miss our slots, our passengers miss their connections, we suffer busted slots for the rest of the day due consequential delays due to the first sector delays, pay our fines for missing those slots, go broke and ASA get to bleat about just how much money they are saving the industry etc on their recorded on-hold phone prattle.

See the issue clearer now? It is much easier and fairer to pre-allocate a realistic feeder fix time (say 50nm from the nominated airport) and should be available half an hour before due airborne and have the aircrew have to make that time or go away until they will fit in...

Right, so we have twenty aircraft holding at the Feeder Fix waiting for their allotted time to come up. Clever.

Originally Posted by Jarse

Toughen up, Bloggs. I thought you ex-military types were expert at +/- 15 secs over a waypoint

Us ex-boat drivers can do it to a minute on the east coast

When you were only doing two miles a minute +/- a minute or two didn't really matter!!

And yes, I belt my FO over the head with the paper if he/she misses our Feeder Fix time by more than 12 seconds! If the FMS would indicate less than 1/10 of a minute, I'd be there.

[airdualbleedfault]

So Bloggs let me guess, you're from WA and that's pretty much where most of your flying has been ?
You obviously have " no idea " how airspace runs outside your little bubble.
Busy places like Europe ? I assume you've never flown into Beijing or Shanghai ? And as far as I am aware, no, they don't use COBTs and slot times in "busy" Europe. BTW Beijing is far busier than any European airport, if you ever left WA you might have known this.
As far as my faux paw (sic), that is an " average " movements per hour for a SINGLE runway airport versus a " max " number of 24 for a 2 runway airport which I am told gets reduced to 16 when inst app in use. Gatwick handles around 4 times the traffic per month that Perth does.
PS you don't even have to travel the world to find these things out just enter " google " into your browser.....or I guess, ignorance is bliss.

[Roger Standby]

I hate to say it, but Metron does seem to have improved things.

I work enroute into Perth and had little faith that it would make a difference, but it has. Summer hasn't arrived yet, tho

I've worked other sectors across the land and to those that shoot their mouth off arguing that other places do it differently and why don't we follow other methods, you probably don't quite understand Perth either. I'm working far harder sorting Perth traffic than I ever did working Melbourne arrivals. A lot of that has to do with the ridiculous aircraft mix and the airspace limitations, but for the most part it's simply that twice a day, a million aircraft go out and an hour later, they come back. There's no even mix over the day, it's simply everyone wanting to go and then everyone wanting to come back. So be it.

And as far as thinking that we have preferential treatment to the two big carriers, think again. You're all just dots to be processed. Do what we ask and we're happy. Bitch and moan and LIE to us about what you can do and that makes us unhappy .

Non compliance of COBT has improved dramatically, thank goodness. You don't want to be vectored all over the sky, and we don't want to do it to you, especially when everyone else is coming on in.

[Transition Layer]

Any F100 drivers (Skywest/Alliance/Network) out there care to explain how you go about losing time enroute into Perth?

From what I can see, the F100 flies a very slow cruise (220KIAS or less) then into 250kts or more on descent, I.e. increasing speed from ToPD and a subsequently steeper descent profile.

On the 737, if possible we try and spread the delay across the cruise and descent (220/230 kts for both if down low enough and copping a really big delay). if following an F100 into Julim, we tend to catch you guys around about our planned descent point, then cop a vector off track in order to get a descent clearance through your level until you start going down. No drama really, just curious.

Also, do you ATC guys notice it too and are there plans for more standardisation across different types - aircraft performance permitting.

[Capn Bloggs]

I don't particularly care what goes on in Beijing or Shanghai. I say again, Fault: "You obviously have very little idea how the WA airspace runs because if we just got "slowed/vectored as required" without COBTs it would be a total shambles."

And as far as I am aware, no, they don't use COBTs and slot times in "busy" Europe.

Nah, doesn't sound like it...

Airport Coordination Limited - Gatwick Airport

More for you: read the first para in the box, Airdualbleedfault:

Airport Slots

Google indeed.

Originally Posted by Fault

As far as my faux paw (sic), that is an " average " movements per hour for a SINGLE runway airport versus a " max " number of 24 for a 2 runway airport which I am told gets reduced to 16 when inst app in use. Gatwick handles around 4 times the traffic per month that Perth does.

So Perth has a movement rate of 24 an hour in good weather, does it?

Sequencer said in 2011: "40 (departures & arrivals) an hour would be moved on a regular basis".

[Capn Bloggs]

Originally Posted by Rojer Standby

Non compliance of COBT has improved dramatically, thank goodness.

In most part due to the agreed-to threat of severe beatings of pilots-in-command and operators if departing early. Must be a similar motivational principle to those big fines [that don't exist] in Europe for dicking pax around when delayed....

Great to see some practical changes too, extending +10 to +30. Nobody likes running late and very few do it deliberately.

[Cuervo]

Aplying for ASA

Hi guys;

I am an experienced ATCO, former TWR and Radar APP Supervisor. Being 44 years old I am considering to leave Europe and give it a try downunder as ASA recently opened positions for experienced ATCOs in Perth and Sydney (both in TWR and APP)...

As you can easily understand if you read the above posts I am a bit worried as it looks like ASA is going through tough times.

Why is ASA opening positions for foreign, qualified ATCOS?!?
Is ASA expected to be a private company in the future?

If I manage to be sucessfull and join the company will I be an ATCO just like all my other (possible) future Aussie mates? Same pay, same overall job conditions?!?

If I do apply, will I be "playing along" some "anti- Aussie-ATCO game"?!?
Hope you understand me...
I will go if prospects are good (both for me, my family and "Aussie ATCOs").

I apologize if my post is out of the context here but so far I did not find a better place to place this message. Any feedback would be much appreciated as I do need to think this process carefully...
Thks a lot for your patience and consideration

[le Pingouin]

Mismanagement mainly - recruitment and training was severely reduced, to be followed several years later by the remarkable realisation they had an aging workforce, and the mad scrabble to rebuild recruitment levels when you no longer have the resources and staff to achieve it.

Many groups can't easily release staff to fill vacancies elsewhere because it would leave them shorter of staff than they already are. Privatisation was the aim at one stage, not any more.

It's simply a matter of trying to get suitably qualified bums in seats - you aren't doing anyone out of a job or a chance at moving to Sydney or Perth. You aren't being used to undermine terms and conditions.

My understanding is you start somewhere in the middle of the pay scales, I guess depending on experience and what you can negotiate, and from there progress as per locally recruited controllers. Aside from not starting at the bottom you're treated exactly the same as a local recruit.

I work with a number of controllers who came from overseas - mainly UK and South Africans, although there have been a couple of Danes, and I don't think anyone sees foreign recruits as a problem - you'll just be another controller. You'll fit in or not depending on you as an individual, not where you're from. My immediate group has people from the UK, US, Canada, Vietnam, Philippines and Peru, as well as a few Aussies

This thread would probably be more suitable: http://www.pprune.org/atc-issues/311...c-testing.html

[Capn Bloggs]

COBT plus FFT. A thing of beauty!

[Nautilus Blue]

Any F100 drivers (Skywest/Alliance/Network) out there care to explain how you go about losing time enroute into Perth?

From what I can see, the F100 flies a very slow cruise (220KIAS or less) then into 250kts or more on descent, I.e. increasing speed from ToPD and a subsequently steeper descent profile.

On the 737, if possible we try and spread the delay across the cruise and descent (220/230 kts for both if down low enough and copping a really big delay). if following an F100 into Julim, we tend to catch you guys around about our planned descent point, then cop a vector off track in order to get a descent clearance through your level until you start going down. No drama really, just curious.

Also, do you ATC guys notice it too and are there plans for more standardisation across different types - aircraft performance permitting.

Last question first, about 12 times a shift, and no.

F100s seem slow down a lot more on cruise than 737's, but not below descent speed. Typically in terms of ground speed (which is what I'm most concerned with as an ATC) they seem to be constant cruise and descent, whereas 737s (particularly Qantas) will lose most of the time in the descent. At TOD a 737 will often look to be anything up to 4-5 minutes early based on groundspeed, which is why we nag about making your time. Sometimes this means you have actually overtaken the aircraft you are supposed to be following. The 737 can't have descent until it's 5 miles behind, it won't get 5 miles behind until it slows down, and it can't slow down until it descends.

It's also not just different types but different companies. A Qantas 737 behind a Virgin 737 will result in exactly the same problem. As we can see this coming 150+ miles out, I used to suggest the whichever aircraft was second to lose as much time as possible during cruise, but gave up.

In summary, two aircraft on the same STAR with FF 2 minutes apart will as often as not require vectoring or step deent even if both are exactly on time.

As an aside, when we used to vector and use speed to in-trail the inbounds, 250 KIAS was considered the minimum we could reduce an aircraft to. If you really stuffed up the vectoring you could ask for 240, 230 if you were desperate. Also, it was always taught that making an aircraft speed up again after slowing down was a cardinal sin. When we went to pilot adjusted fix times, with 250 from the fix, it never occurred to most of us that you would slow down to below 250, and than speed up again at the fix.

Edited to ask : Capn Bloggs is that near MRW, and why distance GEL? I didn't think the airline I thought you flew for went there?

[Capn Bloggs]

Originally Posted by Nautilus Blue

is that near MRW, and why distance GEL? I didn't think the airline I thought you flew for went there?

Hal auto tunes any VORs within 130nm, unless the crew overrides him. We do go there on occasion; last time was a @#$% rescue.

At TOD a 737 will often look to be anything up to 4-5 minutes early based on groundspeed, which is why we nag about making your time. Sometimes this means you have actually overtaken the aircraft you are supposed to be following. The 737 can't have descent until it's 5 miles behind, it won't get 5 miles behind until it slows down, and it can't slow down until it descends.

Been in that situation twice. The 737 was so far in front (later FFT) it was never going to work, so we negotiated a sequence change. All went well after that. Maybe we got sucked in!

[Engineer_aus]

Nice reflection there Capt.....

[Nautilus Blue]

Thanks Capn Bloggs, learn something new very day. And yes, you did .

airdualbleedfault - with respect I think you are still confusing movements with arrivals or departures. Wed morning TWR were firing 40+/hour departures. Remember all bar two flights out of PH are in an arc of just 135 degrees, and I don't think thats bad going (if the TWR didn't clump same direction departures together we could do better, but thats another story).

[Groaner]

Just out of interest, can anybody name me an organisation that has it's headquarters in a separate city to it's two major centres?

Umm, the federal government? Rio Tinto? BHP? Most/all Perth junior mining companies?

[sunnySA]

if the TWR didn't clump same direction departures together we could do better, but thats another story

Surely this IS the story, HIRO can only be effective if everyone is playing the game.

[aussie027]

airdualbleedfault - with respect I think you are still confusing movements with arrivals or departures. Wed morning TWR were firing 40+/hour departures. Remember all bar two flights out of PH are in an arc of just 135 degrees, and I don't think thats bad going (if the TWR didn't clump same direction departures together we could do better, but thats another story).

Especially in Perth's peak departure times-

The above same direction comment just got me thinking about the fact that once all the departing aircraft are lined up nose to tail on the 1 or maybe 2 available taxiways to the THLD holding points then ATC can basically only launch them in the order they are lined up on each, regardless of their departure routing/direction or type (TP or jet) and thus departure climb out speeds.

Just an out of the box thought, what if the last approx 3-500m of the taxiway was wide enough to be like a 2 lane road so that everyone was lined up as now nose to tail in the left hand "holding lane" but could then be called out of that line/lane by ATC so that they can be launched in any order ATC deemed best??? The order of the original taxiway lineup then wouldn't matter. As gaps form in the holding lane everyone just moves forward to fill gaps and allow following aircraft in to the back of the "holding lane" area.

That way they could launch say 2-4 similar speed jets one after the other then 2-4 T/props etc and so on so there would be less issues with a jet that was lined up right behind it overtaking a T/Prop on a similar/same SID or routing or a fast jet doing the same to a slower climbing one etc until they were further away from the airport where there is then more room to manoeuvre/ radar vector both laterally as well as vertically to maintain separation.

That might lead to an overall faster TKOf rate/hr as the time waiting for faster type to be cleared behind a slower aircraft that has departed ahead of it could be reduced as the climb speeds of each would be better matched and there would be little overtaking rate speed difference, eg jet behind a much slower climbing T/prop.
IE, Separation times could be closer to the minimums allowed as the speed/performance of that "departing group type" would all be very similar.

If 2-3 T/props go one after the other with say a left turn on routes heading in a certain direction then maybe the next 2-3 jets launched behind them could be those going right initially or further straight out before turning left etc.

I hope you can understand what I am trying to say. Just an idea.

[Transition Layer]

Nautilus, thanks for the ATC perspective. We get a little frustrated when we are down low, at min speed and still overtaking the aircraft sequenced in front of us. The F100s seem to cause the most grief for whatever reason, obviously they cruise slower and then plan to descend at much higher speeds.

There's only so much you can do when you're reasonably heavy and don't have unlimited fuel tanks!