Request vs Require.
it has also been explained the queue jumping domestic carriers are a regular beneficiary of by taking intersection departures when we taxi for full length. They never seem to complain if they jump the sequence to land on a shorter runway.
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: nowhere
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Keg,
No offence Keg, but where did ACMS/404 et al say they did it for commercial advantage? I'm pretty certain the Chinese carriers don't do it for commercial advantage either, but I'm sure you've worked out the possibilities there. And yes, I knew you'd been there done that, which makes your harping on about it surprising.
Btw , are you going to accept the min requirement.
Fishbowl,
Looks like I was right about you! Where have I said anything of the sort for you to make those conclusions about me? And where FFSs has anyone said ANYTHING derogatory about those who do ATC and the skills required for it? And yes, I've been "up there" and also appreciate the skills required.
You have a habit of jumping to conclusions as well, again you no nothing about me and my ability to do/not do your previous job.
The reason you got up my nose is you're attacking people about something you have very little knowledge/experience about. ACMS/404 etc haven't been coming across all hoity toity, they have just said when it comes down to rwy requirement it is THEIR decision to make on the day as they are the ones who will be doing the answering.
No offence Keg, but where did ACMS/404 et al say they did it for commercial advantage? I'm pretty certain the Chinese carriers don't do it for commercial advantage either, but I'm sure you've worked out the possibilities there. And yes, I knew you'd been there done that, which makes your harping on about it surprising.
Btw , are you going to accept the min requirement.
Fishbowl,
Looks like I was right about you! Where have I said anything of the sort for you to make those conclusions about me? And where FFSs has anyone said ANYTHING derogatory about those who do ATC and the skills required for it? And yes, I've been "up there" and also appreciate the skills required.
You have a habit of jumping to conclusions as well, again you no nothing about me and my ability to do/not do your previous job.
The reason you got up my nose is you're attacking people about something you have very little knowledge/experience about. ACMS/404 etc haven't been coming across all hoity toity, they have just said when it comes down to rwy requirement it is THEIR decision to make on the day as they are the ones who will be doing the answering.
How are they queue jumping if they'r ready before you? If they're not ready before you but it assists ATC with the traffic flow due to the wake separation requirements or the departure tracking issues then that's not queue jumping either.
Now because I want full length, are people going to start complaining that we are inept by not using intersection departures ? You know a Qantas or Virgin domestic A330 uses the short runway or an intersection for departure, that is the benchmark everyone should follow ?
When it suits, "traffic flow", "separation requirements", "departure tracking" are acceptable reasons to be put ahead, and similar happens on the arrival, but somehow the occasional heavy is the cause of all of the problems that started this thread off ?
The sad Australian sense of entitlement and needing someone to blame has raised its ugly head again, I go when ATC says I can. I don't give a toss if I woke up first, got to the airport first, got my coffee first, get my ATIS first, got my PDC first, push-back first, taxi first, or ready first, it is not a competition to me. The reality is, those using intersection departures will often get put ahead as ATC can plug holes with them. Fair enough, ATC have the big picture, not me.
ATC have their plan, and their big picture, my job it to convey what I need from them. I dont tell them how to do their job, nor do I think I am any more or less important than any of their other customers. I just go with the flow, with traffic density increasing, delays are going to get worse. Those bitching bettys who cannot adapt to the way things are now, lookout in 5-10 years when its even worse.
For those who are unaware the departure sequence is based on the 'ready' call not taxi clearance.
So that would be the "Ready on reaching" call or even worse still....
"Fully ready on reaching"...
"Fully ready on reaching"...
I love it even more overseas when ground tells an aircraft to monitor tower on frequency xyz.abc, then on the frequency change numnuts transmits their callsign being fully ready. Its great to hear the wit of some controllers when they explain in no uncertain terms what the word monitor means, apparently it is not the thing ontop of your computer.
Last edited by swh; 27th Jan 2015 at 02:02.
Nunc est bibendum
No offence Keg, but where did ACMS/404 et al say they did it for commercial advantage?
Btw , are you going to accept the min requirement.
Keg I have been ready many times in SYD when you have a 737, DHC-8, and SF340 call ready after me and use the various intersections on 16R to get way before me.
Apart from those relatively few times (and it's always been explained) I've never seen the departure queue go in anything other than the 'ready' call to ATC even for intersection traffic.
Not disputing that it hasn't occurred, just it's not been my experience in the last 6 years ops into/ out of SYD, MEL or BNE.
I don't give a toss... or ready first, it is not a competition to me.
ATC have their plan, and their big picture, my job it to convey what I need from them. I dont tell them how to do their job, nor do I think I am any more or less important than any of their other customers.
I suspect that most of us are coming at this from more or less the same direction. I certainly don't see ACMS/ 404 or ANCPER as trolling as perhaps others have indicated.
Anyway, all good. Where's my beer and popcorn for this arvo?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: OZ
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whatever floats ya Boat young fella.
Enjoy.
( just don't F*** up )
Oh and where did I say or imply I was a better Pilot than you?
Enjoy.
( just don't F*** up )
Oh and where did I say or imply I was a better Pilot than you?
I think that's really where you lost me "young fella"!
Strewth, I wasn't even having a swipe against Cathay pilots, settle sport.
Just as I don't use MAYDAY when a PAN PAN or severe when moderate is more appropriate, my question was simply do these operators even understand the basic difference between Request and Require and should they be coached by ATC or simply processed according to their request.
I'm not questioning a Commanders unfailing unflappable unquestionable right to require a certain runway when he happens to feel like it.
Really? I've not seen it many times at all. When it's occurred ATC have been very clear about it being related to wake separation and/ or the ability to get a both of us away (Dash out in front of me turning right shortly after takeoff and then me before the next arrival) instead of just getting me away due to their not being enough for the Dash to get 2 minutes behind me. As you say, it's about 'plugging holes'. I reckon it's a much more efficient use of the airspace and thus I rail against the term 'commercial advantage' as though they're gaming the system- at least in the way that we've been discussing throughout
I care. If I get (unfairly) put behind an A320 or 737 on the same route as me it can mean having to fly slower than ECON climbs, cruises and descents- burn more fuel.
I dont know if the ATC sequence is fair or not, I dont have their big picture. I would like to think in Australia ATC treat all of their customers the same, there is a bit of give and take for all.
It's got issues for turn arounds times at my destination when I'm scheduled on the next sector in min time.
If there is a tree in the way in the takeoff splay, they cut the tree down, not the way you take off. If the schedule does not work, change the schedule, not the way you work.
I've seen a 30 second delay in a 'ready' call transmit to a 27 minute delay on arrival between MEL and SYD.
Just as I don't use MAYDAY when a PAN PAN or severe when moderate is more appropriate, my question was simply do these operators even understand the basic difference between Request and Require and should they be coached by ATC or simply processed according to their request.
Foreign AOC holders operate to the regulations of the country of registration, not CASA. Your Australian licence does not permit you to operate those aircraft even if the type appears on your Australian licence.
Nunc est bibendum
They can see me waiting, nothing is achieved by carrying on like a pork chop.
Niff naff, absolute trivia, you have no control over that stuff why the artificial care factor ?
I dont know if the ATC sequence is fair or not, I dont have their big picture. I would like to think in Australia ATC treat all of their customers the same, there is a bit of give and take for all.
I dont know if the ATC sequence is fair or not, I dont have their big picture. I would like to think in Australia ATC treat all of their customers the same, there is a bit of give and take for all.
What paces the turn around for me is when everyone has done their job properly. We go when we are ready, not when a timetable says we should.
That is a point I have raised a number of times, it is the domestic carriers business decision to fly something like 4 narrow body aircraft between SYD/MEL an hour. What you are describing is a first world problem like not having free wifi at the coffee shop. It has nothing to do with foreign AOC holders.
Were I to make some implications of my own I would suggest that your comments allude to a quite blasé attitude to operating a commercial service or an ignorance of the multiple things that impact on whether a domestic network provides the service the passengers pay for as well as whether it's making money. I'll just put it down instead to some crossed wires in the comms and suspect that we're a lot closer in our thinking than what your comments imply.
Anyway, I'm done. Better things to do this evening.... and tomorrow... and the day after that is looking pretty busy too!
recall hearing one of the China carriers request 16 in MEL when the wind was a 30+ knot westerly with up to 10 knots of downwind.
There is a reason for this, BA used to get into the same situation with their B747.
Some NAA (like UK CAA) set up the takeoff calculations such that a balanced field length, even at relatively low weights, cannot be achieved --- like B767 on less than (from memory) 1700m.
The other reason is that the YMML wind was more likely south westerly, giving a crosswind on RW 27 as well as RW16.
Again, an NAA problem, if Vmcg limited V1 has to take into account increased minimum Vmcg limited V1 in (even a quite small) crosswind, this will again eliminate using RW 27, for some carriers, because you cannot fit in a balanced field length.
The CAAC are really quite conservative.
There was an example of this sort of thing, years ago, in operating the B747SP into Wellington, you could not use full thrust on takeoff on such a short runway, because of the full rating Vmcg limited V1. However, with Rating 1 Vmcg limited V1, you could get a balanced field length with reasonable payloads. Sounds a bit counter intuitive, but there are some strange wrinkles in performance engineering.
Tootle pip!!
WAGM:---- yes I did call you AMATEUR for a grand total of 5 mins before I cooled off and changed it.
You must have been bloody quick.
A lot of comments in here have been plain stupid and I was quite annoyed to say the least.
An example would be you last comment:--
" I'm not questioning a Commanders unfailing unflappable unquestionable right to require a certain runway when he happens to feel like it." You also included a smart ass rolling eyes emoticon.
You see there you go again casting aspersions........you just can't help yourself can you!!
You must have been bloody quick.
A lot of comments in here have been plain stupid and I was quite annoyed to say the least.
An example would be you last comment:--
" I'm not questioning a Commanders unfailing unflappable unquestionable right to require a certain runway when he happens to feel like it." You also included a smart ass rolling eyes emoticon.
You see there you go again casting aspersions........you just can't help yourself can you!!
Nunc est bibendum
Keg,
There is a reason for this, BA used to get into the same situation with their B747.
There is a reason for this, BA used to get into the same situation with their B747.
Up to 10 knots downwind and 30 knots x-wind when a long enough (particularly with that wind) into wind runway available.
I'm not sure anyone has suggested that so I find it a bit weird that you even make the point.
Because if it's happening on a regular basis then we can feed that back to the company and they can do something about it.
It gave us a commercial disadvantage with being slowed to allow other aircraft on the visual in front of us- to maximise the airspace use.
Using the logic you've articulated here I just 'suck it up' and do nothing about it- to the detriment of my airline when doing it's best to reduce costs. This is an 'easy win'.
However I also know that sometimes the delay on the ground in MEL is caused by something that happened ex Sydney and if I can manage to avoid it then so much the better.
I've never made such a suggestion that it is the fault of the foreign AOC holders.
"Without wishing to be too much of a pedant, does anyone else get irked by our neighbours from the north forever requesting the longest runways.
When asked if they "require" the requested runway their level 6 English doesn't appear to know the difference. Knowing the performance of these aircraft, I very much doubt they have operational requirements without an un serviceability. The rest of us are in effect being displaced for their comfort, convenience or lack of airmanship knowing the difference between request and require."
Were I to make some implications of my own I would suggest that your comments allude to a quite blasé attitude to operating a commercial service or an ignorance of the multiple things that impact on whether a domestic network provides the service the passengers pay for as well as whether it's making money.
Both of the large domestic carriers have stated in their recent annual results that there is a glut of excess domestic capacity, that is a self inflicted race for market share. The real cost saving is not generated by saving 10 minutes on one flight, it is by consolidating schedules to improve yields.
Request vs Require.
Regarding departure order. ATCs like pilots are paid to make use of their best judgement. Otherwise you may as well stick a traffic light at the threshold.
All things being equal, he who is ready at the holding point goes first. If in the controllers judgement, they can increase the runway utilisation by massaging the departure sequence without significant penalty to others they will. Please don't take it personally.
Like someone else said. "Ready is ready" it's not the arbiter of the sequence.
Note: Some people have developed a habit of seeing a large queue and calling ready miles back from the holding point to presumably lock in their departure order. Be aware that the tower controller won't have your strip yet, as its is still with the ground controller, and can't mark it as ready. If their memory is as bad as mine, they'll forget if you called ready or not because they're busy, and there are 15 aircraft ahead of you.
On the original issue, does anyone here know why Cobham won't accept RWY14 during converging operations at YBBN. At the airport capacity meeting the chief pilot when asked just said "we won't be using it, and that's that."
If RWY01 were to close, would they divert or land on 14?
Edit: by Cobham I mean their B717 operations.
All things being equal, he who is ready at the holding point goes first. If in the controllers judgement, they can increase the runway utilisation by massaging the departure sequence without significant penalty to others they will. Please don't take it personally.
Like someone else said. "Ready is ready" it's not the arbiter of the sequence.
Note: Some people have developed a habit of seeing a large queue and calling ready miles back from the holding point to presumably lock in their departure order. Be aware that the tower controller won't have your strip yet, as its is still with the ground controller, and can't mark it as ready. If their memory is as bad as mine, they'll forget if you called ready or not because they're busy, and there are 15 aircraft ahead of you.
On the original issue, does anyone here know why Cobham won't accept RWY14 during converging operations at YBBN. At the airport capacity meeting the chief pilot when asked just said "we won't be using it, and that's that."
If RWY01 were to close, would they divert or land on 14?
Edit: by Cobham I mean their B717 operations.
Last edited by 1Charlie; 28th Jan 2015 at 03:40.
Complylot,
Your age (24) shows, as does your immaturity. I doubt you have anywhere near the experience needed to comment on something you haven't done.
Your age (24) shows, as does your immaturity. I doubt you have anywhere near the experience needed to comment on something you haven't done.
"If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again, then hit it a third time, a tremendous whack.. because you can never believe everything you read on the internet"
9 pages.. can we get to 15?
What blows my mind is the time that some people have on their hands to provide such detailed twaddle.
There must be more than a few wives/girlfriends lacking attention.
"Hang on Dear, I need to clarify my point regarding request vs require! What?! Say again I can't hear you?! Oh, you have a warm ovaltine and Eggheads is about to start......ahhh, ummmm, sorry I'll be another 5 minutes I promise!"
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: sydney
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Real Problem
The real problem at Sydney is that 34L/16R is far too long.
It should be shortened to make it a less favorable choice.
Reduce its length, say, to "F"
The added benefit would be uninterrupted crossings at "A"
Normal international practice for rwy assignment is according to the direction of approach.
IE at sydney, from the east 16L/34R and from the west 16R/34L
The use of overfly circuits are discouraged because they create airborne conflict and reduce safety margins.
It should be shortened to make it a less favorable choice.
Reduce its length, say, to "F"
The added benefit would be uninterrupted crossings at "A"
Normal international practice for rwy assignment is according to the direction of approach.
IE at sydney, from the east 16L/34R and from the west 16R/34L
The use of overfly circuits are discouraged because they create airborne conflict and reduce safety margins.
Nunc est bibendum
The real problem at Sydney is that 34L/16R is far too long.
