Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific
Reload this Page >

Do you know how this can happen?

Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific Airline and RPT Rumours & News in Australia, enZed and the Pacific

Do you know how this can happen?

Old 23rd May 2015, 23:01
  #61 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 153
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
haughtney1

Point 1. You have simply restated that I want to know earlier, but haven't given any useful suggestions as to how this can be achieved.
Point 2. This is really a question of semantics Giving you holding with a EAT is really no different to a feeder fix time + vectors/holding.
willadvise is offline  
Old 24th May 2015, 00:12
  #62 (permalink)  
BGQ
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wanaka
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I accept the reasons you provide... what I cannot accept is why I am so unlucky that just about every time I come to your country at least one of them is happening
BGQ is offline  
Old 24th May 2015, 00:56
  #63 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: at the computer
Posts: 154
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
Well someone used JFK as an example of one of the busiest airports in the world. Wikipedia shows the annual movement rate there is 410,000. They have two sets of parallel runways. Now compare that to Brisbane, which except under relatively rare circumstances is primarily a single runway operation with 226,000 movements in the last year. Now it should be easy to see that per runway Brisbane is moving more traffic than JFK and explain why you very rarely get no delaying action.
1Charlie is offline  
Old 24th May 2015, 01:14
  #64 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Harbour Master Place
Posts: 662
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
JFK has snow, icy runways, deicing, fog everything else the North Eastern US WX can dish up. Comparisons between movement rates between the relativity benign BNE weather & JFK don't make for a strong argument.
CurtainTwitcher is offline  
Old 24th May 2015, 01:32
  #65 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: at the computer
Posts: 154
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
Do you know how this can happen?

Alright let's use KLAX as a comparison. Brisbane weather, but without the thunderstorms. 666,900 per year on 4 parallel runways. 166,700 per runway plays 226,000.

This isn't a di@k measuring exercise. I'm trying to give some perspective to those who seem offended when they receive delaying action at what they seem to consider airports with no traffic.
1Charlie is offline  
Old 24th May 2015, 02:00
  #66 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Harbour Master Place
Posts: 662
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
This isn't a di@k measuring exercise.
Not trying to turn it into one. Having spent a fair bit of my life doing the CG/SMOKA/BLAKA/ELENI scenics, it would appear there is a major problem "The System", not the controllers at the front line. I find a good interplay between pilots & ATC to manage the traffic inside the 250nm ring from BNE. Strategic descents, slowdowns, pattern adjustment negotiations all work very well, however why do we have to go at warp speed as "know knows", some for 15+ hours until we hit the 250nm brick wall? I think that was haughtney1's point.

In you KLAX example again, what is the movement rate inside the LA basin itself? There are many fields in very complex busy airspace: LAX, Burbank, Orange County, Van Nuys, Long Beach - that covers just the major ones, all with jets. Again, not a valid comparison with any Australian field in terms of airspace & traffic density.

"The System", not the controllers is the problem, and it could be fixed with more money, however there has to be sufficient will to make that happen.
CurtainTwitcher is offline  
Old 24th May 2015, 02:39
  #67 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: at the computer
Posts: 154
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
Do you know how this can happen?

Delays don't have much to do with traffic density in the vicinity, you don't get an extra lap just because someone is arriving into an airport down the road. What I'm trying to say with the LA comparison is it's all about the runway rate. We can move around 55 per hour on a good day per runway, which is up there with any airport in the world. If the demand is for more than that the delays build up.

The 250nm brick wall is fairly common around the world. Like has been said earlier, places like Heathrow will tell you at top of descent to expect holding. Why didn't they tell you to slow down 15 hours out? The technology doesn't really exist to achieve what you are looking for yet. Airways NZ is the first in the world to operate a combined ground delay / airborne flow manager that they designed them selves. I've seen the system operating, you can scroll through the whole day and look at the sequence of aircraft that haven't departed yet. But like has been said earlier it can only work with what it can see. An aircraft gets airborne three minutes late because the cabin wasn't ready and they had to wait for an aircraft to land in Wellington before they took off, now they can't make their landing time in Auckland and that landing slot is lost forever because everyone was slowed down 15 hours out to make room for them. For this reason they still only pass the RTA to the pilot 40mins from touchdown which would work out to be about 200miles. This game just isn't predictable enough to achieve what you want.

Last edited by 1Charlie; 24th May 2015 at 03:04.
1Charlie is offline  
Old 24th May 2015, 03:12
  #68 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Oztrailea
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Never fear all,

The promised land is visible on the horizon....

Have a look at this executive collection of buzzwords and catchy phrases. One Sky, the panacea that cures all ill's......

OneSKY Australia program | Airservices
flightfocus is offline  
Old 24th May 2015, 12:31
  #69 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Mostly here, sometimes over there...
Posts: 373
Received 63 Likes on 19 Posts
"By 2018, Australia will be providing air traffic control services using the most advanced and integrated air traffic control system in the world."
Now, anyone guess why this is probably true?
Buttscratcher is offline  
Old 24th May 2015, 13:33
  #70 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: YMML
Posts: 1,837
Received 16 Likes on 6 Posts
Originally Posted by haughtney1
Sure Will

2 things would be a good start.

1.Advise me in good time (being pragmatic here) of expected or planned delays... (Given I'm datalink equipped it's a few strokes on the keyboard)

2. In the event of a delay...do as they do in the UK and Europe and increasingly in the US, advise us, send us to a fix to hold, and give us an onward EAT.
1. I can only message aircraft I have control of so I still have to go looking for you, put your estimate into Maestro, make a guess as to what sort of delay you'll actually get (seriously, a lot can change between 300 and 200 miles), tell another controller I may not even have a direct comm line to and get them to make a dozen clicks to send you the message.

2. What's the difference between that and us giving you a time that you can choose to slow down as much or as little as you want and we absorb the rest with vectors or holding? That's what I don't get. Why does it make you feel better to be given a 10 minute hold at 200 miles than us telling you to reduce speed to lose 10 minutes with the implicit understanding that you'll tell us what you want to do?

There 2 things that would make planet haughtney better for me.

P.S. If the controller is to busy, then isn't that an issue relating to safety and SA?
Yes it is, but it only takes a second or two to gain an appreciation of pending traffic, whereas it takes many times longer to provide the service you're asking for to just one aircraft. I can perform quite a number of my routine essential tasks in the time it takes to service just you with an guess as to a fix time when you're well outside my airspace. They don't have Maestro so can't do it themselves.

It's called workload management. The system we use just isn't designed to work the way that you want. Sure it can be achieved manually but that is labour intensive so isn't going to happen when I'm busy.

Are you guys understaffed or something? Knowing about a delay in good time also allows me to plan further on the basis of a contingency, prudence being what it is, my priority is also safety, knowing about that 10 minute delay in advance could be the difference between me legally being able to get to destination or divert.
We can go back and forth as much as we like, I want this...you can only give me that etc..ultimately my neck is on the line everytime I plant my fat butt in the chair, yes you guys have enormous responsibility as well but your safety and well being is hardly an issue, to me when I hear "I'm too busy" it's the thin end of the wedge, what else one day might someone be too busy to pass on, you guys have that luxury, that safety valve, I don't.
It's the nature of the job - workload isn't smooth. You can have 20 evenly spaced aircraft and be twiddling your thumbs or half a dozen and barely time to think. Loosely speaking staffing/sectors/the system is based on averages plus a margin. Sometimes the margins are exceeded and we just pedal faster to keep up. When you're busy the non-essential is moved to the back of the queue. That's what I get paid for - not forgetting to do the important things. While I won't physically fall out of the sky my neck is on the line every time I don a headset too.

In an imperfect world we make do, we improvise and we get the job done, if you use system and workload practicalities as reasons for being unable to provide some basic information..then maybe your organisation needs to look at how others seem to manage.
Not the guys on the front lines problem I know, god knows you have a bloody tough and thankless job at times, but as a team, we ought to be all moving in the same direction.
Too idealistic?
The information is being provided, just not with the timing you'd like. I don't disagree that things could be done better, but not with the system as it currently is.
le Pingouin is offline  
Old 24th May 2015, 15:40
  #71 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Santa Barbara
Posts: 912
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
ALL Pilots should be required to do a shift in an ATC centre at least once a year that encompasses peak time, not the bull**** PR visit that you sometimes make now.

ALL ATC's should be required to a famil day, sitting in the cockpit for the full duty day that includes at least one flight at peak time into a major airport, not a single famil flight that doesn't see what the crew have to deal with for a full duty day.

Guess why this doesn't happen now & will never in the future?
The name is Porter is offline  
Old 25th May 2015, 02:38
  #72 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Some great discussion going on in here! Although the original question seems to have been answered I'll throw in my 2c.

The way the sequence works in my neck of the woods is that the outer (ex) procedural sectors are responsible for for setting FF estimates into MAESTRO at around 350-400nm out, this starts to stabilise the system and then these controllers can give an expectation of delay and a Mach # slowdown when it hits a certain size. I'm not entirely sure what the process is for East Coast sequences re locking into MAESTRO, but for PH early stabilisation and slowdowns were what was requested by industry and works best for us due to the nature of the traffic patterns (no inbounds for 3-4 hours at a time, then a sudden sequence of 30-40 when all the mining traffic turns around at the same time). That's the reason that we have the outer sectors responsible for that stage.

The next sectors (250nm out) are responsible for issuing the actual FF times, making sure MAESTRO has put aircraft the correct order (remember the original sequence is built off pilot estimates.. Which is why MAESTRO often tries to put the cheeky bugger in his F100 ahead of the 737 even though he's 20nm behind and 20kt slower).
Even at this stage your 'expect a 6-7 minute delay' may have blown out to 15 mins due to 3 departures from nearby aerodromes. I guess the reason these departures aren't all allotted times in the sequence before departing is that if they don't get away on time then there will be holes in the sequence and everyone gets punished as a result... Similar to when pilots give an unrealistic estimate for JULIM, become number 1, then despite getting direct and pushing 310 on the descent to JULIM they end up 2 mins late and every behind gets shafted...


From 250nm to 160nm pilots have the chance to let us know how close they can get to the issued time and this info helps the inner centre controllers figure out the most efficient way to achieve the rest..
The last 12 months, with the implementation of MAESTRO and the consolidation of the GDP, has seen a decent increase in the number of aircraft being able to achieve the delays without our intervention. We've gone from 20-30min delays + holding the majority of traffic twice a day, every Tuesday/Wednesday/Thursday to occasionally having 15-20 minute delays and maybe holding a couple of aircraft a week.

But to go back to the original post there are still some instances where we will have to hit someone with 10 or so minutes on short notice.. People have discussed go arounds, medevac, rwy changes etc.. But occasionally it will also just be a case of taking a little longer than usual to pick up the delay. An example is: at 400 miles you give your estimate which puts you in your own sequence.. No one in front of you for 4-5 mins and no one behind you for the same time. Procedural sector locks this in, sees no delay in maestro and moves on to their next job. You get transferred at 250miles, get your STAR, and still no delay in MAESTRO, and no one near you so your time at the fix is not pertinent. In the next 6 minutes 3 departures get away from 2 aerodromes within 100 miles, and someone finishes airwork and is ready to return. These aircraft all need to be sequenced and some will end up in front of you.. Chances are you are coming in from the north and all these departures came from the south so it's a different controller looking after them. Someone who is all over it will be aware of what's going on in surrounding sectors, assessing Maestro making sure all times are up to date, but it does happen occasionally that as per this example an aircraft might run through to 160 odd miles before the inner controller picks up that what was originally a sequence of 1 has become a sequence of 4 and your dreams of scooting through the terminal before the rush are shattered.

Last edited by WhisprSYD; 25th May 2015 at 05:43.
WhisprSYD is online now  
Old 25th May 2015, 04:59
  #73 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: shivering in the cold dark shadow of my own magnificence.
Posts: 522
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thanks for the detailed explanation WhisperSYD.
psycho joe is offline  
Old 25th May 2015, 06:31
  #74 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: at the computer
Posts: 154
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
Do you know how this can happen?

Generally speaking should say the wind be calm, you're cruising at FL400 in your 77W. You're 200nm to run and have been asked to lose 10 mins. I'd imagine you're pretty close to min speed already at FL400. My question is would you rather stay at that altitude and speed and take a lap of the pattern, or descend lower to reduce the TAS and maybe take what you can 't lose with a vector. Technically speaking what would be more efficient. As soon as you've been assigned a delay you're now flying for best endurance instead of range. Is the best endurance going to be at mid levels as opposed to way up high? Or is it more efficient to stay high?

As a side note I was amazed on my last famil flight which was on an A388 from Auckland to Brisbane. Cruising at FL4XX at what was probably M.84 or so and 260 odd indicated or whatever it was and were assigned a delay of 15 minutes. I was very impressed at how slow the A388 can actually fly, we slowed down to about 210kts IAS and started a gradual descent for next 100nm or so. Still needed a lap of the pattern but it surprised me how flexible that aircraft is.
1Charlie is offline  
Old 25th May 2015, 09:55
  #75 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Harbour Master Place
Posts: 662
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
As a side note I was amazed on my last famil flight which was on an A388 from Auckland to Brisbane. Cruising at FL4XX at what was probably M.84 or so and 260 odd indicated or whatever it was and were assigned a delay of 15 minutes. I was very impressed at how slow the A388 can actually fly, we slowed down to about 210kts IAS and started a gradual descent for next 100nm or so. Still needed a lap of the pattern but it surprised me how flexible that aircraft is.
1Charlie, that is the crux of our beef! We can do amazing things with sufficient notice. The 250nm brick wall isn't really sufficient time for large losses.

On my machine fuel burn (including 5% allowance for racetrack hold) burn at altitude vs holding at 1500'
10,000' -4%
FL200 -7%
FL300 -7%
FL350 -6%

There isn't any benefit staying high to hold. By holding in a straight line you save 5% right off the bat. In general I find I only burn half the holding fuel by descending to say FL250 vs continuing at flight planned cruise altitude then entering the pattern to lose the same time. Slowing down at optimum altitude doesn't lose much time, due to relatively high minimum speed. Each aircraft will have its own profile, twins need to consider engine failure at min speed at high altitude, not so critical for an A380.

PER seem to have a good system, you blast off heading south, pass an estimate for JULUM, ATC get back with a crossing time and you use the next hour or two to lose the time, 15, 20 or even 30 minutes is possible with sufficient notice.
CurtainTwitcher is offline  
Old 25th May 2015, 10:38
  #76 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 153
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I am going to answer inevitable question. Why can it be done in Perth but not in Sydney and Melbourne?

The vast majority of jet traffic for YPPH departs from outside 400nm YPPH. This means that a sequence generated for an aircraft at 400nm is going to be a reasonable approximation because it is less likely to be changed by another jet departure closer to YPPH
This is not the case for YSSY and YMML.



As you can see every departure from YSSY, YPAD, YSCB and tasmania is within 400nm of YMML.
Similarly for YSSY. Every departure from YMML,YSCB,YBBN is within 400nm.

This is why we have to wait till you are about 250nm for the sequence to become stable.

Last edited by willadvise; 25th May 2015 at 10:54.
willadvise is offline  
Old 25th May 2015, 13:07
  #77 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Not at work
Posts: 1,569
Received 59 Likes on 30 Posts
WhisprSYD,

Thanks for the great detail you went into with your explanation, helps us understand things a bit more.

. Which is why MAESTRO often tries to put the cheeky bugger in his F100 ahead of the 737 even though he's 20nm behind and 20kt slower).
Glad to hear that you are aware this stuff goes on. Very frustrating for us too, as we know exactly where he/she is thanks to TCAS and we all know a 737 cruises faster than an F100!

Cheers,
TL
Transition Layer is offline  
Old 25th May 2015, 15:32
  #78 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: YMML
Posts: 1,837
Received 16 Likes on 6 Posts
Originally Posted by angryrat
To the ATCer's on this thread, thanks for the great job you do day in day out. Yes I admit I've sworn under my breath at you most days but it has never been personal and is more out of frustration than because of the job you are doing(I'm sure you have done the same with me). Like haughtney I get frustrated with the late notice, however, I get it is the system and I'd rather be given the option of losing that time myself than just being sent to a hold.
Thanks, I think most of us realise we're there to provide a service and do what we can within the confines of the system and the situation at hand. Sometimes it just all goes to poo and there's little we can do about it. Occasionally we're not on our game and make it harder. And yes, you get sworn at too, although I take the approach that life is too short to get overly worked up - I have to deal with the situation anyway so might as well fix it and move on.

Whatever you guys do please don't punish us all because of one airline. By all means send planet haughtney and his airline to the hold every time they need to lose time. Please let the rest of us make the situation work and beat them on efficiency.
It's a lot easier and safer for everyone to be doing the same thing. Yes, it's possible to run aircraft through holding traffic but it's complicated and easy to screw up. Like many things, it's possible but the extra workload is a threat. That said I'm sure we could accommodate haughtney and co. if it was made known their preference was to hold.

Since the ground delay program and this airborne strategy has been introduced, I have had to do very little holding in Oz. In fact we managed to lose 12 minutes without a vector into BNE the other night and yes we could hear the doubt in the controllers voice as to whether we would make it or not. Yes we had to work harder to make it happen but I believe that we saved my company 800kgs of fuel in one sector while some others just bleat.
And that's the crux of the discussion - by necessity you take the bottom up approach of managing a single aircraft while I have to take a more top down approach of managing a chunk of a whole system. You naturally want to optimise your single aircraft while I'm driven by system optimisation and the two don't always coincide. It's just the nature of the beast.

On average that means someone gets screwed for the benefit of the greater good. Better luck next time?
le Pingouin is offline  
Old 25th May 2015, 19:29
  #79 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Transition Layer
WhisprSYD,

Thanks for the great detail you went into with your explanation, helps us understand things a bit more.



Glad to hear that you are aware this stuff goes on. Very frustrating for us too, as we know exactly where he/she is thanks to TCAS and we all know a 737 cruises faster than an F100!

Cheers,
TL
No problem.
Yeah we try and police it to the best of our ability, and the fact that we can see exactly where all of you are on ADSB helps spot the obviously 'ambitious' estimates... It also used to be a pain in the ass switching aircraft around as it involved lengthy conversations with the flow, but MAESTRO has given us the license to use a bit of common sense in that situation.

That being said, it all comes down to the controller working too. Some of the newer, fresh faced and recently rated controllers still take a pilot's word as gospel, whereas those of us who have been around for a little longer have learned to be a bit more cynical when it comes to trusting all FF estimates.
WhisprSYD is online now  
Old 25th May 2015, 21:48
  #80 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Eastside
Posts: 634
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Similar to when pilots give an unrealistic estimate for JULIM, become number 1, then despite getting direct and pushing 310 on the descent to JULIM they end up 2 mins late and every behind gets shafted...
. This f@ckwit behaviour seems to be happening a lot lately - and it's just as likely to be a 737 as f100.

I'll be honest, I don't understand why, in this age of technology, you need to be relying on a verbal fix estimate. However, why not give aircraft unable to make their fix time a 180 degree vector to the back of the queue - I reckon that might sort out the problem.
grrowler is online now  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.