Melbourne Air Traffic Control

[EPIRB]

Why do Melbourne and Sydney have seperate frequencies to call when departing to a COBT controlled port yet other airports don't? Is this due to a higher rate of traffic movements that would impede the function of the SMC?

[GA Driver]

When I asked that question awhile back I got told Melbourne was a 'digital tower' and Sydney still had the old strips. No idea if that's still the case.


Today's fun arrivals into Melbourne, us and several others were given 20mins holding. Tigoz infront started to query why they were given 20mins when the notams indicated 10. There wasn't much explanation other than there's now 20 mins holding. I thought it was a fair question seeing we base our fuel figures on the destination requirements....

So what has to happen for the Notam to get updated or at least a hazard alert announced?
An additional 10mins traffic after the Marub6 AKL transition starts to add up.

[Fatguyinalittlecoat]

So is turning from Echo onto Alpha (for 34) and calling ready also bull?

You all do it guys, so don't get too narky when the opposition does it to you.

What utter rubbish.

[DukeBen]

Originally Posted by EPIRB

Why do Melbourne and Sydney have seperate frequencies to call when departing to a COBT controlled port yet other airports don't? Is this due to a higher rate of traffic movements that would impede the function of the SMC?

I can only speak for Melbourne but yes you are correct. The SMC has enough to do, as you can probably tell from the frequency congestion at times, without also having to search through a list for a callsign and COBT for certain departures before responding to pushback requests.

Pushing this task onto the clearance delivery controller works much better for us as they have more time and don't need their eyes out the window as much as the SMC.

Melbourne does use the INTAS system which doesn't use paper strips and Sydney is still on the old paper strip system but will be transitioning to INTAS as well sometime in the near future I believe.

[le Pingouin]

GA Driver, while it might be a fair question it's unlikely the en-route controller you're addressing it to will be able to provide an authoritative answer. You're asking the wrong person.

8.10.3.5 All traffic holding advisories are estimates only and are based on the best information available. Actual holding may differ from the estimate, including to allow for effective traffic management. Operators should use their own judgement on fuel carriage decisions.

[Snakecharma]

Le Ping,

With respect that is a bull**** response and you know it.

Granted 10 minutes (as discussed in this instance) isnt too much in the grand scheme of things (on face value, but in my aircraft it is close to 1 and a bit tonnes) but seriously where do we conjure extra fuel from if we get unexpected holding?

As an operator there is no rhyme or reason when delays occur, so using your "own judgement" is difficult.

Fuel decisions are made an hour or so prior to departure (in some cases earlier, in some cases later, but I doubt inside 30 minutes in most cases), and these decisions are based on info in many cases a further hour older, at least.

I do appreciate that stuff happens and sometimes delays just happen, but more info when you have the abacus out trying to figure out what your plan is is better than less info, so perhaps a means of telling the enroute guys/gals who are delivering the delaying info to aircraft the background would be helpful.

[Lookleft]

but seriously where do we conjure extra fuel from if we get unexpected holding?

You double the stated traffic holding. This is a battle the airlines need to fight if they don't want crews to carry the extra fuel, its not something the frontline ATC can change. If its an extra 1 and a bit tonnes then so be it. Its similar to carrying weather holding. The current state of forecasting is not what I would expect in the 21st century but my mitigation of the problem is to carry the fuel when I can. There has been more than a few occasions when the extra fuel I have carried has saved me from a diversion. There is no change to my schedule if I divert it just makes my day longer so I carry the fuel. Once again if the airlines don't like it then it is up to them to battle it out with the various agencies it is not up to me and my fuel decision.

[willadvise]

Originally Posted by Snakecharma

I do appreciate that stuff happens and sometimes delays just happen, but more info when you have the abacus out trying to figure out what your plan is is better than less info, so perhaps a means of telling the enroute guys/gals who are delivering the delaying info to aircraft the background would be helpful.

Why does it matter? A delay is a delay. You either have the fuel or you don't?

You must also be aware that Airline management pester Airservices to keep the recommended traffic delay advisory to an absolute minimum to save money.

[GA Driver]

Traffic holding is only an advisory and I am well versed in that paragraph you recited contained in the jepp. I do appreciate things can change in a blink of an eyelid particularly when it comes to Melbourne weather. The operator (well my operator) plans on known data. So that's why I pose the question. What has to happen to get the notam amended? It's all well and good to say it's up the the operator to take more, but if I start adding more and more for each of the Melbourne factors I'm not sure where we'd stop really.

The reason I mentioned it was because it does happen a bit into Melbourne (additional traffic holding.) Knowing about this earlier rather than later would be helpful, particularly before I've burnt fuel heading towards the holding pattern. Notams or hazard alerts could at least alert us to a problem BEFOREHAND so we can decide if we need to pop into Canberra (shudder) or head back from whence we came.

[Lookleft]

You must also be aware that Airline management pester Airservices to keep the recommended traffic delay advisory to an absolute minimum to save money.

As I thought which is why the AIP states what le ping posted (my bolding).

8.10.3.5 All traffic holding advisories are estimates only and are based on the best information available. Actual holding may differ from the estimate, including to allow for effective traffic management. Operators should use their own judgement on fuel carriage decisions.

The great bureaucratic arse covering. Who wears it in the end? You guessed it Who gets to have the final say as to how much fuel will be actually put in the tanks? Well done, two out of two.

[willadvise]

Originally Posted by GA Driver

So that's why I pose the question. What has to happen to get the notam amended? It's all well and good to say it's up the the operator to take more, but if I start adding more and more for each of the Melbourne factors I'm not sure where we'd stop really.

The reason I mentioned it was because it does happen a bit into Melbourne (additional traffic holding.) Knowing about this earlier rather than later would be helpful, particularly before I've burnt fuel heading towards the holding pattern. Notams or hazard alerts could at least alert us to a problem BEFOREHAND so we can decide if we need to pop into Canberra (shudder) or head back from whence we came.

The problem is that it is very difficult to predict when delays are going to be in excess of the advisory. I'm not sure if you are aware but the COBT system is not meant to remove delays, but to keep them to a maximum of 15mins. This is to keep pressure on the system to ensure slots are not lost and so that international aircraft, which are not subject to COBT, cop some of the delays. So with this in mind it is not to difficult to imagine how easily a 20min delay can occur (missed approach, change of runway, MEDEVAC, controller/pilot stuffing up the sequence) Most often these 20 min plus delays are just a very short term thing. Only half a dozen or so aircraft are affected then it is back to normal. Often you are sitting there watching MAESTRO (the ATC flow control tool) and the delays are at a constant 5-10 mins and then a couple of aircraft depart from close by airports and there is a missed approach and suddenly you have your 20min+ delay out of nowhere. If this happens NOTAMS are not going to be amended and I fail to see the point in hazard alerting when all affected aircraft are told of there delay anyway. A NOTAM and hazard alerts will only be raised if long term delays are expected .

[GA Driver]

I fail to see the point in hazard alerting when all affected aircraft are told of there delay anyway

And there in lies the problem, its too late by then. You're notifying us of a delay via the enroute controller as we get the star. This is usually 100nm(ish) prior to descent and past the halfway point if I wanted to do a U turn. We need to know about this earlier
Ignore the hazardalert or notam question if it really is that hard, but surely this could be passed down the line, 'expect 20min traffic delay!'
I completely understand what you are suggesting and respect your statements about runway changes, go-arounds (I was one of them) stuff ups etc. But its equally as dynamic for us with the changes, we just sit behind a different console however the consequences and decision making is a bit differnt.

A NOTAM and hazard alerts will only be raised if long term delays are expected

And here is the $64,000.... WHAT is a long term delay? I have had plenty of flow controllers opinions but never found anything that constitutes LONG TERM.
We have to find the fuel to cover this question.

Im not trying to finger point at anyone, but the earlier this stuff gets to us the better. A go around is going to effect all those aircraft behind, so why can't this information be passed down? Ive had it from the dep/app controller as it happens but thats usually it.

[willadvise]

Originally Posted by GA Driver

And there in lies the problem, its too late by then. You're notifying us of a delay via the enroute controller as we get the star. This is usually 100nm(ish) prior to descent and past the halfway point if I wanted to do a U turn. We need to know about this earlier
Ignore the hazardalert or notam question if it really is that hard, but surely this could be passed down the line, 'expect 20min traffic delay!'
I completely understand what you are suggesting and respect your statements about runway changes, go-arounds (I was one of them) stuff ups etc. But its equally as dynamic for us with the changes, we just sit behind a different console however the consequences and decision making is a bit differnt.


And here is the $64,000.... WHAT is a long term delay? I have had plenty of flow controllers opinions but never found anything that constitutes LONG TERM.
We have to find the fuel to cover this question.

Im not trying to finger point at anyone, but the earlier this stuff gets to us the better. A go around is going to effect all those aircraft behind, so why can't this information be passed down? Ive had it from the dep/app controller as it happens but thats usually it.

I guess my point is, and I should have made it clearer, is that often the controller at the half way point, where you would want to divert, doesn't know what your delay is going to be. Often at this point your delay may only be 5-10 mins and the delay blows out closer to destination. I suggest you have a good read of this thread as it has a lot of good info about how delays occur and why you don't get notification earlier.

[le Pingouin]

The problem with NOTAMs is the extent of delays often doesn't become evident until relatively late in the piece and then it's pointless issuing one - you're already in the air and either have the fuel or you don't. By the time aircraft on the ground who could load more fuel get airborne those delays will be long gone.

You can cop an extra 10 minutes delay just from traffic disposition - if five of you have the same estimate unlucky last gets an extra 10 minute delay.

[Snakecharma]

Lookleft, double the traffic advisory fuel is a nice sentiment but not practical in some cases.

I add fuel when I reckon I need to but sometimes I really need to justify in my own mind the trade off between fuel and payload and a couple of tonnes for "mum and the kids" isnt really a reasonable justification in my mind.

Willadvise - why does it matter? Well because the earlier I know the more options I have. In the machine I fly there are not all that many options so the more thinking music I have the better it is.

More to the point, the further I go down track the more options I give away until I get to the point where a diversion to the alternate is the only option. Given we always carry an alternate and we plan to land at the alternate with 2/10th of 5/8th of bugger all fuel it isnt a situation I would willingly put myself into unless I got pushed into a corner.

The earlier I make the decision to pull the pin and divert to somewhere which can more easily handle the machine I fly then the easier my life is, particularly after 14-16 hrs.

[Lookleft]

I would be surprised if carrying an extra 15 minutes results in a couple of tonnes but I don't know what you are flying. Its not for Mum and the kids either, its for the scenario you are describing. ATC are telling you here that they can't give you notice for extra holding due to various reasons so it is extra contingency fuel that is possibly or even probably going to be required.

[EPIRB]

Just to change the subject a little, two questions:

Why do we have to request a GLS?

What is the old tower used for? I noticed there were some lights in it tonight.

[le Pingouin]

I think we'll just clear you for an ILS approach on 16 or 27 and an RNAV on 34 or 09 if you don't ask.

[sunnySA]

Why do Melbourne and Sydney have seperate frequencies to call when departing to a COBT controlled port yet other airports don't? Is this due to a higher rate of traffic movements that would impede the function of the SMC?

Many of colleagues think that ATC should have nothing to do with COBT and that the airlines should manage it themselves. But we have what we have.
At Sydney there are discussions that ALL domestic aircraft should call Coordinator 24/7 (not just those with a COBT).

[RAC/OPS]

What is the old tower used for? I noticed there were some lights in it tonight.

Not used for anything as far as I know. Gradually decommissioning it.