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

Melbourne Air Traffic Control

Old 11th Dec 2016, 23:53
  #61 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 77
Agreed, you ATC do a great job with the limited resources and I imagine excessive bureaucracy that is forced upon you. Well done.

For what it's worth, Adelaide is becoming increasingly bad as well. Not sure why, but lately seem to subjected to lots of delaying action, yet when arriving at the airfield, there is no other traffic anywhere. Has there been a change of procedure?



Cheers.
cloudsurfng is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2016, 00:27
  #62 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sincity
Posts: 972
Where can we improve departure acceptance rates?

Thats the logjam excuse ive often heard of regarding what seems to be inefficient takeoff sequences... other busy ports just fire em off and sort it out enroute but here in oz they manage to squeeze a saab into a 7nm gap
maggot is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2016, 00:51
  #63 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Age: 64
Posts: 338
Why won't you give conditional line up clearances? Waiting until the landing traffic reaches the gate and the crew have disembarked doesn't keep things flowing.
mrdeux is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2016, 03:16
  #64 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: YMML
Posts: 1,694
SP, venting on PPRuNe is just that, venting. It will do nothing to improve things for you as we have no influence over things like Metron. It needs to come from your management kicking up a stink with our management. Or the minister saying "fix this". As I keep saying, it's too many aircraft arriving at the same time.
le Pingouin is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2016, 03:59
  #65 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Australia
Posts: 348
As I keep saying, it's too many aircraft arriving at the same time.
No it's not. It's a two runway international airport that can't handle nearly as many movements as it should.
Slippery_Pete is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2016, 04:14
  #66 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Earth
Posts: 82
As I keep saying, it's too many aircraft arriving at the same time
I know you meant that sincerely but it isn't accurate.

Many airports around the world deal with far greater movements and less runway options but do a better job than Melbourne ATC is allowed to do. As someone mentioned earlier, take a look at Dubai for instance. The airspace surrounding the airport is a severely restricted, due to the countries involved. Yet they now handle the massive amount of aircraft movements (#27 in the world) with aplomb.

ASA needs to pull their finger out and start providing the service which they think they are, but aren't. It is laughable.
keepitrealok is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2016, 04:23
  #67 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Doomagee
Age: 6
Posts: 640
Asking airline management or reps to address it? That's funny stuff.

Adelaide's favourite trick is RW05 with a 5 knot tailwind turning into RW23 on pushback. We love doing all the figures, the whole set up and brief again as we've got nothing better to do with our time and it carries no risk at all. Pushback should be the cut off for the runway change unless its outside performance figures.

Very few can be bothered asking for speed waivers on departure or arrival these days as it's gotten too hard. Saves fuel and time but that's neither here nor there in such a profitable non time critical industry.

Maybe the carpark and food court could throw a few dollars the airlines way!
Berealgetreal is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2016, 04:23
  #68 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: In da Big Smoke
Posts: 2,348
As I keep saying, it's too many aircraft arriving at the same time.
Are you seriously suggesting that airlines should change their schedules so to spread out the departures and arrivals over a longer time period?
neville_nobody is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2016, 05:54
  #69 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 58
Conditional Lineup

..Can't be used with the stop bars active. Says so in about 6 different places in the manual. Big smacks.

KIR
KeepItRolling is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2016, 05:55
  #70 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: PA
Age: 54
Posts: 35
Something is up on 09 arrivals, seldom, very, very seldom have I seen an arrival. The RNP procedures are really nice, but I seem to remember them being perm NOTAMd out of use. 09 seems far more logical to use, as you end at the terminal, so who knows...

AWOS winds are at 10m, so the terrain, especially for 27 and 16 makes those reading useless until you are at about 10m. Almost always see a 90 degree turn from ATIS in winds at around 150-200m on 16 depending on the prevailing direction, due to the valley off to the east of the airport. I heard that the use the dust from the gravel pit to determine runways rather than AWOS...

Almost always a good crosswind in 09/27, so it makes perfect sense to build the other runway parallel to 09/27, rather than 16/34...

love the single runway ops when the winds close either down...
underfire is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2016, 06:33
  #71 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Doomagee
Age: 6
Posts: 640
The planned parallel is 09/27 correct?
Personally prefer 16.
Berealgetreal is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2016, 06:36
  #72 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: YMML
Posts: 1,694
b.r.g.t. these problems are systemic - the airlines are the ones suffering the consequences and are the major "customer" and are the ones with all the evidence to back up their claims. Controllers certainly don't have access to any of those details, so who else is going to be able to push to get things fixed?

"Too many aircraft arriving at the same time" is exactly the problem. If it's costing too much money then push to do something about it. Don't just keep firing aircraft in at some theoretical rate you'd like to be able to knowing they'll be delayed by the actual conditions as they exist.

Shocking thought isn't it neville


le Pingouin is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2016, 06:54
  #73 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Doomagee
Age: 6
Posts: 640
Yes sounds the case and it won't get fixed as the people that are involved that make the decisions have little to no exposure to the coal face so it will continue on.

I think the thread however is good as I've learned a few things that are impossible to absorb on the pages and pages of diatribe in the various manuals.

From our point of view if you can offer a cancel speed/track shorten and avoid changing a runway as we push or after we've got the clearance then it makes the day that much easier. From where we sit a 1 minute delay can quickly turn into an hour so any of the above can make a big difference.

Another one that I do hear occasionally is "large delays lower levels available" on first contact. Makes a HUGE difference to fuel and workload to level off at 300 rather than blast up to FLRidiculous only to come back down.

Have a look at the DRW incident when considering RW27 in difficult conditions...
My three bobs worth.
Berealgetreal is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2016, 07:30
  #74 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: 41S174E
Age: 52
Posts: 2,767
framer, who decides the runway? - the tower and flow between them. How? - not in any particular order - noise abatement, wind, "mode" (as in more departures or more arrivals).

I say this in all seriousness - if you're unhappy with the assigned runway then utter the words "require" and you shall receive without question. We aren't on the flight deck with you so don't know how rested or otherwise you are, what other factors there are and what you feel comfortable with handling at the time.
Thanks for the response Le P.
Like I said in my post I have 'required' another runway in this situation, but that was once out of probably 20 times and like I said, it always makes me think long and hard about the risk I am accepting on behalf of my passengers and crew. The reason for this is because I spend all day making decisions that create a comfortable trade off between efficiency and safety only to be faced with a trade off that is very close to what I consider unacceptable. If I elect to 'require ' an into wind runway I am increasing the workload of others in the system and also facing delays myself. The real question I was interested in was how do you controllers see the risk.ie do you see it as a significant risk or does it not even raise itself as an issue that you are choosing a hairy wind set up onto a shortish runway when there is an option with a lot more fat built into it?
I'm not having a go at controllers, just interested because the two professions are nowhere near as aware of each other's challenges as we used to be.
I think if the controller choosing the runways sat on the jump seat onto 27 at 10pm with a 25kt northerly quartering to tail a few times they might make different decisions in the future. Again, that's not a crack at controllers, more a crack at the system that doesn't roster you guys into the jump seat.
framer is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2016, 08:20
  #75 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Doomagee
Age: 6
Posts: 640
27 at 10pm with a 25kt northerly quartering to tail
Taken for granted by everyone except those that sit at the front 12 hours a day everyday.
Berealgetreal is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2016, 09:29
  #76 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: 41S174E
Age: 52
Posts: 2,767
Well that is what I'm wondering. Is there a bit of a disconnect between what pilots are happy to accept risk wise and what is now considered normal by everyone else? If the wind is challenging then so be it, we'l do what is needed , but if the wind is challenging purely because someone on the ground chose that runway then things are more likely to come unstuck when there was another option.
framer is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2016, 11:00
  #77 (permalink)  

Bottums Up
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: dunnunda
Age: 62
Posts: 3,446
If a thread like this were to appear on the PATCRN, and have ATCers grumbling about how a request to various jets for best speed to the field, saw a range of speeds at 10-15 miles between 250 & 160 kts, from similarly capable aircraft. Or a request to reduce by 20 kts taking 20nm to be achieved. I suspect many professional pilots might be somewhat pissed off.
Capt Claret is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2016, 11:11
  #78 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: FNQ ... Still!
Posts: 3,369
No.
In the absence of a specific speed request, if ATC ask for best speed, it is just that.
Everyone's best speed will be different. Nothing to see here!

Claret, how would you know some take 20nm to slow 20knots? Do you see this as a Check Pilot?
Capt Fathom is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2016, 16:35
  #79 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Age: 64
Posts: 338
Can't be used with the stop bars active. Says so in about 6 different places in the manual. Big smacks.
I didn't say anything about crossing the stop bars. Issue the conditional clearance, and turn off the bars as the landing aircraft passes the holding point. Works perfectly well in Dubai and London. But not in Melbourne obviously.
mrdeux is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2016, 21:05
  #80 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: YMML
Posts: 1,694
b.r.g.r. I'll try to keep offering a lower level as early as possible in mind, although the problem is the controller giving you the level often has little idea what is going on in ML delay wise and won't initiate reduced speed without being told to by those closer to ML. And those closer in are often busy enough with their own traffic that looking at what's coming is rather low priority. That said you could always ask for a lower level to start with and ask about the delay later.

As to the runway selection - it's all noise abatement (so basically you're screwed). Betwixt 0600 and 2300 local thou shalt use R16 or R27 with equal priority. Only once the crosswind exceeds 20 knots or the tailwind exceeds 5 knots (including gusts for both and on a dry runway) then thou shalt resort to R34. R09 is the last option and only if nothing else is suitable by the 20kts cross and 5kts tail criteria.

If you get more than 20 knots tell the tower. If you don't want to accept 20 knots require another option. There is no time penalty involved in requiring - you should land at about the same time, although the flow might tweak things slightly to better suit the traffic disposition.
le Pingouin is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.