Melbourne Air Traffic Control
Agree with the ATIS changes being unnecessary. Last week flying into ML from Tassie it was changing quicker than a politician on the election circuit.
How on earth due major airports with much more extreme weather deal with it? Common sense!
That new RNP for 16 will back up the flow even more imo.
How on earth due major airports with much more extreme weather deal with it? Common sense!
That new RNP for 16 will back up the flow even more imo.
Sounds like the problem is the criteria for issuing the ATIS to me. Written by people that know nothing about flying.
What happens on final approach at Ballina and the wind changes? If it's a tailwind the Pilot Monitoring will be watching it on the FMC and telling the Pilot Flying any pertinent changes with a "less is more approach" (only tell me if it goes above X). Ultimately a picture paints a 1000 words and we just look out the window and have the information we need.
Go slow? Quite the opposite in fact.
Last 5 years has seen the introduction of COBT's, 230kts, 185kts, 160kts and feeder fix times, yet into Melbourne it seems to be actually getting harder. I think Sydney and Brisbane have improved.
The best is an arrival at night with all the associated delays with hardly another aircraft in the sky and one person covering all frequencies. Tell me thats not about staffing levels and KPI's!
Air Services look after their needs as any business does and its up to the airlines to go into bat for their mob which clearly isn't happening or working.
One question: Why do we have to ask for speed waivers or track shortening if either or both are available? We don't like wasting fuel and being late.
What happens on final approach at Ballina and the wind changes? If it's a tailwind the Pilot Monitoring will be watching it on the FMC and telling the Pilot Flying any pertinent changes with a "less is more approach" (only tell me if it goes above X). Ultimately a picture paints a 1000 words and we just look out the window and have the information we need.
Go slow? Quite the opposite in fact.
Last 5 years has seen the introduction of COBT's, 230kts, 185kts, 160kts and feeder fix times, yet into Melbourne it seems to be actually getting harder. I think Sydney and Brisbane have improved.
The best is an arrival at night with all the associated delays with hardly another aircraft in the sky and one person covering all frequencies. Tell me thats not about staffing levels and KPI's!
Air Services look after their needs as any business does and its up to the airlines to go into bat for their mob which clearly isn't happening or working.
One question: Why do we have to ask for speed waivers or track shortening if either or both are available? We don't like wasting fuel and being late.
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Sydney
Posts: 470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bollocks.
1. Your arguments are departure based. None of this explains why 09 can't be used only for arrivals. Ie at least turboprops from the south and west.
2. QF can be directed to exit 16 at the high speed like every one else to keep Echo free for taxiing aircraft. Straw man argument.
3. Doesn't explain why you suddenly won't use 27 when there's a couple of knots downwind.
I've been told they won't do simultaneous ops on Rwy 09 and 16/34 because the tower position and height doesn't allow the tower controller to monitor both flight paths and runways. Or is that just another excuse?
Without a doubt the most inefficient traffic flow in Australia. Note I didn't say the most inefficient ATC, I guess they're just working within the constraints and procedures they are given.
Something needs to change.
1. Your arguments are departure based. None of this explains why 09 can't be used only for arrivals. Ie at least turboprops from the south and west.
2. QF can be directed to exit 16 at the high speed like every one else to keep Echo free for taxiing aircraft. Straw man argument.
3. Doesn't explain why you suddenly won't use 27 when there's a couple of knots downwind.
I've been told they won't do simultaneous ops on Rwy 09 and 16/34 because the tower position and height doesn't allow the tower controller to monitor both flight paths and runways. Or is that just another excuse?
Without a doubt the most inefficient traffic flow in Australia. Note I didn't say the most inefficient ATC, I guess they're just working within the constraints and procedures they are given.
Something needs to change.
Aircraft currently arriving on 27 while 16 or 34 is in use also have to cross 16/34 after landing. How is this any different? You don't see a "queue" trying to cross from the other direction.
Seriously guys you really need to do some liaison visits to LHR or LAX or even DXB to see how to move aircraft around in a busy environment.
While you guys sweat the small sh1t. Like demanding a read back of "Line up and WAIT" or "Taxi to HOLDING POINT XY". You seem to have no idea whatsoever when it comes to the efficient movement of airframes when you compare the operations of MEL in particular, and every other Australian capital city airport more generally.
I know your only working within the constraints of the rules in this country so it's not entirely your fault. The problem is the rules have been added to over many years by every controller who has a thought bubble about yet another layer of safety, added to someone else's, this is the way I do it, to another's just a bit more fat for mum and the kids. These redundant layers then become law and the whole system falls down under the weight of its own bureaucracy.
Last edited by IsDon; 10th Dec 2016 at 21:58.
Biggest problem with Melbourne ATC is not using the parallel runways at Tullamarine, must be a union thing, after all airport management have invested lots of dollars in car parks and terminal Siberia!
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wow do I regret stumbling into here!
As a controller, whenever I am at work I do my very best to get everybody to their destination as quickly, safely and in as orderly a manner as possible using the rules that are all intended to make things safer for the people in the risky seats. I get immense satisfaction from doing things as well as possible every time I'm at work so I'm sorry to hear that the service I provide is, in your eyes, so sub-standard.
As a controller, whenever I am at work I do my very best to get everybody to their destination as quickly, safely and in as orderly a manner as possible using the rules that are all intended to make things safer for the people in the risky seats. I get immense satisfaction from doing things as well as possible every time I'm at work so I'm sorry to hear that the service I provide is, in your eyes, so sub-standard.
The cause for of these delays and inefficient practices can be squarely placed in the political/financial bucket. These days, operationally, we work With what we are given. It is a sign of the times when any group takes any type of IA, it is squarely directed at getting back some control and sanity into OPERATIONAL matters.
So, instead of taking shots at each other, let's support each other's endeavors to bring sense and efficiency back into aviation.
So, instead of taking shots at each other, let's support each other's endeavors to bring sense and efficiency back into aviation.
FL400,
Read the thread again.
We aren't having a go at individual controllers. In fact, we specifically said you are probably doing your best stuck within the constraints.
We are having a go at the overall inefficiency of YMML. Sure, it has YMEN close by, but why are other airports around the world doing so many more movements with so much less?
Put your personal pride on the shelf for a minute and look from the outside. Why is YMML so inefficient? We'd like your input too because it needs to be fixed.
COBT, feeder fix times and holding, 230 at 20, 185-160, 160-150 - these things all make your job easier, yes? Well they make our job harder, sometimes much harder. To facilitate easing ATC workload, your management are piling work onto us.
Read the thread again.
We aren't having a go at individual controllers. In fact, we specifically said you are probably doing your best stuck within the constraints.
We are having a go at the overall inefficiency of YMML. Sure, it has YMEN close by, but why are other airports around the world doing so many more movements with so much less?
Put your personal pride on the shelf for a minute and look from the outside. Why is YMML so inefficient? We'd like your input too because it needs to be fixed.
COBT, feeder fix times and holding, 230 at 20, 185-160, 160-150 - these things all make your job easier, yes? Well they make our job harder, sometimes much harder. To facilitate easing ATC workload, your management are piling work onto us.
The cause for of these delays and inefficient practices can be squarely placed in the political/financial bucket.
The teaching of "lean operations" at university, the health and safety rules, the noise sensitive folk who vote, self regulation, businesses operating as a series of 'silos', these things (and I'm sure many of you could add more) combine to create an environment that can be very frustrating to work in, especially if you remember other ways of operating.
I just make sure my end of the bargain is met and try to remember that most other operational folk are also operating with weak management and no leadership. Next time you taxi up to the gate and have to hold short because their is no guidance, instead of getting wound up, feel empathy for the bloke who is trying to do more with less and hold up your end of the bargain by letting ATC know. Next time there is nobody to drive the aerobridge, don't get wound up, feel empathy for the person who is running between flights due to the latest round of 'lean operations initiatives', and hold up your end of the bargain by explaining things to the pax.
And don't forget to put on enough fuel to be able to operate under little stress when the contractor who was engaged by the airports third party contractor to to oversee the 'improved ' maintenance schedule for some important piece of infrastructure goes on annual leave over Christmas
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Sydney
Posts: 470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FL400, TCAS, please, if you've taken my comments as a personal dig at the controllers I sincerely apologise. I do not, in any way, seek to impugn the professionalism of individual controllers. On re-reading my posts I can see how that could be assumed.
I know you're doing your best with what you have. Sadly what you have is not good enough by world standards.
Ever complex procedures for pilots to comply with in order to make your job easier because of inadequate resources, manpower, training, recency or facilities, is the thrust of this thread. We are on the same side.
I know you're doing your best with what you have. Sadly what you have is not good enough by world standards.
Ever complex procedures for pilots to comply with in order to make your job easier because of inadequate resources, manpower, training, recency or facilities, is the thrust of this thread. We are on the same side.
Slippery, pigs @rse. The thread started with "is it industrial action or have all the good controllers gone?". Nice way to start a civil conversation.....
What you call "inefficiencies" is the acceptance rate which is set by external factors, including your companies. Go moan at them. They have the power to try to change things.
I have no idea who introduced the extra speed restrictions on the STARs - it certainly wasn't the line controllers as it reduces flexibility for everyone.
What you call "inefficiencies" is the acceptance rate which is set by external factors, including your companies. Go moan at them. They have the power to try to change things.
I have no idea who introduced the extra speed restrictions on the STARs - it certainly wasn't the line controllers as it reduces flexibility for everyone.
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Singapore
Age: 56
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Biggest problem with Melbourne ATC is not using the parallel runways at Tullamarine, must be a union thing, after all airport management have invested lots of dollars in car parks and terminal Siberia!
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Santa Barbara
Posts: 912
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And Porter, acceptance rates are the line controllers fault exactly how? You're a bloody peanut as well and should know better than to bag your former colleagues for nothing they have any control over.
I'll say this for you very slow: I'm not bagging line controllers. I'm bagging the fools that tell you from above how so very good you are doing. You are brainwashed from above to only provide the service that legally protects ASA from action if things go wrong. You and I both know it. 25 years of contextuals constantly criticised me for going too far with the advice I provided to pilots.
Do you honestly think ASA does a good job compared to organisations that move similar or more amounts of traffic?
Next time I'm over in the States I'll record my flights and you can have a listen.
Getting back to reality, why haven't they built parellal runways at Melbourne yet?
Too hard for the owners, or does that cut into management bonuses, or just keep on milking the the golden goose? Which will come first the rail link or parallel runways?
The airport was opened 1970, what were the traffic numbers then compared to now?
Still got the same real estate to land them flying machines on.
Same applies to that cluster f&ck called Hobart- lets have an airspace review they say! Review it as many time as you like but until they put in parallel taxiways, nothing will improve- but management will spend big dollars to extend the runway for the single long range international flight!
Too hard for the owners, or does that cut into management bonuses, or just keep on milking the the golden goose? Which will come first the rail link or parallel runways?
The airport was opened 1970, what were the traffic numbers then compared to now?
Still got the same real estate to land them flying machines on.
Same applies to that cluster f&ck called Hobart- lets have an airspace review they say! Review it as many time as you like but until they put in parallel taxiways, nothing will improve- but management will spend big dollars to extend the runway for the single long range international flight!
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: FL370
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My favourite is 25 knots xwind/5 knots tail on 27, basically all down the runway on 34 and they put you on 27 for arrivals even at night. I can count on one hand the number of into wind landings I have done in MEL.
With the number of foreign airlines running into Melbourne with no high speed, I reckon YMML ATC do a great job.
It is uncommon to not be lined up 5nm in trail.
The system and strategic flow could be better, but while we have commercial interests, schedules, passengers and machines, the situation is always dynamic and the present flexibility seems a compromise.
In my humble opinion, airlines reps should be based in the same room as those controlling the COBT's, with COBT's being more dynamic to the situation at the field on the day and this information relayed directly to the tower rather than the present Chinese whispers setup.
If traffic is backing up, COBT's should be pushed back. While slot availability should be predicated on the actual and expected arrival rates, managing real time.
It amazes me that the arrival rate increases or decreases prior to approach control, aircraft are entering holding patterns,, yet our COBT's are not dynamic.
It is uncommon to not be lined up 5nm in trail.
The system and strategic flow could be better, but while we have commercial interests, schedules, passengers and machines, the situation is always dynamic and the present flexibility seems a compromise.
In my humble opinion, airlines reps should be based in the same room as those controlling the COBT's, with COBT's being more dynamic to the situation at the field on the day and this information relayed directly to the tower rather than the present Chinese whispers setup.
If traffic is backing up, COBT's should be pushed back. While slot availability should be predicated on the actual and expected arrival rates, managing real time.
It amazes me that the arrival rate increases or decreases prior to approach control, aircraft are entering holding patterns,, yet our COBT's are not dynamic.
Last edited by Bula; 11th Dec 2016 at 03:49.
Slippery, pigs @rse. The thread started with "is it industrial action or have all the good controllers gone?". Nice way to start a civil conversation.....
What you call "inefficiencies" is the acceptance rate which is set by external factors, including your companies. Go moan at them. They have the power to try to change things.
I have no idea who introduced the extra speed restrictions on the STARs - it certainly wasn't the line controllers as it reduces flexibility for everyone.
What you call "inefficiencies" is the acceptance rate which is set by external factors, including your companies. Go moan at them. They have the power to try to change things.
I have no idea who introduced the extra speed restrictions on the STARs - it certainly wasn't the line controllers as it reduces flexibility for everyone.
The external factors? Can you please list them - because we don't understand. That's what the thread is about. And trust me, my airline is pissing away millions in ever increased delays and slow downs into Melbourne. If they had ANY ability to change this, they'd have done it because they are completely driven by bottom line and nothing else. Does our CEO just ring up and ask for 50 more movements an hour and it'll happen? I don't think so.
So if speed restrictions also make ATC's job more difficult, then
a) why aren't ATC jumping up and down about it to management
b) why don't you cancel them whenever you can. It's a constant theme on the radio all the time - Request track shortening or speed waiver - Bam, instantly approved. If it can be approved immediately (or without talking to another controller), then why do we have to ask for it?
We want to learn why the system is so slow when it's so fast everywhere else.
My favourite is 25 knots xwind/5 knots tail on 27, basically all down the runway on 34 and they put you on 27 for arrivals even at night. I can count on one hand the number of into wind landings I have done in MEL.
Aviation is all about mitigating risks yet we have the above happening regularly.
As a controller do you guys think that a crew that is ending an 11 hour duty, has flown Melbourne -NZ- Melbourne and gets a gusty 25kt crosswind with 5 kts downwind on 27 at night is being exposed to a significantly greater risk of incident than if they landed into wind on 34? Or does the risk associated seem small and acceptable to you?
As a pilot I have accepted it in every instance except one where there were other factors at play on the flight deck , but each time it does make me think long and hard because my main driver is to expose my aircraft to as little risk as possible.
I hope it is clear that I am not whinging about controllers above, but rather interested to see any differences in how the two professions view the same situation.
Also, who decides which runway is used for landing and how?
Cheers
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Brisbane Australia
Posts: 525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My opening line about it being industrial or if the old controllers had left was thoughtless. For that I apologise, no offence was intended.
I just fail to see why we have so many shortcomings. It just gets very frustrating. I believe airline management are aware of it but what about ATC management? Ultimately it damages the economy and damages company profitability.
I just fail to see why we have so many shortcomings. It just gets very frustrating. I believe airline management are aware of it but what about ATC management? Ultimately it damages the economy and damages company profitability.