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

MEL Tower ó Go Slow?

Old 6th May 2018, 08:50
  #61 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Australia
Posts: 341
IMHO...

The system is vastly better in the states.... but the controllers are not.
Slippery_Pete is offline  
Old 10th May 2018, 04:24
  #62 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Queenstown
Posts: 14
Originally Posted by Popgun View Post

(Ps. And as an aside...whats with the snarky denials of a roll-thru on 34L in SYD when there is NO ONE on final or at any holding point waiting for take off!)

PG
I try and give a roll through where it works, but there could be reasons not immediately obvious eg international traffic waiting to cross further down, tugs in and out of the alley, bay occupied, ground want you off at the rapid because thatís what theyíve planned on(or are too busy for ask to ask for a late notice change), a turboprop southbound on Charlie that hasnít yet called but will likely be ready at the HP, director given the guy behind you a late notice change from R to L and jammed him in close behind.

Or the controller hasnt had enough coffee 🤷*♂️
macbe327 is offline  
Old 10th May 2018, 05:29
  #63 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: You live where
Posts: 390
Originally Posted by Popgun View Post
And as an aside...whats with the snarky denials of a roll-thru on 34L in SYD when there is NO ONE on final or at any holding point waiting for take off!)PG
Possible needs a separate thread.
Firstly, there is an "agreement" that pilots won't ask and that you'll be offered it if its available and works with the traffic.
Secondly, vacating via the rapid exit permits you call company to verify the bay. Rolling through to an occupied bay doesn't make much sense.

Last edited by missy; 10th May 2018 at 13:15. Reason: grammar
missy is offline  
Old 10th May 2018, 06:05
  #64 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Seat 0A
Posts: 7,767
Don't forget the Runway Occupancy Time statistics...
Capn Bloggs is offline  
Old 10th May 2018, 14:00
  #65 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: 41S174E
Age: 52
Posts: 2,767
Rolling through to an occupied bay can make sense if there is no down side from an ATC perspective. It still gives an upside to the aircrew/ aircraft side of the equation.
framer is offline  
Old 11th May 2018, 04:27
  #66 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: SA
Age: 58
Posts: 313
Originally Posted by framer View Post
Rolling through to an occupied bay can make sense if there is no down side from an ATC perspective. It still gives an upside to the aircrew/ aircraft side of the equation.
What's the upside for the aircrew/aircraft?
sunnySA is offline  
Old 11th May 2018, 12:19
  #67 (permalink)  
Keg

Nunc est bibendum
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 5,177
Having to get off at an exit may require full reverse thrust and heavier braking. That delays engine cool down and takes longer before you can shut one down on taxi in. A roll through (and idle reverse) decreases the cool down time by up to three minutes. Thatíll save 30kg a go. Itíll save wear and tear on both brakes and engine. I canít quantify those numbers.
Keg is offline  
Old 11th May 2018, 14:20
  #68 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: SA
Age: 58
Posts: 313
Originally Posted by Keg View Post
Having to get off at an exit may require full reverse thrust and heavier braking. That delays engine cool down and takes longer before you can shut one down on taxi in. A roll through (and idle reverse) decreases the cool down time by up to three minutes. That’ll save 30kg a go. It’ll save wear and tear on both brakes and engine. I can’t quantify those numbers.
I realise that there was a lot of variable, unless there is tailwind then I would think its unlikely that you'll need to use full reverse thrust and heavier breaking to make the rapids at either A2 or B9. Perhaps you need to review your exit speeds on this taxiways and get the call in to Ground so that they can you the cross or the taxi via if they need to park you a further distance from the apron. I'd like to keep the punters moving at a consistent but slower pace (the illusion of movement) rather than hurry up and wait. I'll be changing my control practices immediately to "hurry up and wait".

Sorry, its a thread drift but I think it highlights were are even further away from a common understanding, common purpose and common application.

As my colleague said all those years ago "don't trust pilots", was he wrong, many days he was 100% correct.

Last edited by sunnySA; 13th May 2018 at 06:57. Reason: grammar
sunnySA is offline  
Old 11th May 2018, 14:58
  #69 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Santa Barbara
Posts: 678
I realise that there was a lot of variable, unless there is tailwind then I would think its unlikely that you'll need to use full reverse thrust and heavier breaking to make the rapids at either A2 or B9. Perhaps you need to review your exit speeds on this taxiways and get the call in to Ground so that they can you the cross or the taxi via if they need to park you a further distance from the apron. I'd like to keep the punters moving at a consistent but slower pace (the illusion of movement) rather than hurry up and wait. I'll be changing immediately to the hurry and wait, let them go onto the apron like the Qantas for bay 2 did this week. Conditional clearance to pushback given at bay 3 subject to the inbound to bay 2. Bay 2 pipes up - oh we're on bay 2. Great stuff.
Yet again an ATC sticking their ill informed nose into the cockpit. Forget who pays your wages?

Do your job and let them do their's.
The name is Porter is offline  
Old 11th May 2018, 23:33
  #70 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The world's most liveable city
Posts: 216
Yet again an ATC sticking their ill informed nose into the cockpit.

Do your job and let them do their's.

Judging by the lack of ML tower responses on here maybe we think the same of pilots.

Last edited by RAC/OPS; 11th May 2018 at 23:46.
RAC/OPS is offline  
Old 12th May 2018, 00:44
  #71 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Coal Face
Posts: 507
Originally Posted by le Pingouin View Post
Yes you do hire LCD pilots - everyone of you has good days and bad days, ever airline has some pilots who are better than others. You certainly don't plan for everyone to be near perfect all the time. Why do you think aviation is so regulated?
Maybe its time to stop catering for the LCD all the time. Why doesn't the industry bring the standard up instead of continually ratcheting it down. Regulation doesn't solve LCD issues, it just drags everyone down with it.

Incidentally, I was SLF on a flight Cairns to Brisbane the other day and we were held for 25 mins on the ground prior to departure due to whatever issue ATC had at Brisbane. I know it wasn't weather or a runway disaster. Same happened Perth - Brisbane recently. I simply cannot fathom that Australia has such a volume of traffic that aircraft are held on the ground prior to departure to ensure a slot on the other side of the country. Talk about a broken system. Wait till the volumes really ramps up....oh yeah that won't be until 2100.
Chronic Snoozer is offline  
Old 12th May 2018, 04:39
  #72 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Melbourne
Age: 63
Posts: 131
There was a day,long,long ago,when ATC were Aviators,or,at the very least,had done observation sectors during training,so they had some idea how an aircraft operates.Major Airlines had regular consultation with AirServices to review performance,on both sides,with a view to improving the system.All that went out the window when the Howard Government went to full cost recovery at AirServices and sold off Melbourne Airport.The result decades later?The debacle we all live with today.The system today is C+ at best and sometimes way less than that.Whoever is to blame, let me ask ATC viewers this; do you want your family on an RPT flight out of say ,Canberra, carrying Company flight planned fuel that assumes NOTAMed holding (usually 10 minutes), on a gin-clear CAVOK day,that gets airborne and is immediately given a Hazard Alert of 45 minutes holding.Reason? Greater than 5 knots tail wind on Rwy 27.If anybody cant see the sheer stupdity of that then I'm on a different planet.And there is plenty more where that came from.The system is broken.Everybody on the rest of the planet knows it.
George Glass is offline  
Old 12th May 2018, 09:24
  #73 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: YMML
Posts: 1,685
Snoozer, "LCD" simply means the minimum standard, it says nothing about the level of that standard. Why is it so hard to understand that if more aircraft are planned to arrive than can be accommodated in a given period then there will be delays? Surely it's better to absorb some of the delay on the ground than by burning fuel in the air?
le Pingouin is offline  
Old 12th May 2018, 10:44
  #74 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Australia/India
Posts: 2,769
Originally Posted by George Glass View Post
...The debacle we all live with today.The system today is C+ at best and sometimes way less than that.Whoever is to blame, let me ask ATC viewers this; do you want your family on an RPT flight out of say ,Canberra, carrying Company flight planned fuel that assumes NOTAMed holding (usually 10 minutes), on a gin-clear CAVOK day,that gets airborne and is immediately given a Hazard Alert of 45 minutes holding.Reason? Greater than 5 knots tail wind on Rwy 27.If anybody cant see the sheer stupdity of that then I'm on a different planet.And there is plenty more where that came from.The system is broken.Everybody on the rest of the planet knows it.
No no no.

The rest of the planet is out of step with Australiaís award-winning, punching-above-our-weight, cutting edge, efficient and safest-in-the-world airport and airspace infrastructure and arrangements. This pretence must be maintained by the spivs who have been allowed to milk the hapless taxpayers who use airport infrastructure, the spivs who run Airservices, the spivs who run CASA and the spivs who run ATSB.


Lead Balloon is offline  
Old 12th May 2018, 11:58
  #75 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Coal Face
Posts: 507
Originally Posted by le Pingouin View Post
Snoozer, "LCD" simply means the minimum standard, it says nothing about the level of that standard. Why is it so hard to understand that if more aircraft are planned to arrive than can be accommodated in a given period then there will be delays? Surely it's better to absorb some of the delay on the ground than by burning fuel in the air?
Well....not really. It means that the standard is lowered to capture a broader selection of pilots/ATC whatever. As the pool of applicants dries up, the standard gets lowered to once again capture a broad selection. And so on and so forth. One could argue that making these jobs more appealing in terms of pay and lifestyle would raise standards as demand increases. Le Pingouin are you saying that air traffic management is as efficient as it can be? Is that it now - airports are full at peak times?
Chronic Snoozer is offline  
Old 12th May 2018, 12:20
  #76 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: QLD - where drivers are yet to realise that the left lane goes to their destination too.
Posts: 2,119
Yet again an ATC sticking their ill informed nose into the cockpit. Forget who pays your wages?
Pot. Kettle. Black.
Ultimately, the same people who pay yours.
Traffic_Is_Er_Was is offline  
Old 12th May 2018, 12:20
  #77 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: The wrong time zone...
Posts: 646
Just my two bobs...
I reckon the guys and girls at the other end of the radio in Aus are really good value - returning home from O/S I am always glad to switch to Brisbane on HF and then my first contact on VHF. I always find the individuals are helpful and put in a maximum effort to assist with all sorts of stuff (CPDLC login issues/random requests/etc) within the confines of the system under which they work. In fact, most go out of their way to cheerily assist. I enjoy talking them, and I think they do a very good job.
Having said that, the ATC "System" in Australia is convoluted to the extreme, slow and inefficient. Eg Required time at fixes - particularly when one has smashed their way across the Great Australian Bight, only to be told to now do min speed to a relatively near fix. The traffic density in Aus does not justify this - the system should be smart enough to slow us an hour out, if it is REALLY required.
The separation requirement for lining up ahead of an aircraft on finals - in Australia, is this double that of the rest of the world? We often make the comment that we could have taken off twice before the aircraft on 10 mile final landed...
And, yes, in my experience, all of the above is exaggerated further in Melbourne - not sure why. Again, it's NOT THAT BUSY.
Some posters here have degenerated to a bit of "us" and "them" - it doesn't need to be like that, we need to work together to make it better.
josephfeatherweight is offline  
Old 12th May 2018, 13:20
  #78 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: YMML
Posts: 1,685
Snoozer, yes really. Take a group of mythical skygods and gun controllers of yesteryear and there was still be a spread of skill levels. Everyone has days they'd rather forget performance-wise and events they learn from. That is the systemic envelope we all operate within. Or does nobody ever go around due to something they've stuffed up or never overcook the spacing between aircraft in a sequence in your world? No, I'm not saying it's as efficient as it could be, but at some stage no matter how much you jam 'em up you run out of capacity sooner or later if too many try to arrive within a given time.

You might be able to nail the fix time to 10 seconds from a 1000 miles out, fantastic. But it just doesn't work well in the real world when there are more than a few aircraft in the sky. Do they actually use that as a sequencing technique anywhere in the world?
le Pingouin is offline  
Old 12th May 2018, 13:26
  #79 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Santa Barbara
Posts: 678
Pot. Kettle. Black.
Sorry mate, ex ATC of 26 years, Pilot of 30 years.

unless there is tailwind then I would think its unlikely that you'll need to use full reverse thrust and heavier breaking to make the rapids at either A2 or B9
How the [email protected] would you know unless you're braking and deploying thrust reverse?

Perhaps you need to review your exit speeds on this taxiways
And this unmitigated arrogance gazing out the window of a tower.

Do your job, not their's
The name is Porter is offline  
Old 13th May 2018, 08:16
  #80 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Dunnunda
Posts: 227
You might be able to nail the fix time to 10 seconds from a 1000 miles out, fantastic. But it just doesn't work well in the real world when there are more than a few aircraft in the sky. Do they actually use that as a sequencing technique anywhere in the world?
The problem with this statement is, Australia nor Melbourne, are the only airports in the word that suffer from these problems.

le pingouin To be clear, these are NOT your words, but often the ATC response to any of these problems is, 'too many aircraft pop up between xxxx miles and the airport whilst your chugging along, we can't manage this any better as they aren't part of any program/plan/system' You have the flight plan, they're coming! When I've queried why the traffic holding can't be increased BEFORE I get airborne, the statement is much the same. 'We can't do anything about it.....'

Refer my statement above. Plenty of other airports have this issue yet don't have the problems. Sydney suffers from Canberra and Albury traffic just as much as Melbourne if not more.

Not attacking you mate, but you do seem to be in the know and the most dogmatic with response!
GA Driver 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.