BNE ATC Holding
 

Does anyone know what is going on in BNE recently? Seems if the weather requires Instrument approaches you get a ridiculous amount of holding. In the last week there was unforcast low viz (1500m) but everyone was getting in ok, 58mins holding, 2 nights ago at 9.30pm with normal showery weather 25mins holding, tonight with no weather requirements (There were some TCU around a couple hours earlier but nothing too bad) 48 mins holding arriving 8.30pm. Is there something going on industrially with ATC? Even in the wet when there was Instrument approaches all day and night long there was rarely more than 15mins hold usually only a 5-10 min delay.

I was wondering the same thing. 25 min hold for a few showers, both runways in use.....

We held for 75min and then went to the Goldy.....:mad:

Pax were unimpressed is an understatement, Absolute joke. If they think that BNE will cope with all the future FIFO and related development without a parallel runway. :ugh:

Add a little rain and a few well spread clouds the place went silly :{

Every quarter there is continued pax growth all along the J-curve..... where's the added infrastructure..???:rolleyes: Thats right... they are shopping malls with a passenger terminal attached now:oh:

What was the safety issue that was not apparent in the last 20 years?

Some all-star in a Cirrus doing a missed approach on 14 and having a close encounter of the Boeing kind with an aircraft on final for 19.

It was one of those Pandora's box incidents that didn't happen for twenty years, but once it did it was impossible for all the relevant agencies to say "oh well, let's stick that back in the box and pretend it didn't happen". With the information from that incident, the risk assessment for a lot of the dual runway ops suddenly looked...risky.

ihd, the parallel runway is on the way but it got delayed by a year. Even on the original time line it wouldn't have been ready yet. It is a big aviation infrastructure project and it will happen, but there's a lot of ground work to do before the land is suitable for runway building. The airport probably should have been built with a parallel 01/19 back in 1988 but no-one realised how busy Brisbane was going to get.
http://bne.com.au/projects-and-devel...sked-questions

if you want to see how much traffic can be moved from a single runway airport, in various weather conditions, have a look at Gatwick.

BN already has a second airport but ya can't get off da plane, it's called 'BLAKA'!!!

Aussie airports are a disgrace. We have been playing backwood politics for years being left behind from the rest of the advanced world, they must look at our aviation infrastructure & laugh!

Look at SYD. Australia's gateway airport & our busiest, it's a coastal drome & it's curfewed with the politicians running it!!!

CB, Australia's Capital city drome, CTAF R after hrs!!!!!

ML, No Precision App on it's main Nth rwy & now with a new twr being built (75 mtrs high) I'd bet that the Min will be higher on the 34VOR!!! (920ft now) I hear curfew is being discussed for this drome, yep great idea, nowhere too go (well T/off after you have arrived due curfew like AD) when the whole SE region gets ugly due wx!!

PH..........need I say more !!!

AD, sleepy, curfewed, nobody wants to go there anyway:E

Yep it's a great country for sure just not for RPT into Major dromes!



Wmk2

WTD.

Surely you are not suggesting that those responsible pull their respective heads out of their respective armpits and see how the rest of the world operates?

In fairness to the guys on the mic. they are hamstrung to a degree by Aus archaic rules, malevolent noise lobbies and weak as piss pollies. They do however have a responsibility to offer professional advice on how to improve the system. A trip to a few overseas airports would work wonders for the corporate knowledge base. (Chicago, LAX, JFK, Atlanta, Narita, Incheon, Heathrow, and Gatwick to name a few)

Who knows, maybe we could even get away from the fallacy that SYD/ BNE and MEL are busy airports. Sunday picnic parks more like it.

"behind the landing, line up and wait be ready immediate, following at 10 miles"

SS

That still amazes me every ime <i go to ML. The city is awash with money compared to most other cities in the world and yet there is still a VOR to the main strip. Mental.

I must admit to having seen some excellent ATC work in recent days from TWR controllers. Getting departures away with four miles between arrivals. It's been pretty to watch.

I'll admit to having seen the occasional clanger (being asked to taxi as number 2 to Thai out of PER the other day was one of them given that we could have been airborne before he had reached the holding point given his slow taxi speed) but these things happen from time to time with the best of intentions. More often than not it's been great work and far better than I've experienced in most places around SE Asia.

If we could go to an system such as used in HKG, LHR, LAX, etc for SYD airport then it'd be great. One runway for arrivals, the other for departures. :ok:

Yep, Keg the Perth tower guys have been on fire recently with the single runway ops off 06/24. :ok:

Maybe this calls for an Airport Infrastructure Senate Inquiry!? Get the heads of those aiports mentioned above in for a bit of a 'chat'.

As much as I would love a visit like that unless I do it in my own time at my own expense, its not going to happen. Even better would be a 2-3 'exchange' type arrangement. We do have a few 'foreign' controllers, and locals who have come back from working o/s, which is the next best thing I suppose.
Two questions though. What 'Aus archaic rules' are you referring to, and what is, for example Gatwick's arrival rate compared to BN?

Surely Govt, BAC, ATC (whoever is doing the ass covering) could get parallel runway ops back by putting something into ERSA like 'No go-around available RWY14 during parallel ops' or similar.
It's hardly groundbreaking, there are many airports in the world where a go-around is unavailable (usually terrain), so if you only let people land who were happy to accept a no go-around landing, what's the (legal) problem?

In fact, you could even have something like 'if going around, early left turn must be made as to avoid entering 19 final approach path.'

Any reason this can't be done?

ATC has asked us to slow down to fit in with the arrival sequence due to the number of aircraft all arriving at [insert airport here] at the same time as us.

Does that do the job? :ok:

That in my opinion sums up ATC and ATM in Oz, superb post scam sniffer.

Vegas in traffic terms is a backwater, there is no good reason why there needs to be excessive delays in anything other than severe wx or poor vis. Words fail me sometimes when I read stuff like this..honestly you have a 3500m or so long runway with plenty of exits..and yet certainly in my Company Doc's (Lido) no mandated minimum rwy occupancy..other than a general note and advising if you need full length.
Am I being unfair in my observations? I'm not having a go...I just can't fathom a 45 minute delay for 1500m viz?

N-Blue, LGW has an average movement rate of a little over 40, but at peak periods it can get up to 52-54 I'm told...LVP's generally dont go into action until vis drops below 800m from memory.

haughtney1, the number of movements is not a useful indication because the arrival rate is the limiting factor.

As P-Dubby said at the start - it's physics. The only way you're going to do better on one runway is by reducing radar standards & you getting off the runway faster. Gatwick could no more handle 50 arrivals in an hour than BN.

"Delayed due to airline scheduling exceeding airport capacity" :E

All ATC's know pilots hate holding. But ATC's hate holding just as much as pilots, especially when we look outside and see clear skies!

I believe the problem is that neither BAC, ASA or the airlines are prepared to accept the liability in the event of it going wrong, so the whole thing's sitting in the limbo tray. As we're all well aware, what's done in the rest of the world doesn't necessarily get done in Australia.

The Cirrus pilot didn't follow the missed approach procedures anyway, hence the close encounter. If it had done so, there would have been no incident.

P-D, I have no doubt you are accurate in what you say, but where does the 45 mins come from if the numbers you speak of ring true?
Is 45 min a usual figure? or is it exceptional based on an exceptional set of circumstances? just wondering.
With respect to the movement rate, the a/c mix at BNE and LGW is broadly similar, mostly medium jets with a heavy or 3 thrown into the mix...and of course those pesky TP's floating about as well.
FWIW, my experience of Vegas app and twr has been pretty good, and as our usual arrival times are mostly outside peak times..we never usually have any bother.
At LGW (as a comparison) its pretty much always peak time...and yet with a similar runway, less airspace, and certainly a far greater volume of traffic, the worst holding delay in wx above CAT1 was in the region of 20 mins. So with that in mind, where is the difference? is it procedural? is it a systemic difference? is it a competancy issue? (both pilots and controllers?) Or is it perhaps more a cultural or corporate reluctance to deal with these peak traffic periods as effectively as possible?
I know Oz has some unusual procedural stuff (as does the UK, USA, and everywhere else!) so does this contribute into the mix?
Interesting stuff...and I'm interested in the answers, cos we all learn from this.

haughtney1, it's simply a numbers game - once the number of arrivals exceeds the max arrival rate you get delays. Exceed it by a large number & you get large delays. Overall volume has little to do with it. Density does.

Maybe Gatwick enforces slot times?

A stiff headwind will blow out the acceptance rate as you're slower down final (ground speed) - 3NM radar separation gives longer time spacing into wind. It's also harder to judge turns because you're screaming along on down wind & screech to a halt as you turn.

Even with a slot time, BN still F:mad:K you around!

Fuel-Off :ok:

From what I understand arrivals to Gatwick, Heathrow and other major European destinations will have been subject to a slot time for departure, using a centralised computer system based in Brussels that determines capacity for a given piece of airspace or concrete and does not permit more than a set number of aircraft to arrive in a given hour. The delays are absorbed on the ground or schedules are adjusted accordingly preventing excessive airborne delays.

This kind of system is planned for Aus and has been patchily attempted, but has not been critical until recently as airborne delays into our major ports haven't been long enough to make the accountants cry or overload the ATC system. We are probably approaching that point now. Note - this will not increase the arrival rate, it just means the top of the peaks will be forcibly shoveled into the troughs with the scheduling complications to be dealt with by the companies. Its not all beer and skittles - In europe if you miss your ramp time well thats tough titty and back you taxi until another slot is available.

My experience is that too much less than 90 seconds between arrivals and number 2 will be going around. Something more than that will be required if tower is to have an opportunity to depart one occasionally. This places a practical upper limit on how many aircraft can arrive within an hour without someone having to wait, you can do it on the ground or in the air, but unless there is more concrete the delay will have to be absorbed somewhere.

WWT

Australian ATC doesn't enforce slot times - we have no way of knowing & just takes you as you come. First in best dressed.

Presumably slot times are enforced o/s, and maybe thats the main difference? Delay=demand-capacity, so cap the demand with slot times.
Slot times were introduced at PH awhile back as a temporary measure to cope with rwy outages. With some coaxing from at least one ML line manager, a light went on somewhere in the corridors of power, and they stayed. Stage two is that a/c early for their slots are being held to meet it, allowing those on time to come through. The current situation in BN would seem a good opportunity to follow suit.

Yes I can understand obviously that if the number of arriving aircraft exceeds capacity there will of course be delays but it has only happened in the last month or so, it has suddenly beconme extremely bad, in fact the worst Capital city airport by far for holding. Has there been a massive increase in the number of scheduled flights in and out of BNE recently? And yes it is bad when Instrument Aproaches are in use so it is about the weather, I guess greater seperation standards required. The other night when we had 20mins at 2130, the plane behind us got 25mins, we landed and there was no takeoff or landing for a further 6 mins??!! Something is going on its pretty obvious.

BNE currently handling around 600-620 movements on Thursdays and Fridays with a further 10 movements a day to start over next 2-3 months and more to come with DJ ATR's, and Tiger planning to base 2 aircraft here later this year.Easily another 40 movements a day could be added by years end . The the FIFO will increase as well over the next 1-2 years.

With 660-670 movements a day BNE would be on a par with KL,and a little bit busier than MEL.

The one behind you in the sky or the one behind you in the sequence?

Sequence, and they landed 7 mins after us, no departures either between us.

Nope, can't explain that one. Following a/c could have been late out of the hold, but that seems excessive. The problem is that without pulling the tapes for three or four positions, there is no way of finding the reason (assuming it wasn't just a stuff up).

Keg, Chazddat - Thanks chaps! :D We are up for it if you are. Gotta love the backtrack 06 from J1 or J2 into the teeth of the next arrival turning final at 4nm. :eek: Were getting good at maximising tarmac time, but everybody needs to be on there game!

Seen some great work from the drivers as well. Although one 76 driver was concerned that he might break off his nose wheel on the turn around on 06 threshold! :{ He still took the gap and got away.... :O

Yeah she was VFR and had no MA procedure to follow, mind you what she did was mind boggling from the way the ATC friend described it to me :uhoh:.

So no VFR CROPS, that should have been the end of the problem.

So are they no using 14 and 01/19 for IFR CROPS? Is that all over now?

Time for a few K's more concrete folks!

Or........ Brisbane is full of tunnels, build a high speed rail link under the city to YBAF and move all the turbo props out there :}

Out of interest flightfocus (and this is wayy off the topic of BNE here) but if RW06 is in use, approach tell us they need to give 5nm separation for arrivals to the tower. This often results in long downwind legs and a complete bugger up of the profile. Is this only done if there is a heavy taxiing to give them a chance to backtrack or is it done regardless? Seems a bit of a waste of time if there are no heavies waiting to go.

Chadzat
 

The backtrack is only part of the problem, runway occupancy time is also increased with most arrivals having to vacate at the end on TWY "W"
often the last third of the runway is taxied at quite slow speed, 5 miles is there to ensure everyone gets in and everyone gets out without having to wait long periods at the HP.

I appreciate the Aussie system is hampered by different separation rules

but surely it could be tightened up a little. To me LHR is the standard to

aim for. I know they have two parallel runways etc but they reallly shift

the traffic. It's not uncommon to get the landing clearance in the flare.

It seems to work OK providing everybody knows what he's doing. The

Yanks and most of Europe are more or less the same. In ORD (Chicago)

any pilot who slows up the system is sent into a 'sin-bin' an off-set

holding point and ignored for twenty minutes. It does wonders to house

train the slow to learn types.

One common procedure is the "not below 160knots until 4 miles" and to

"vacate on the first available high-speed". 40 knot exit speed is common

and quite safe if it's dry and uncontaminated.

Every time I come into Aus the tension is in the air but I never seem to

be looking up someone's bottom as much as elsewhere and the daisy-

chain is not as tight. As for a SR-22 causing problems they wouldn't

be allowed anywhere near the place. (in JFK it would be shot down). I'm

not saying that I agree with that but if you want to move 'big-iron' it's

'big-iron' only. Apart from the obvious second runway, maybe a few more

high speed exits are needed and bunch 'em up more.

In Australia Big iron only is hard or impossible to do without a change of legislation. As it currently stands, if you operate an airport you pretty much have to welcome anyone with a radio and VH rego. Presumably the States has different legislation.

Apologies for a slight thread drift...

ATC have been pushing more tin than allowed in Sydney! The legislated "cap" of 80 movements per hour has been exceeded so the "fix" is to marginally reduce the acceptance rate under certain conditions. The best case scenario of 34 parallels has an acceptance rate that will be reduced by ( i think ) 2 movements per hour. i.e. from 46 to 44 landings per hour.

My point is that we , ATC that is, are capable of moving more heavy metal but there are numerous reasons, many of which are not apparent to all, why we don`t.

If you`ve got questions then ask away! Don`t expect a quick response from the official channels though.

Can't they just do what Sydney does and charge landing fees that make it prohibitively expensive to land your bugsmasher at Brissy? If you want to cough up $200 + parking then go for it.

Actually I believe they've just started doing that in peak times, but I don't think it's had much of an impact on traffic.

Brissy never got all that many bugsmashers anyway, and even the fine upstanding metro freighter fleet :} tends to operate at night when it's not all that busy. What 14 used to take a lot of was peak hour Q'link and Skytrans Dash 8s. I would guess that putting them onto 01/19 due to the new restrictions is having an impact on traffic.

If I had a buck for the times I have been asked why we are on Rwy07 instead of Rwy 16 parallels in SY when the wind is 160/10 and everyone is holding, well then I would have lots of bucks. Qantas 767 drivers tend to be the most chirpy.
I hope the pilots out there understand that as controllers our lives would be a lot easier without the holding. A few minutes to lose soaked up in the cruise or descent, maybe a couple of minutes vectoring and away you go.
We do not enjoy reading where it is seen as something special that the LA flyer , through the 'efforts' of an army of suits talking, liaising, flying to meetings,lunching, expense accounting,etc was given unrestricted climb and direct tracking saving X tonnes of fuel. FFS we aim to do that everyday.We then plug in, with no relief, holding aircraft for in excess of 20 minutes each so we dont upset KSAs neighbours who have no idea they have bought near an airport that has been in existence for 80-90 years.
I shake my head when I see the LA 'ASPIRE' flyer depart off R34 wiping out landing slots off R07 and then watch as a collective 2-300 minutes of holding is dumped on the jets and turboprops as the suits go off to a round of backslapping and beers because of the greenhouse gas they just saved.
Other countries ANSPs want Aussie controllers, another 5 'youngsters' from BN FIR have just signed contracts with Germany.