A couple of things evident from the thread;
1. Pilots often don't understand sequencing, yet always think they do. The most vocal are inevitably the ones who wouldn't lower themselves to sit in a centre and watch it being done/have it explained. Classic example is bitching about being sequenced behind a turboprop- as explained, the tp will go faster longer, and will actually go at least as fast (on average thru an approach) as an RPT-type jet, especially closer in to the field. There is also no wake turb issue with the tp in front, allowing better runway utilisation.
2. Sequencing is about ground speed. The controller converts that into an IAS/Mach, taking into account winds and levels, and issues instructions accordingly. Hearing speeds on the freq will not tell you the other guys groundspeed, unless he is on the same route at the same level.
3. Comparisons to LHR. Do I really need to explain it? Ban GA from your airport, enact highly prescriptive procedures such as exact speeds for every phase of the approach, hire 4 times as many controllers, only commence an approach from a hold, only depart for the airport with a controlled slot time etc. etc. and you may get a result that looks like LHR.

Anyway, carry on with the sledging.

Ferris:ok::ok::ok:

Lt Z:ok::ok::ok::ok::ok: Departures!!! OMG!!! You want to depart as well?!?!?! That's a novel idea.... try squeezing a few departures into those 3nm gaps... in a single runway operation that doesn't happen chaps!!

Whilst APP is "doing that controller sh!t" and squeezing all those arrivals into NZAA, spare a thought for the twr controller trying to play the other half of the game, 'cos sure as eggs are scrambled not too long after you're in that arrival queue, you'll appear in the departures queue and probably moan about delays on departure!! Not to mention the GND dude playing parking attendant and running out of places to put all those arrivals 'cos their gates are occupied!

Big picture guys!!

Although we bag ATC from time to time on the whole they do a pretty good job.

However they could keep us pilots a bit more in the loop at times. Like the original poster mentioned re the speed up slow down requests.

So often you get told to go fast only to the told by the next sector go slow, no wonder the reaction of (thought not spoken) "WTF we've just been told to go fast now you want us to slow down what are you guys smoking down there". A bit of a heads up like "we need you fast for the next XX minutes/miles to fit in a gap" might help at times a bit like Steady Eddie used to do.

And then we see threads about ATC loving the sound of their own voice. 'For sequencing' should cover it. As an ATC, I want you out of my sector in the shortest posible time. As has ben covered above, one ATC will need to stick you in a gap or create a gap, the next guy the same. These gaps are usually different.

Add to the LHR comments above, runway design. Appropriate high speed taxiways and airlines/aircraft that met minimum Runway Occupancy criteria.
Seriously, you guy DO realise there are other planes up there right?

With over 1000 a day where I'm at, most have dispensed with that needless add-on. I mean, what else is it for on a busy TMA/APP frequency- controller amusement?

I think you just had a few LL guys rolling on the floor. You have been there, haven't you? :ooh:

Could not agree more Slackie, but it begs the question, if you have departures ready to go, wtf is the approach controller sequencing arrivals at 3 miles?
Have sat at A1 for probably 6 arrivals, I know..its only 6, but when its a mixture of Dush ates..a 737, 320, BN2, then a 1900, I'm wondering where that 800kg of gas went:}
I guess it begs the question, is there a plan per se? Then again, operators dont help themselves at times, one of thos Dushes decided to try and make A4 and all he did was mess things up for us as we coulda got away before the next lightie arrived.
Mayby he did it on purpose:suspect:

Lap Sap, yes and yes. The strictest letter of ICAO however does require a reason to be given for vectors. I use 'sequencing, turn/speed .........'. We do same numbers and then some at our place and i note noone argues. I can only imagine the hilarity if some one tried on the **** about getting dicked around on freq that is a normal occurance at 'certain' places

As for runway/taxi way design lets us acknowledge that high speed exits useable by the aircraft requiring the greatest distance behind are key. EGLL has that sorted. Also the location of inner holding stacks. Will be interesting to watch with the altimeter changes and stack redesign as to how it runs especially in high winds.

That was my point, it is a tiny adjustment. I wanted to know if controllers thought the designers had been a bit optimistic considering the miriad of other variables that have been listed in this thread.
Hidden amongst the defnsive responses and silly comments I have found answers to both of my questions. Ta.
@PLazbot
Do you actually believe that you are controlling a whole lot of people that are ¨retarded¨? Or do you think the system might create conflicting demands on them? The people you are talking about would probably think you were incompetant at managing the energy of a jet if you were suddenly put in actual control of one , but I doubt they would assume you were retarded mentally, just that you hadn't enough experience in that role. Anyway, I learnt something from you when you described creating gaps and fitting aircraft in, cheers for that.

Framer, I work in the same region as Plaz (it's nowhere near oz), and believe me, if you were to sit with one of us for a shift, you would be scratching your head.
As for the rest of the thread; I feel that some responses were directed toward the Artificial Horizon-types. As you see, we sometimes deal with a level of condescension in our profession, which can grate when you see the standard of individuals employed as pilots in some parts of the world.
Thanks for your questions, and glad that they were answered (eventually).

..........you do all get driven around in small white buses.........

Sitting at 35000' I don't want to have a late level off and vector. All I want to know is what time you want me at the threshold so I can plan a more efficient descent.

One of the things that completely annoys me about AKL is the lack of early flow control. I've planned my descent at 280. If you want a slower speed on descent for sequencing that's fine, just tell us before top of descent for efficiency.

If you want me to track via kauri in anticipation of the visual, tell me before TOD. If you going to track me on the ILS tell me as early as possible or the full star, tell me.

The differences about AKL and LHR is that at least I know I'm going to hold before the approach. I have a reasonable expectation about whats going on. In Akl however, I may track via a visual approach, I may have to track via the STAR. I might be told to speed up enroute, then be told to reduce to min clean by approach so they can squeeze me in on the visual.

It feels sometimes that Approach control does not speak to enroute control enough. Cancellations of approach speed requirements is a classic example of this. One guy cancels them, to only have standard speeds stated when on approach control because your No 8.... Why in hell would I want to speed up, only to be slowed down again. It's a double fuel penalty.

Bulla, why does your aircraft vary its descent speed about the 280k & not fly exactly that speed all the time? Because it's flying to meet a target in variable conditions. Same with us adjusting your speed - we're aiming to put you in the right place at the right time relative to other aircraft & sometimes it needs adjusting. You've got your nice FMS to help - we're hand flying with basic instruments.

I must agree with Bula
On late arrivals into akl I always ask if the is any speed control on descent. Usually the instant response is standard speeds( almost as if they couldnt be bothered to pick up the phone to ask what speed they want) only to be asked on the next frequency for max speed as long as possible.
While I'm at it does anyone know how, to be told to leave cruise altitude 40-50nm early help with the sequence into Akl.

Cheers

Profile matching. Like I posted back a page.

who_cares, a sequence is a dynamic thing. A gap opens up ahead of you because someone does better than expected or takes track shortening when it wasn't sure they could earlier. By moving you up a bit to fill that gap everyone behind you benefits too. The aim is to maximise the entire sequence & is not just considering one aircraft - individual aircraft get tweaked to achieve this.

Sure, a 3 minute gap could be left in the sequence instead of speeding you up but how is that efficient for the system as a whole?

My issue is not with the controllers, it is solely with the sequencing/Flow control.

If I speed up to 300 knots for the sequence, let's say 40nm, then slowed to 220 for say the next 40nm,why can't I just be told prior to ToD to maintain 255 knots, or adjust my speed to cross the feeder fix before we even leave our cruise alt.

I expect vectoring to slot in,, extensions and the like. You know, whatever it takes as the situation is revolving.

We talk about efficiency. But if everyone is beeing dicked around, we loose efficiency for everyone, not just the arrival rate.

"We are good at what we do"... No offense, but it does Puts a huge smile on my face sometimes :)

Of course. As you are the onlyaircraft in the sky.......

You are not serious are you? Did you read the preceeding posts in this thread?

Far from..... Other busy airports do it, why is Auckland an exception?


I'm sorry. I've operated around the world to many different airports. Why does Auckland always feel like the most manual place I fly to with the most frequent changes to profile?

Quite frankly Airways is ok at at what they do but there are many who do it better. Hopefully "Mana" forces a few people to spend more money where money needs to be spent to give ATC better tools to work with before someone else does it for them.

A new tool for the controllers toolbox in use at Auckland for the last few days. RNP AR now up and running at NZAA since Thursday. When sequence and capability line up, it's in for the short approach! From the south only at this point. Bring it on!:D

Here I was thinking that Airway's ways of doing things was worlds best practice, where ever did I get that idea from. :hmm: