TL, I don't think any of the crew have noticed a pattern who the non conformers are. The Flow controller may be aware having to document the events but as a general rule, the guys who are sorting them out couldn't care less. We just have to deal with it. By the time it all happens we're usually a bit to busy to take notes :)

The West 14 May:

Please note he is not saying GROWTH will flatten, he is saying passenger NUMBERS will flatten and potentially DECREASE.

Well, potentailly the sun may not rise tomorrow morning, so I guess technically he is correct. He is also trying to hose down talk of having to actually provide some improved infrastructure such as more space and a new runway.

Keep it up Brad. Unfortunately for you there are some very big movers and shakers sick and tired of you company's stranglehold on Perth air traffic. So they are doing something about it, you know, like talking to the owners of the airport, not the leaseholders.

Tuesday 22/5 ... midmorning wind vrb 3kts , perfect viz , no cloud in the state ... 6 waiting at 21 for departure , flow of arrivals onto 21 ... rwy 24 ... sitting idol... 15 minute delay ... :confused:

I think I've seen R24 used for about 20 minutes in the last two weeks. If it is unavailable due works it should be NOTAMed.

It's not "NOT AVBL DUE WORKS" it's "NOT AVBL DUE NOISE" isn't it....plus LAHSO what is that again?

And so it should be. No jet noise over my back yard thanks! :=

Taxiway works stop the tower from nominating R24, means arrival rate of 24 an hour not 26 using R21/R24.

Flows know when an aircraft is not compliant as soon as an aircraft departs, they can choose to de-prioritise the flight (or not) depending on the sequence and give additional delay up to the MOTAMed holding.

Sorry, I was thinking of 24 arrivals :O

Please excuse my ignorance - the other morning I was watching the aircraft lined up on taxiway bravo for a 21 departure, and I couldn't help notice that the next aircraft to take to the runway seemed to take forever to lineup. I looked into the distance and couldn't spot any arriving a/c. Why isn't the next cab on the rank moving to lineup as soon as the one cleared for takeoff is rolling? It must be procedural and I understand the wake turbulance but these where all 737's.:confused:

Maybe the pilot was slow to get moving, or the tower did not have departure instructions for the aircraft because the Dep controller was too busy with all the other Perth Departures and IFR departures out of Jandakot.

Rumour has it aircraft were held up, inbound, at one point last night. Had nothing to do with slots or sequencing apparently???

Not a rumour. They broadcast on center frequency that it was due to staff shortages. Departures and arrivals delayed.

I wonder how many people have to leave or go sick to cause a shut down of big chunks of airspace. :rolleyes:

No TIBA, no TRA, no NOTAMS. We call this the Short break procedure. We use this process in times where a controller must take a break and there is no one qualified to work the airspace. Simply refusing access to airspace for 30 minutes appears to be another new way of handling it.

Easy enough to keep IFR out of CTA but what about VFR in E looking for a service. IFR pickup, anyone?

I heard that the expression "due staff shortages" or similar were NOT supposed to be used but when we get asked "why are we being delayed?", then "operational requirement" doesn't seem to cut it. "Not telling!" doesn't seem to go down well either.

The minister doesn't find out about "delays". The minister only finds out about airspace closure. Hence, no closures- only 'delays'.

That way the managers can stand in front of a senate estimates committee and say "we do not have a staff shortage- we have adequate staffing".

Perhaps you could print out the relevant transcripts to read to help pass the time next time you are holding...due to staff shortage (cough cough)...I mean 'operational requirement'?

Thursday was nearly as bad. Arrival rate limited to 18/hour so sectors could stay combined (3 staff instead of six).

The "Operational Requirement" euphemism won't work much longer, if it still does. Eventually everybody will know it means "Staff shortage and we're trying to cover it up".

The minister may not find out directly, but apparently the Airlines are asking pointed questions of ASA, and if they don't get answers that they like, will I'm sure be on to him.

Nautilus, it is a wonder they have not started applying pressure to ASA and the minister already. The airlines (passengers), through extended traffic delays and lack of services, have been footing the bill for a few years now.

How odd that a Government that is so keen on taxing carbon is also holding the purse strings for an entity that can leave us up there churning through tonnes of fuel for almost an hour! We could abolish ASA all together and the whole country can live on the carbon tax alone. :}

The West, 11 July 2012
 

Airport snarl-up a 'nightmare'
Geoffrey Thomas Aviation Editor, The West Australian

Updated July 11, 2012, 2:20 am

A new system to allocate landing and take-off slots at Perth's overcrowded airport is not working properly, delaying flights and putting pilots under stress.

In a letter leaked to The West Australian, the Regional Aviation Association of Australia has told its WA members that air traffic control provider Airservices Australia has admitted the system is failing and that too many pilots are forced to declare "fuel emergencies".

Airservices recently introduced the Metron system to try to better manage the limited runway capacity at Perth Airport.

The system gives priority to incoming flights originating more than 800 nautical miles from Perth, meaning a flight from Broome or Adelaide will get clearance to land ahead of a flight from Karratha or Albany. Most of the critical fly-in, fly-out flights come from sites within the 800-nautical-mile radius.

This is creating a bottleneck with many flights being put into holding patterns for up to 40 minutes and forced either to divert or declare a fuel emergency - indicating the plane will run out of fuel before it reaches its intended destination if it continues to stay in a holding pattern - to be given priority to land.

The Metron system was introduced to ration the limited slots at Perth Airport and to try to stop long and wasteful queuing for take-off or holding for landing.

According to the RAAA, the acting chief executive of Airservices, Andrew Clark, has admitted the system is not working.

Airservices told the association they were forced into Metron because of the congestion at Perth.

In an official response, an Airservices spokeswoman said it was "well aware of a number of concerns that some regional airlines have expressed with the deployment of Metron in Perth".

"We have been working with individual operators and industry bodies (including the RAAA) in recent weeks to ensure that the benefits of the software are realised," she said.

"Based on airline feedback, Airservices is also reviewing procedures which determine which aircraft use the Metron Traffic Flow tool to better improve the overall air traffic flow into Perth."

RAAA says that as a result of the chaos, on-time performance for many airlines has slumped from 90 per cent to 50 per cent.

Some operators have told The West Australian pilots are also being put under pressure to meet slot times, adding to stress. Missing a take-off slot can mean a delay of up to two hours.

One airline said the system "was a nightmare".

1. Do any of our ATC get to a chance to do US exchange work? Watching ATC at a busy US hub is where we could learn some lessons about getting people on and off runways (single, multiple and crossing) quickly.

2. Also, a system of RNAV arrivals that seems to work well particularly in EU is the system that resembles the security queue - having an s pattern arrival flow with strict speed control on each leg and constant descent paths. It doesn't use much more fuel, and gets maximum landing rates close in where short range spacing control is easier.

When traffic is light or if spacing needs to be decreased corners can be cut to get minimum spacing/maximum landing rates (like raising the tape in the outside barriers of the security queue).

If spacing needs to be increased extending any of the legs is also easy.

Being back at min speed for an hour and a half from the FIR boundary to meet an arrival crossing time and then being narked at for being 2 minutes out because of a massive descent wind gradient change is not satisfying for anyone.

Why not have a rough crossing time filter or a medium level hold a bit further out and then into the arrival queue.

6.........5..........4..........3............2...........1

7

8.........9..........10.........11.........12.........13



:::::::::::::::::::............17.........16.........15

HD's hand puppet at work again.

However, is there any chance 24 could be used for arrivals and 21 for departures (with obvious exceptions). Surely that ease the congestion at peak.

Bull****...pure and utter bull****. No priority whatsoever. Plenty of aircraft from Brisbane/Adelaide/Sydney/Melbourne etc doing laps at HAMTN every night.

It just means that aircraft outside the 800nm range aren't given a ground delay, which makes sense given things can change during the 2hrs plus it will take them to get to Perth.

Go crawl back into your hole Mr. Thomas and do some proper research.

Until a few months ago we used 21 for departures and 21 and 24 for arrivals, and yes gives a higher movement rate. However 24 is not used for arrivals anymore, but its unavailability is not NOTAM'ed for some reason.

ATC vectoring and speed control can be much more accurate than crews adjusting to make a fix time, but it will happen inside 160nm. The airlines pushed for feeder fix times and early notice, and boasted they could hit times to within seconds.

You will get narked at when we can see from 100+ nm out you won't make your time but can't convince you to change.

Of course if METRON works and the airlines comply, then nobody gets any delay and it becomes academic :)

Hey, Nautilus Blue,

Any chance of getting something like an "Expect J5A arrival RWY 21" with the JULIM time/speed requirement? It's just that if we sit there aiming to make that time and speed and then get given a different STAR/RWY combo our timings can be up to 2 minutes out. Or are we not meant to try to anticipate the STAR and just accept being a minute or so out once you finally do give us a STAR?

DD Basically we want you to be exactly on time no matter how hard we make it for you :O.

I understand that the problem for arrivals via JULIM is the large difference in track miles between 21A and 03A, and the subsequent alt at JULIM. We could give a RWY expectation, but there are a few issues.

- ideally you will get a JULIM time as far out as possible, so often the controller issuing the JULIM time won't know (or care) what the duty RWY is. Admittedly thats our problem not yours, and something we could fix.

- the main problem though it would be only and expectation, not a promise. PH are unable to forecast RWY changes, so the further out you get an expectation, the more likely it is to be wrong. Thinking about it, I suppose if the RWY changes we'll need an amended JULIM time anyway, and in the highly probable event you can't make the new time that again is our problem not yours.

It is probably worthwhile, but I suggest you would have more luck going through you company, ASA pays a lot more attention to the airlines than it does to its workers.

Out of interest, how far out do you check the CATIS? As a guide, on 21 you will always get the JULIM5A21, 03 will be JULIM5A03, unless its not dark, not instrument approaches and your operator is not johnny foreigner (not including kiwis) in which case the WOORA2 (unless we give you the JULIM5A03 anyway for sequencing).

How about checking the TTF or TAF.... always provides a reliable indicator of RNW expectancy for me.

What a proactive management point of view.

Airlines 'must want' fog upgrade - The West Australian

Quite frankly I'm heartily sick and tired of listening to the bull**** that emanates from ASA and that complete twit that runs Perth airport. The system is stuffed pure and simple and no amount of bull**** will fix it. It requires a complete rebuild from scratch. If GT's article draws attention to the fact, well good on him.

I no longer have any trust what so ever in ATC and nor the bloody METRON system. After all, why bother complying with a COBT when compliance results in holding (quite often longer than promulgated by NOTAM) anyway? I wonder if the two aforementioned culprits would continue down the same path if they had to pay the carbon tax caused by excessive fuel burn due to their incompetence?

I'll just continue to carry more fuel than required, tell my pax via the PA that we have again been "screwed" by ATC and leave it at that.

Nero fiddled while Rome burnt - same same.

It's @#$%^s like you, butting in, that stuff it up for the rest of us. Thanks for that. :cool:

As has been said many times, ATC is not the creator of this shambles and in my experience, they do pretty well, considering.

Why do people have so much trouble understanding PH?
It is a monopoly.
It is privately owned.
The boss is required to deliver maximum returns to the owners/shareholders.
Extra infrastructure airside would cost, and produce no increase in returns.
The boss can do sums.
No new airside infrastructure will be built.


While I share your frustration, the are two possibilities. One, there is a reason that you don't know, because nobody told you and you haven't asked. Two, there is no reason and either WAC or ATC are deliberately screwing with you for fun. Take your pick.

Thats OK, these will be the same pax that blame your piloting for turbulence.

"Bloggs", blah blah blah blah - when you dare to leave the coast of Western Australia and venture further afield than good old Perth and see how it can and should be - lets talk.

Otherwise blah blah blah blah - same old crap still in 20 years time.

Perhaps you should go in and show ATC how to do it Hoof?

To disclose from the get go, I am ATC but not in OZ let alone Perth but Bloggs is one of the more rounded posters with facts and tact than the vast majority here. Attacking him is like punching your own kid for being cute.

I've heard a lot of adjectives used to describe Bloggs but cute and rounded are not 2 of them.
You have 2 runways, most of the time you only use 1, and 1 of the runways, 24, is virtually never used for departures, now why is that ? Why the hell do they bother publishing STARs for 24 ?? It is common knowledge that for years ATC has been asking for more staff and the oxygen thieves at ASA have refused, meanwhile the operators ( The customer ) suffer. I am told that ATC have even advised operators of a go slow ( 16 movements an hour, how do u sleep ? ) due to controllers calling in sick.
Anybody who has flown outside of this sheltered workshop knows that with the benine weather, no terrain and no complicated airspace, a hell of a lot more can be done with 2 runways.

Awesome accusations chief. Care to back any of them up? 16 movements am hour is about an 18 mile trail at 35 miles at matched speeds. Whilst not what we roll in a full controlled/**** off G category/fat for pop ups, that is what you get when the GA community have/had a voice on the Houses that make legislation.

ATC in OZ whilst staffed by the softest union run by dudes padding their final average salary, just want you the tuck out of their airspace ASAP.

I personally want all the five minute experiencd guys especially who operate into one local hub to have a bit of a look around and learn what actual traffic flow requires.

Salami Bacon to you all

Am I the chief ? If so, a friend of mine at Network recently advised me he would b late for dinner because he had been told by his ops that ATC had called them and told them that in VMC the movements per hour were being reduced to 16 due sickness, I guess it's his word against yours, what's your evidence ?
Hong Kong airport has 2 runways, very complicated airspace ( 3 other mainland china airports in close proximity ) , terrain issues and lousy viz and weather, they handle up to 50 movements an hour. Yes they are parallel runways but if you know anything about that you would know its still not a case of simply firing off departures whilst a/c arriving, especially not when you consider the missed approach is straight into the path of departing a/c
Kind regards, The Chief

Technically true, but full of weasel words.

It was ML centre that has the problem, not PH.

Controllers called in sick because they were unfit for duty. The lack of any safety margin in staffing (tactical or strategic) meant nobody was available to replace them.

Go slow implies staff deliberately under performing. The reduced arrival rate was dictated by management. Rather than close airspace, positions were kept combined. During this period, 3 controllers were doing the job that requires a minimum of 4, sometimes 5. That doesn't include provision for toilet breaks etc.

During the period of 16/hour arrivals, one controller was separating/sequencing etc every arriving AND departing a/c from 30 miles out to 90 to the west and 160 mlles north.

What was supposed to happen was that METRON would schedule 16 arrivals an hour, but PH would accept at normal arrival rate, around 26-28. This meant that even with the que jumpers we would't have to hold, and the workload would be possible. Thats not quite what happened but thats another story.

PS re terrain. PH does have some interesting terrain. The is a 15000' high cliff wall 10 miles to the north!

Maybe a 15,000' cliff some 2500 miles to the North East, but 10 miles north?

A zero too many perhaps? :O

Nothing wrong with adding some personnel safety margins !

I'm not sure I'd call it terrain, but I'm pretty sure he's talking about Pearce' airspace.

SandyPalms,

thanks, now I am with the program!:O