BNE ATC Holding
Tell your conspiracy theorists that they are not alone 
There are in fact other aircraft in the sequence with them. They can't be shortened up until the aircraft ahead in the sequence has made it possible. The controller often can't know whether that will or won't happen.
There are in fact other aircraft in the sequence with them. They can't be shortened up until the aircraft ahead in the sequence has made it possible. The controller often can't know whether that will or won't happen.
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Cairns Australia
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All the capital cities airports have the same problem. If their management refuse to invest in proper infrastructure and only wish to invest in shoppimg facilities etc they should be forced to sell up and buy into stockland or westfield. As that is where their hearts is set on. Airport Privatisation has been a failure in Australia. I can't think of one airport where the supply has kept up with demand. We need a bit more regulation to put more pressure on the airport owners to start the ball rolling faster in the right direction. As at the moment its really lagging behind on all fronts.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: SE QLD
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Haughtney1 ......fair dinkum!!!
Don't Post such dribble.....
.......conspiracy....concerted effort.....back guys into corners....
Yep we've got nothing better to do.......
LTD
Don't Post such dribble.....
.......conspiracy....concerted effort.....back guys into corners....
Yep we've got nothing better to do.......
LTD
Geez, I thought you guys in BrizVegas had everything! Don't you have the flashing red label in Maestro that means "screw this aircraft over"? Funny how it's always the same airline..... I hear we're integrating it with crew manifests as well so we can target individual pilots.
Don't you have the flashing red label in Maestro that means "screw this aircraft over"?
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Surrounding the localizer
Posts: 2,200
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
1 Post
LTD, I do have better things to do mate, trust me..and you should note, I merely asked the question, I didn't say I was the recipient, nor did I say that I felt it was anything other than an observation of what OTHER people have said, as for dribble...well, I do that on even a good day.
PDubby by way of PM was more than helpful in helping this button pusher understand the vagaries and uniqueness that is entailed when operating into YBBN on an infrequent basis.
PDubby by way of PM was more than helpful in helping this button pusher understand the vagaries and uniqueness that is entailed when operating into YBBN on an infrequent basis.
Last edited by haughtney1; 12th Jun 2012 at 14:07.
Join Date: Jun 1997
Location: auckland, new zealand
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Approach controller BNE today at about lunchtime (2 JUl 12): Big ups, guy. It is hard to be mad at someone you agree with, what with gin clear wx,a gentle southerly and a hold out over the ocean. It may have got you a bit of trouble with your supervisors, but the quiet reference to " stupid restrictions" (or words to that effect) really made a difference to the mood on our flight deck (plenty of gas and a warning for 20 min hold, but a lot of bitching before that comment to another aircraft). Good assist with the non-standard hold, BTW.
I think the greatest frustration in general is the apparent lack of foresight and coordination between sectors, and potentially a lack of understanding of how aircraft operate.
For example:
Trucking along for 3 hours only to be told at TOD to descend at a reduced speed. A little notice (don't need that much) allows for a much more efficient and comfortable descent.
Given max speed to the field after having just reduced to 250 kts at 10000.
Given a speed reduction just prior to a height requirement, with no height waiver.
Slowed down to min speed by one sector, only to be given max speed a few minutes later by the next.
Ok, so you say that prior notice is not always possible and it's part of my job to meet these requirements - that's absolutely true. I'm saying that if where possible this could somehow be addressed, both our workloads are going to be greatly reduced (less vectors,etc due aircraft unable to meet requirements) and (not that it's ATC's problem) we can potentially save millions of dollars in unnecessary fuel burn.
For example:
Trucking along for 3 hours only to be told at TOD to descend at a reduced speed. A little notice (don't need that much) allows for a much more efficient and comfortable descent.
Given max speed to the field after having just reduced to 250 kts at 10000.
Given a speed reduction just prior to a height requirement, with no height waiver.
Slowed down to min speed by one sector, only to be given max speed a few minutes later by the next.
Ok, so you say that prior notice is not always possible and it's part of my job to meet these requirements - that's absolutely true. I'm saying that if where possible this could somehow be addressed, both our workloads are going to be greatly reduced (less vectors,etc due aircraft unable to meet requirements) and (not that it's ATC's problem) we can potentially save millions of dollars in unnecessary fuel burn.
Bottums Up
Growler,
I used to think along similar lines to your post. The during a recent visit to Cairns Tower & Approach, asked the question. The Approach people were able to demonstrate, in real time, how pop up traffic, either with or without a flight plan, can drastically alter the planned flow.
Oft times they try to squeeze every one in, rather than asking the bloke leaving Cooktown to wait 15+ minuted for the previous flow to pass through. Add to this VFR with no details, that presents at the zone boundary, and it's much easier to to understand why the late notice, as frustrating as it is, occurs.
Now what really gives on the sh!ts is requesting a visual approach at 150 to 200 nm, being cleared on a STAR that adds 30 odd nm, with altitude restrictions that keep one quite high, and then being cleared to shave 20 track miles off with only a moments notice. You'll never guess which northern port does this routinely.
I used to think along similar lines to your post. The during a recent visit to Cairns Tower & Approach, asked the question. The Approach people were able to demonstrate, in real time, how pop up traffic, either with or without a flight plan, can drastically alter the planned flow.
Oft times they try to squeeze every one in, rather than asking the bloke leaving Cooktown to wait 15+ minuted for the previous flow to pass through. Add to this VFR with no details, that presents at the zone boundary, and it's much easier to to understand why the late notice, as frustrating as it is, occurs.
Now what really gives on the sh!ts is requesting a visual approach at 150 to 200 nm, being cleared on a STAR that adds 30 odd nm, with altitude restrictions that keep one quite high, and then being cleared to shave 20 track miles off with only a moments notice. You'll never guess which northern port does this routinely.
Grrowler, it is just like driving your car from A to B along a road that narrows from 2 to 1 lane, when you get to the merge, sometimes you gotta slow down then speed up to go in a gap and vice versa and some times, you rock up with noone else and get to do your own thing. Pretty simple stuff really. Easily fixed by having as many runways as arriving aircraft!
I think the greatest frustration in general is the apparent lack of foresight and coordination between sectors, and potentially a lack of understanding of how aircraft operate.
For example:
Trucking along for 3 hours only to be told at TOD to descend at a reduced speed. A little notice (don't need that much) allows for a much more efficient and comfortable descent.
For example:
Trucking along for 3 hours only to be told at TOD to descend at a reduced speed. A little notice (don't need that much) allows for a much more efficient and comfortable descent.
The sequence isn't always set early enough to allow this and giving you a delay comes a fair way down our list of priorities - separation, coordination and other routine tasks take priority.
Given max speed to the field after having just reduced to 250 kts at 10000.
It could be you're late and the guy following is early - for us the best solution is to speed you up as it doesn't reduce the gap behind the other guy.
Given a speed reduction just prior to a height requirement, with no height waiver.
Slowed down to min speed by one sector, only to be given max speed a few minutes later by the next.
Some International heavies are very good at this - they end up low and slow and already a minute late at 100 miles (which is about when you're being handed off to arrivals so is when you get given the max). Far easier for all involved to not flog the dead horse and push you ahead. It's either that or you continue at min and vectored to lose another three minutes to keep you behind.
Ok, so you say that prior notice is not always possible and it's part of my job to meet these requirements - that's absolutely true. I'm saying that if where possible this could somehow be addressed, both our workloads are going to be greatly reduced (less vectors,etc due aircraft unable to meet requirements) and (not that it's ATC's problem) we can potentially save millions of dollars in unnecessary fuel burn.
Time for a car analogy: would you expect to be able to maintain spacing behind another car every time with a pre-programmed level of braking? Including when the car in front slams them on hard & then coasts the last 10 metres? Or when someone nips in front of the car five ahead?
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Australia
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So, why don't we have max/min IAS requirements on STARs or downwind or base positions, like most other countries? Would that not help?
Slight thread drift...but can anyone point out exactly where it's written, if at all, where pilots are to advise ATC of a change in TAS? And exceeding what tolerance? Seems some do and some don't. Might just be a "nice to do" thing to help out the guys and gals on the ground, but I want to know if it is a requirement. (I meant aside from the M.02 requirement for RVSM)
Slight thread drift...but can anyone point out exactly where it's written, if at all, where pilots are to advise ATC of a change in TAS? And exceeding what tolerance? Seems some do and some don't. Might just be a "nice to do" thing to help out the guys and gals on the ground, but I want to know if it is a requirement. (I meant aside from the M.02 requirement for RVSM)
Last edited by 2Plus; 3rd Jul 2012 at 08:34.
It could be you're late and the guy following is early - for us the best solution is to speed you up as it doesn't reduce the gap behind the other guy.
Given a speed reduction just prior to a height requirement, with no height waiver.
So, why don't we have max/min IAS requirements on STARs or downwind or base positions, like most other countries?
Last edited by Capn Bloggs; 3rd Jul 2012 at 09:48.