ATC DELAYS
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: uk
Posts: 1,122
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When I was in HKATC in 3.3years I never saw any inner hold used once,despite almost hourly the great conga line forming to the south.It seemed that to use an inner hold was a failing of some sort.No we can give 3 million headings,confuse the pilots,get an overloaded frequency,but isn't HKATC doing a great job.Well not really.
The likes of Heathrow operate the way they do because the airspace is very tight.If they operated a great conga to the south then they would be in Gatwick airspace,which operating 50+ an hour on a single runway.
HK operate in their way because that's how they have always done it,not because it's the most efficient.
Also inside 50 miles most turboprops will always beat a jet,so small aircraft aren't necessarily slower.
Back to my garden in the fresh air to use a HK luxury item.A lawnmower.
The likes of Heathrow operate the way they do because the airspace is very tight.If they operated a great conga to the south then they would be in Gatwick airspace,which operating 50+ an hour on a single runway.
HK operate in their way because that's how they have always done it,not because it's the most efficient.
Also inside 50 miles most turboprops will always beat a jet,so small aircraft aren't necessarily slower.
Back to my garden in the fresh air to use a HK luxury item.A lawnmower.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Global
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks all
Thanks for the information everyone.
CAD must stop issuing slots then. If the airport is almost at capacity.
Every working day I am in and out of HK. So I have to endure delays caused by Weather, China, Chinese airforce, and more recently HK ATC flow management because the CAD are issuing too many slots. Maybe someone in the office should be looking at the overall delays being experienced here. I personally think it is out of control.
The FIR bounday speed I suggested earlier was to have all aircraft at the same speed and mandate it as such. I do observe both mainlan carriers and carriers from the Phillipines at lower speed then most other operators.Subsequently all following aircraft are slowed down. Without the corporate aircraft, all other jet aircraft have similar decent speeds. I have flown both Boeing and Airbus aircraft in Hong Kong and would say without turbulent days these aircraft can all do 300 kts on descent. Tis wouls have aircraft move through all sectors faster, allow us to stay at the higher speed longer. Then a speed limit point for starting the star and one for starting the approach. This would seriously reduce congestion and stacking of flights. If you can have us at 250 kts all the way in, I am sure the extra speed would just make everything move faster.
The zig zag delay manoeures need to stop. The amount of controlling required for this manouvring is crazy. What happens if we do have a radio failure? 10 aeroplanes dancing in the sky on zigs and zags.
Give us a time to leave mango etc and EAT issue this information at first contact at FIR. Adjust speed as reuired hold etc and ensure your aircraft is at point on time.
These delays are going to cause more problems for Airlines. Inefficiency fuel cost lost crew times compensation paid to passengers. etc etc etc.
Maybe the slot person needs to start considering these things before issuing new slots. Redsign airspace around HK as well.
CAD must stop issuing slots then. If the airport is almost at capacity.
Every working day I am in and out of HK. So I have to endure delays caused by Weather, China, Chinese airforce, and more recently HK ATC flow management because the CAD are issuing too many slots. Maybe someone in the office should be looking at the overall delays being experienced here. I personally think it is out of control.
The FIR bounday speed I suggested earlier was to have all aircraft at the same speed and mandate it as such. I do observe both mainlan carriers and carriers from the Phillipines at lower speed then most other operators.Subsequently all following aircraft are slowed down. Without the corporate aircraft, all other jet aircraft have similar decent speeds. I have flown both Boeing and Airbus aircraft in Hong Kong and would say without turbulent days these aircraft can all do 300 kts on descent. Tis wouls have aircraft move through all sectors faster, allow us to stay at the higher speed longer. Then a speed limit point for starting the star and one for starting the approach. This would seriously reduce congestion and stacking of flights. If you can have us at 250 kts all the way in, I am sure the extra speed would just make everything move faster.
The zig zag delay manoeures need to stop. The amount of controlling required for this manouvring is crazy. What happens if we do have a radio failure? 10 aeroplanes dancing in the sky on zigs and zags.
Give us a time to leave mango etc and EAT issue this information at first contact at FIR. Adjust speed as reuired hold etc and ensure your aircraft is at point on time.
These delays are going to cause more problems for Airlines. Inefficiency fuel cost lost crew times compensation paid to passengers. etc etc etc.
Maybe the slot person needs to start considering these things before issuing new slots. Redsign airspace around HK as well.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: HKG
Age: 47
Posts: 1,007
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for posting here bhead. I think one of the main reasons pilots who operate into HKG a lot think the ATC is not that great is because the instructions given often make no sense to us at all. Today we were asked to reduce ground speed by 20kts which we did our best to achieve. We were then given a vector about 60 degrees off our track for spacing, from this vector we were cleared into the hold with an expected departure time 20 minutes from the current time. To a pilot this reeks of incompetence, why not just clear us into the hold higher than the aircraft we are following rather than spacing us from it to enter the hold? I know I don't have the whole picture but no matter how hard I try I cannot figure out why we need to slow our groundspeed and be vectored just to enter the hold.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: uk
Posts: 1,122
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Question.
Do HKATC operate inbound delays less than 20 mins is regarded as no delay and no EATs are issued.Only delays in excess of 20 mins then you get an EAT.
If not,why not?
If they do then the delays that seem to be experienced with 250kts and a bit of vectoring is less than 20 mins,so that's no delay.
Where's the strimmer.
Do HKATC operate inbound delays less than 20 mins is regarded as no delay and no EATs are issued.Only delays in excess of 20 mins then you get an EAT.
If not,why not?
If they do then the delays that seem to be experienced with 250kts and a bit of vectoring is less than 20 mins,so that's no delay.
Where's the strimmer.
Last edited by throw a dyce; 20th May 2013 at 10:50.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: in the sandpit
Age: 49
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting thread...
Even though I've been knocked about by HK ATC many a times...often with no logic at all, it is still seamless compared to much of the globe. Try delays with certain Arab countries with not even a tenth the traffic of HKG. Having to reduce speed and get vectored around with no known traffic making it look like the controllers taking you on some desert tour or using you for future separation practice!
I take my sandy dishdash off to you HK towerboys!
Even though I've been knocked about by HK ATC many a times...often with no logic at all, it is still seamless compared to much of the globe. Try delays with certain Arab countries with not even a tenth the traffic of HKG. Having to reduce speed and get vectored around with no known traffic making it look like the controllers taking you on some desert tour or using you for future separation practice!
I take my sandy dishdash off to you HK towerboys!
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: No longer in Hong kong
Age: 75
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Visit to HK ATC
Early in this thread, "flapsdown" asked about a visit to ATC. It's my opinion that a visit should not be a fleeting rush through the centre/tower but should include sitting in and listening to the controllers for at least an hour. As there are three main areas of activity: Tower, En-route and Terminal (Approach) the visit should cover at least 4 hours (one hour each in each area), not counting travel. I would have to do it on a day off, and due to the limitations of the shuttle bus timetable from the terminal to ATC, you would need to lay aside a minimum of five hours. I have PM'd flapsdown to contact me but as yet he has not done so. I will give him until midnight tomorrow (Tuesday) and he has a spot. The priority (first in), if there is any interest for two more spots would be: captaindbusdriver; aislinn; Cpt. underpants; silberfuchs; flexible response; crwkuntroll; jizzmonkey; Mr Claus; 744 dry and sloppy joe. If flapsdown does not come back to me, then three from the above are welcome. If the three spots have not been filled by midnight Thursday 23rd, offer will then be open to any one else that might be interested. You can pm me and I'll pass my contact details
Just re-confirming, only show an interest if you're prepared to spend at least 4 to 5 hours for the total trip. If there is a response, I will return to this thread and advise status.
Just re-confirming, only show an interest if you're prepared to spend at least 4 to 5 hours for the total trip. If there is a response, I will return to this thread and advise status.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Smogsville
Posts: 1,424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ATCers thanks for contributing.
I have to agree with what's been said, the zig zagging has to stop purely for the amount of wasted radio chatter the amount of missed calls, stepped on calls, wrong call signs, miss understood instructions, repeats etc etc is nuts, and throw in weather and then the multiple read backs for minor heading changes, it's endless chatter.
Can we not all just be sent to the hold at whatever speed descend one at time and leave the hold, London amazes me it's constant in order instructions that are almost identical for every aircraft, which we like as we can plan ahead.
However tonight would not have worked the hold at abbey was basically shut down by passing thunderstorms (luckily the lightning allowed a good visual definition of the cb's) we self adjusted a little before getting ATC approval from a 10nm leg to 8 to 5 to almost an orbit before being unable to hold, then the TCAS looked like someone had dropped a box of cockroaches planes were literally crossing in all directions doing left/right orbits south of abbey.
Would it be possible to fly to a different hold as the weather from the north made the abbey arrival very chaotic?
On the topic of speed control, we descended at 340-350kts the other day to try and put distance between us and a company Airbus, I doubt he had to do any zig zagging and he landed straight after us even though we arrived on top of each other at ELATO. Is there any way to accelerate the earlier arrivals away from the rush behind ie if the rush kicks off at 1pm can the 1200 arrivals be sped up to 330+ kts to create a buffer to last as long as possible? It worked that day, and I understand it wasn't busy however we did this of our own accord ATC didn't ask us to fly 340kts, had we done nothing I imagine we would have both got the zig zag, undoubtedly we would have been put behind.
Rgds.
I have to agree with what's been said, the zig zagging has to stop purely for the amount of wasted radio chatter the amount of missed calls, stepped on calls, wrong call signs, miss understood instructions, repeats etc etc is nuts, and throw in weather and then the multiple read backs for minor heading changes, it's endless chatter.
Can we not all just be sent to the hold at whatever speed descend one at time and leave the hold, London amazes me it's constant in order instructions that are almost identical for every aircraft, which we like as we can plan ahead.
However tonight would not have worked the hold at abbey was basically shut down by passing thunderstorms (luckily the lightning allowed a good visual definition of the cb's) we self adjusted a little before getting ATC approval from a 10nm leg to 8 to 5 to almost an orbit before being unable to hold, then the TCAS looked like someone had dropped a box of cockroaches planes were literally crossing in all directions doing left/right orbits south of abbey.
Would it be possible to fly to a different hold as the weather from the north made the abbey arrival very chaotic?
On the topic of speed control, we descended at 340-350kts the other day to try and put distance between us and a company Airbus, I doubt he had to do any zig zagging and he landed straight after us even though we arrived on top of each other at ELATO. Is there any way to accelerate the earlier arrivals away from the rush behind ie if the rush kicks off at 1pm can the 1200 arrivals be sped up to 330+ kts to create a buffer to last as long as possible? It worked that day, and I understand it wasn't busy however we did this of our own accord ATC didn't ask us to fly 340kts, had we done nothing I imagine we would have both got the zig zag, undoubtedly we would have been put behind.
Rgds.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 744
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for posting some good information bhead. You've obviously thought about the big picture here rather than just looking at a bunch of blips on a screen. Well done. Us pilots (well, most of us) appreciate the ATC inputs here.
A few things you said caught my eye
Probably true, but the other factor involved here in HK could also be experienced and inexperienced.
Absolutely!! Give me a target time for a gate. Doesn't have to be MUSEL/MANGO/CANTO, any point will do (ABBEY/BETTY/GUAVA/MURRY/LIMES etc etc). You can even give me an expected touchdown time to help me to help you. Pretty much every aircraft arriving in HK has a modern FM that tells us estimates for each waypoint. Give me a time, and I'll be there. If it's unachievable, then it becomes my responsibility to tell you so, then you have the opportunity to hold or zig-zag me. Assuming everyone arrives at their gate +/- 1 minute, the approach or director controller can fine-adjust with vectors (either cut the corner, or send us a little wider), or speed control, or even give us a further gate time at LIMES.
Much simpler, much less radio chatter, much less workload for both us and controller, much more fuel efficient.
A few things you said caught my eye
I hate to distinguish controller here by local and expats, I distinguish dull and smart controller
According to my communications with pilots on the frequency, they like to reduce the speed and make the entry gate time (e.g. MUSEL/MANGO) rather than spending long time in the holding pattern, not to mention being given a cardiogram-style doglegs
Much simpler, much less radio chatter, much less workload for both us and controller, much more fuel efficient.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Earth
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nice seeing all the sensible replies and questions, pretty tired after working on a weather day but Sloppy Joe raised a very common questions among pilots, this was also a question when I was first started working ATC and hold, why care to do so much (speed control, vector for spacing) before we send traffic into holding pattern?
there is a point,
because when we (ATC) give level clearance, the separation we think is ATC separation is 10nm/5nm depends on how far away u are from the radar head. so very often even when pilots reports visual and clear from a traffic, we still have to wait until we got 10 or 5 lateral nm to issue a clearance.
an example here,
traffic A and B inbound via ELATO, A preceding, B follows by 6nm, B catches up by 20kts. So one of the way to do it is, once B inbound, i reduce it by 20kts, then the 6nm gap can be maintained, but only maintained (not widening)
If I wana descend both traffic to FL260 reach by MAGOG which is the waypoint I hand off the traffic to the controller who do the holding, I cannot give the clearance to them in one go, i have to do step descent, i.e. the clearance to the traffic at higher level only to be cleared above the traffic at lower level, which is not very ideal for pilot and controller. so ideal way is put them 10nm in sequence with similar speed similar profile (talk about profile after this paragraph), all reach FL260 by MAGOG, hand off to another controller, then the next controller can clear all traffic all the way down to the level for holding say FL160 by ABBEY, second FL170 by ABBEY, at abbey join the hold.
About profile, we all knows same speed (IAS) at higher level means higher ground speed. So if we are to sequence traffic of very significant vertical profile it is a headache, coz for example if A is at FL300, be given 250kts, B at FL360 be given 250kts, B would still be catching up A until B gets down to a certain lower level, and bcoz lower IAS is no good for rate of descent the aircraft will be high and drifting down and always catching up the lower traffic in front. So for that we have to do speed control and vector, my principle is, vector for spacing, speed control to maintain the gap.
But what if there are more than A and B in the sequence....and what if they are not in-trail, what if we have to consolidate two streams into one for example in HK we've to consolidate DOTMI and ELATO traffic into one stream, where the westerly wind has so much effect on ELATO inbound and not really much effect on DOTMI traffic until they make the right turn? And for the vertical profile, even if I work nicely like 5 traffic from ELATO , 10miles in trail no catch up all going to MAGOG reaching FL260 by MAGOG, and then a DOTMI traffic comes up at a position which is better be inserted into number 3 or 4 in the ELATO sequence? and remember HK has no control until the traffic pass DOTMI and that traffic is at FL320, which by profile is always higher than it should be (i.e. always way higher than all the ELATO traffic)......................................all these and that....
Maybe a bit messy on this post, not very organized, but happy to clarify.
Or to make it more "first-hand", try this,
just all ELATO traffic inbound to HK, 5 aircraft A B C D E
All 3 miles apart
A - A322 FL320
B - A322 FL360
C - B744 FL300
D - A333 FL400
E - B744 FL380
need 10 miles at MAGOG, reach FL260 by MAGOG, speed at MAGOG has to be 250kts
ATC separation 10nm
how can u do it? (for simplicity we have omitted all overflight traffic north and southbound to and from DOTMI, no VHHH departure, no weather) I think that's enough to reflect a little bit of complexity here.
Afterall, really nice seeing we have a discussion going on here rather than finger-pointing.
there is a point,
because when we (ATC) give level clearance, the separation we think is ATC separation is 10nm/5nm depends on how far away u are from the radar head. so very often even when pilots reports visual and clear from a traffic, we still have to wait until we got 10 or 5 lateral nm to issue a clearance.
an example here,
traffic A and B inbound via ELATO, A preceding, B follows by 6nm, B catches up by 20kts. So one of the way to do it is, once B inbound, i reduce it by 20kts, then the 6nm gap can be maintained, but only maintained (not widening)
If I wana descend both traffic to FL260 reach by MAGOG which is the waypoint I hand off the traffic to the controller who do the holding, I cannot give the clearance to them in one go, i have to do step descent, i.e. the clearance to the traffic at higher level only to be cleared above the traffic at lower level, which is not very ideal for pilot and controller. so ideal way is put them 10nm in sequence with similar speed similar profile (talk about profile after this paragraph), all reach FL260 by MAGOG, hand off to another controller, then the next controller can clear all traffic all the way down to the level for holding say FL160 by ABBEY, second FL170 by ABBEY, at abbey join the hold.
About profile, we all knows same speed (IAS) at higher level means higher ground speed. So if we are to sequence traffic of very significant vertical profile it is a headache, coz for example if A is at FL300, be given 250kts, B at FL360 be given 250kts, B would still be catching up A until B gets down to a certain lower level, and bcoz lower IAS is no good for rate of descent the aircraft will be high and drifting down and always catching up the lower traffic in front. So for that we have to do speed control and vector, my principle is, vector for spacing, speed control to maintain the gap.
But what if there are more than A and B in the sequence....and what if they are not in-trail, what if we have to consolidate two streams into one for example in HK we've to consolidate DOTMI and ELATO traffic into one stream, where the westerly wind has so much effect on ELATO inbound and not really much effect on DOTMI traffic until they make the right turn? And for the vertical profile, even if I work nicely like 5 traffic from ELATO , 10miles in trail no catch up all going to MAGOG reaching FL260 by MAGOG, and then a DOTMI traffic comes up at a position which is better be inserted into number 3 or 4 in the ELATO sequence? and remember HK has no control until the traffic pass DOTMI and that traffic is at FL320, which by profile is always higher than it should be (i.e. always way higher than all the ELATO traffic)......................................all these and that....
Maybe a bit messy on this post, not very organized, but happy to clarify.
Or to make it more "first-hand", try this,
just all ELATO traffic inbound to HK, 5 aircraft A B C D E
All 3 miles apart
A - A322 FL320
B - A322 FL360
C - B744 FL300
D - A333 FL400
E - B744 FL380
need 10 miles at MAGOG, reach FL260 by MAGOG, speed at MAGOG has to be 250kts
ATC separation 10nm
how can u do it? (for simplicity we have omitted all overflight traffic north and southbound to and from DOTMI, no VHHH departure, no weather) I think that's enough to reflect a little bit of complexity here.
Afterall, really nice seeing we have a discussion going on here rather than finger-pointing.
Last edited by bhead; 21st May 2013 at 02:13.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Earth
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Probably true, but the other factor involved here in HK could also be experienced and inexperienced."
Know what u mean.
But I just couldn't agree that expats means the only experience here in hk and when they leave it means "oh all the experience is leaving and Hong Kong ATC is going to collapse". To my knowledge, local controllers are not the minority in HK ATC for decades, i.e. there are many locals who are experienced, been working for over 15 yrs, so to say the "experience" has been relied on the expats for all these years is unfair.
But having said that, if we put too big an equal sign between experience and competency, we're also very unscientific/unrealistic. Who was the main cause of the Tenerife (forgive my spelling) accident? The captain.
For this "out of control" feeling , "expats leaving and hk gona collapse feeling", my feeling is that the exponential traffic growth is the main killer in recent years, the growth is not only about hk airport movements, but also the growth of overflight traffic into china and from china,which is always not mentioned or identified by any bodies, with all the metric levels and chinese-standard english speaking pilots.
But also having said that, I agree with the saying that " local controller are not as interested in aviation as expats".
Know what u mean.
But I just couldn't agree that expats means the only experience here in hk and when they leave it means "oh all the experience is leaving and Hong Kong ATC is going to collapse". To my knowledge, local controllers are not the minority in HK ATC for decades, i.e. there are many locals who are experienced, been working for over 15 yrs, so to say the "experience" has been relied on the expats for all these years is unfair.
But having said that, if we put too big an equal sign between experience and competency, we're also very unscientific/unrealistic. Who was the main cause of the Tenerife (forgive my spelling) accident? The captain.
For this "out of control" feeling , "expats leaving and hk gona collapse feeling", my feeling is that the exponential traffic growth is the main killer in recent years, the growth is not only about hk airport movements, but also the growth of overflight traffic into china and from china,which is always not mentioned or identified by any bodies, with all the metric levels and chinese-standard english speaking pilots.
But also having said that, I agree with the saying that " local controller are not as interested in aviation as expats".
Last edited by bhead; 21st May 2013 at 02:17.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Earth
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Broadband Circuit, in case if you are unaware of, in HK, when we talk about delay/holding/sequencing, we talk about the time over entry gates which are MUSEL (in the east),MANGO (in the south),CANTO(in the west), we feed aircraft into approach sector with reference to the enroute clearance time of those gates. so very rarely we will mention a time over other fixes to inbound traffic.
will explain more later about how flow control computer works...
will explain more later about how flow control computer works...
I've visited HK ATC a few times and its always a good experience.
Must go gain soon.
I've also been in Centers and Towers all over the world, from KLAX to EGLL to nearly all in Oz. ( yes I know, but after you've been to these Airport hotels 20 times what else could you do )
Gives you a good idea about the other side..
Best I've seen was EGLL without a doubt, bloody impressive stuff.
Must go gain soon.
I've also been in Centers and Towers all over the world, from KLAX to EGLL to nearly all in Oz. ( yes I know, but after you've been to these Airport hotels 20 times what else could you do )
Gives you a good idea about the other side..
Best I've seen was EGLL without a doubt, bloody impressive stuff.
Last edited by nitpicker330; 21st May 2013 at 06:36.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: hongkers
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Today's crap weather
Good job today you guys. I did three sectors in and out of CLK with aircraft diverting around weather everywhere. You guys were on top of it all and handled it well I thought.
It was pretty wild too. Was at the holding point for 25 L when the big storm went thru. The predictive windshear was going crazy.
Well done
It was pretty wild too. Was at the holding point for 25 L when the big storm went thru. The predictive windshear was going crazy.
Well done
All 3 miles apart
A - A322 FL320
B - A322 FL360
C - B744 FL300
D - A333 FL400
E - B744 FL380
need 10 miles at MAGOG, reach FL260 by MAGOG, speed at MAGOG has to be 250kts
ATC separation 10nm
A - A322 FL320
B - A322 FL360
C - B744 FL300
D - A333 FL400
E - B744 FL380
need 10 miles at MAGOG, reach FL260 by MAGOG, speed at MAGOG has to be 250kts
ATC separation 10nm
330
Must agree with you about EGLL, they certainly turn a sows ear into a silk purse better than anywhere else I have been in the past 30 years.
The Japanese, however, do conga lines better than anyone. On a clear night Haneda approach is a sight to behold.
As a footnote, some stacking at CLK might help with C&T.
Must agree with you about EGLL, they certainly turn a sows ear into a silk purse better than anywhere else I have been in the past 30 years.
The Japanese, however, do conga lines better than anyone. On a clear night Haneda approach is a sight to behold.
As a footnote, some stacking at CLK might help with C&T.
Start with track offset, 10 nm left or right.
I'd post a screen capture here that would probably scare you if allowed.
1,025 flights per day on average last month at HKIA. Plus 600 overflights. Over 3,000 flights through the PRD every day now.
Last edited by LapSap; 22nd May 2013 at 14:07.
The Macau arrival transition route runs basically 10 miles north and parallel to you and the DOTMI departures are coming out 15 south of you opposite direction.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: hong kong
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If already answered, sorry. But can any ATCer tell me why no penalty is imposed on ac who refuse to speed up at the FIR boundary, perhaps offenders should given a vector out of sequence. Its always the CX ac told to increase and keep high speed and always we cooperate its the same into Tokyo, SIN, KUL etc.
Please. Start to penalise the ac who won't cooperate!
Please. Start to penalise the ac who won't cooperate!