Ha Ha Ha.

Must you really re-do the descent checklist?

"Within months of the last expats leaving, local female contollers
Will put two of us together. Thank god for TCAS"

Are you a part time fortune teller or what.

Squawk 7700

only cowards would sidetrack and attack other's use of the easiest language in the world when they cannot follow arguments. For your info I work everywhere as
ATC experts and am now Serco rater of ICAO English Test for middle east controllers. I find ATC guys generally possess better language proficiecy than pilots, who only know swear word when they lose an argument:ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh:

Coming into HKG last couple of times from SIKOU ATC kept me high&fast for both runways it just doesn't seem to be getting through A330 aircraft don't really like reducing and descending at normal rate at the same time..

It's almost like flying into PVG nowadays or any other PRC airport :ugh::ugh:

one need not be psychic to understand 'cause and effect'

If I hand my 14 month old a glass of water he will spill it.

If you hand over ATC to these useless HK twats, a incident will occur.

My favourite on air quote from last week when we were all holding in VFR WX @ abbey.. (and the second runway was empty on app at least) was ANA asking to slow to min clean speed in the hold, and the tw*t or should I say Chwat... says "no.. maintain 250 knots." I actually burst out laughing..

They simply have no concept.

But neither does my 14 month old.. thus I don't give him open cups of liquid.

PS.. I can give time and date of transmission if any ATC want to look up the tape.. it was hilarious.

AAIGUY

You are absolutley pathetic:\:\:\:\

If you really want to improve any ATC service, you should report
and comment to the CAA.

Calling her **** proves you are a die-hard chauvalist;
Calling her Chtwat proves all the more that you are a bigoted racist;

Perhaps you hate your mother too:D:D:D:D:D:D

The fact of the matter is HK ATC have lost the plot in the last 12 months. Last Sunday was a prime example. Aircraft holding for 45 min and then having to divert due to HK ATC freaking out. Their excuse.... weather. What a crock of Sh!t. First of all.... the weather was not that bad and second, the unprofessional manner in which they refused to accept aircraft into HK airspace would NEVER have happened before all the good controllers left.

Oh Gwelioairline.. my poor little friend.

I am neither a bigot or a chauvinist.
All my comments are based on fact.

Its not only me as well I'm afraid.. whether I'm in the cockpit with a Local
pilot or a female pilot, all of us are underwhelmed at the useless of the
new female controllers..

Last Saturday was a goatfest. The holding @ Abbey now ALL the time.. strange vectors.. maintain high speed from first girl, next girl please slow 220, next sector 250 knots please..

It shows no planning or co-ordination or fore thought.

and its scary.

The last months ATC standard just kept falling and I am not sure but some of it seems to be started to happen with this new procedures coming in from Sierra

It is actually an item during my briefing as well of many others. Threat: expect to be kept high and fast in the descend. If you expect us to be kept high just let us reduce speed and we can increase speed on descend..

Regardless of race of gender current Air Traffic Control is just not what it used to be HKG

Night Watch: The reason a/c were holding was because crews did not want to fly through weather to get to the airfield where the weather was for most (but not all) of the the morning quite good. Any aircraft that got close to the airfield got approaches asap. Most sectors ended up overloaded most of the morning with all aircraft deviating and asking for new headings. The early part of the morning also affected by a mainland active danger area near Macau.

VHHH did not have approaches for a short while only due to CB across base leg and the need to route through ZGSZ and VMMC arrival and departure routes to get to our approach - VHHH cannot provide terrain separation assurance outside of our own FIR - co-ordination load and knock effect for VMMC and ZGSZ. Again - if the crews do not want or to fly through the weather how can ATC keep the place running efficiently?

gweilo airlines YAAFM and as you seem to get your info from GF - so is he or she.

BTW IMHO - HK has some excellent locally trained controllers of both sexes.

flatfilea4

flatfilea4

you are right :ok:

i am the one you just touched on :O

Well we didn't dream up the weather. It was you sooks who wouldn't go near base leg for almost an hour! I don't know why half of you bother having IFR ratings the way you all dodge around the pi$$iest bit of cumulus these days.

As for the steep descents, it is ICAO, IATA and the companies that are screaming at our procedure guys to design these "optimum" descent profiles- 5% they tell us- no problem- we can do it. Sure- it seems you can if you're the only one in the sky. But when you're number 34 in the arrival sequence and asked to slow to 230, the whole thing goes for a ball of chalk.

"WTF happened at BORDA this past Sunday? No public statement from CAD but it appears that two widebodied airframes almost lost."

Not just 2 but 3.. or more! The problem was too few controllers to work too many busy positions too long and getting fatigue and unable to handle traffic. Not enough days off and few annual leave given to controllers. But the lovely management still say theres enough controllers. Too bad! So sorry for the poor controllers working on sunday. Not there fault

Perhaps it is time for a voice of reason.
We, pilots and controllers, are both stake holders with a view to getting the job done as efficiently as possible.
Understanding this basic tenet it a good foundation for moving forward yet understanding the other parties perspective seems to be what is missing.
As a pilot it seems illogical for me to be tasked with 250 kts in the hold yet 200 on final descent however, deciphering my TCAS display, I can often explain the reasoning when preceding aircraft are flying speeds at whim regardless of ATC instruction. Take a look next time at the increasingly reduce spacing when you are on approach behind an airline with "reduced RT skills" and try and imagine the knock on effect to the controllers when there are 10 of "them" on frequency. The number of crew that I fly with who pay scant regard to increasingly reducing spacing is alarming. Whilst our primary concern remains the safety of our aircraft, it pays to consider we are not the only aircraft in the sky.
As for controllers comments ref wx avoidance, we have on average a couple of hundred people down the back of which on average half of them are scared sh1tless of flying. It is in our best interests (and yours) that they become a return customer. Whilst the "whale" rides the bumps well, it is patently obvious that the person making the "sook" comment has yet to experience a towering Cu penetration in a lightly loaded A330.
Further, we are not all 737's. I struggle doing a dirty dive onto 07R when landing at 280 T after a 12+ hour duty..... really struggle.
In addition, on said flight it is not possible to reduce to 250 kts at FL 370 when entering the FIR at ENVAR (and definitely not 220 kts). My comment "too heavy" should be the end of it. If you need to enroute hold the aircraft then so be it but continual requests to reduce speed from the next controller does beg whether the message is getting thru. You do talk to each other on handover .... right? As a hint, any flight number prefixed with a "0" from North American is a dead given that we are entering the FIR tired, jetlagged and more often than not close to max weight. If I am inbound from AMS via SIKOU then different story.
If this has come across as a rant then tough luck.
But both sides in this debate need some perspective, and maturity !

I apologise for my "sooks" reference but Night Watch implied that ATC was using the weather as an excuse. It was the crews ahead of you that were saying they couldn't negotiate the weather, not us! What would you like to do with those who wouldn't "have a go"? Say "get out of the way" and let someone with a green tail have a go?? Once aircraft start orbiting/holding/ wandering all over the sky of their own volition within 25 miles of the field theres no option but to hold everyone else out.

As an aside, when your company plans an alternate in inclement weather, do they consider 80 or 90 other airlines at HK (yes there are more than 100 regular carriers now) are carrying the same alternate, and that if you are tail-end Charlie, there may not be room for you? Even on the taxiways? I'm surprised how often crews are presumpuous that they will just go to Macau or Shenzhen when they get down to minimums. Of course the information should be made more readily available but often the situation is so dynamic that noone can keep up with the acceptance rate at other airports.

Unfortunately, as others have pointed out, the situation on Sunday was largely exacerbated by extremely poor supervision on that watch and very junior staff in the approach area (Management keeps arguing they have the numbers- its a numbers game you know - this is the Civil Service-very low experience levels though - not dissimilar to your iCadets).

Expect things to get worse. CAD is focused so heavily on going to their new Centre in a couple of years that operational staff numbers have been decimated. They are hellbent on the fact that the new radar system is the solution to all their problems when its actually all about the people.

All I can say is keep one eye on the TCAS.:(

If anything Lap Sap and Lazy Gal have understated the situation - we all (crews and pax most of all) got lucky even with the incidents, maydays, and multiple diversions.

On Sunday AM the Supervisors and Watch Manager worked rather than supervised out of necessity - so at least 2 bums short for normal ops on AM shifts (APP/TMS/TMW/MCL) (one trooper off sick) - the unit is arguably not adequately staffed for normal ops - cannot open all our available and advertised positions except at expected peak periods and with Sups working and provided all turn up - anyone guess as to how the staff can ramp up in time for the new centre? It was a Sunday AM, so no office staff with ratings to call upstairs. I await some prat from the 4th floor to arrive with a new daily plan with shorter breaks to further erode morale and build fatigue.

It is very difficult to split a sector to add another sector once the workload nears or exceeds overload - all time spent on separation and talking on radio so no time to tell someone else WTF is going on - if the ATC knows what is going on by that stage - and HK does have sectors that can overload very quickly even on the best of days.

Re some comments from crews earlier about VMC holding days: just what about 40+ aircraft an hour arriving to land in Hong Kong when we have an arrival capacity of less than that do you not understand. Quart into pint pot? Unless the VHHH is forced into alternate operating procedures due to visibility well below VMC our landing rate is independent of visibility but is always dependent on wind speeds. Sorry to be harsh but this is simple apples and barrels arithmetic.

Now for our 4th floor who don’t understand: The landing rate will always be affected by the wind components on the approach opposite to the direction of landing - because landing rate is to do with time **not** distance - it takes a finite time for aircraft to vacate a runway - it takes a finite time for an aircraft to travel the distance from the point with the minimum separation from the landing aircraft ahead to the touchdown point - this depends on the ground speed from that point to touchdown - landing rate factors: distance to travel, starting ground speed, deceleration rate (option for some calculus for those who understand it), ground speed at touchdown, time to vacate. So before each day we might expect Supervisors and Flow Controllers to strategically calculate the expected possible landing rate for the expected wind and weather conditions - and then apply appropriate flow measures where possible (tricky with so many long hauls) - for those hard of thinking: the greater the wind speed on the approach the lower our landing rate. I have excluded Vref effects as this is outside of ATC control but also a factor tactically - crews, if light please warn us well before (outside 30 NM from touchdown would be good - not at 8 miles) if you get or expect a speed your aircraft cannot fly - presuming a generally “normal” or published speed of 150 to 160 KIAS at 4 NM from touchdown.

Re busy periods: if we had the staff we would open the positions late night and early morning - no staff, no open. Sector overloads are just about a **daily** occurrence and not written up as the serious incident that these are - normalization of deviance? Some periods at night still single staffing partly because of culture and partly due to not enough staff. So nothing learned from Uberlingen. New shifts are being introduced but some years late and without enough extra staff in the system. Regarding the actual shift progression shift to shift - fatigue promoting - the opposite of the recommended way to mitigate against fatigue (for those hard of thinking - shift should progress towards night shifts with progressively later starts each day and then provide adequate rest before the next cycle) - unlike things that actually are ‘rocket science’ this is not ‘rocket science’. HK ATC working hours are similar to HK Civil Service hours - too many for the job at hand in HK now - just too intense for too long.

Re holding speeds: A/C should reduce to any holding speed that suits below published max holding and if necessary increase again when leaving the hold to fit in with the traffic pattern - many HK ATC will not recognize the reasons for that because it has not been part of the culture - vectors common.

Lower speeds will save fuel (good during a delay), reduce turn radius (NM) -> reduce the actual on the day holding area (good for changing levels with other a/c near a hold) - allow greater rates of turn (deg/sec).

Contrary to an unfortunate HK ATC culture IMO - holding always better than vectors for ATC workload when appropriate (4 minutes delay or more) - although the position of a/c needs monitoring relative to the hold leaving time. Present company excepted, my experience is that crews are generally poor at hitting the hold fix at the right time when leaving the hold without help. I don't think that an FMS gets fuddled about wind direction and inbound and outbound headings so is easy for crews as well? Not sure how hard to program the FMS to hold? Most HK ATC will not fully understand rate of turn, the relationship to radius of turn, and why 25 deg bank (or less deg bank if the crew brains are offline) at 220 KIAS is not a rate one turn (if they know what that is anymore) and how long the turn will take - we should measure turns in time not miles.

Of course all that said - all main holds embedded in weather on Sunday so ad-hoc holds and orbits necessary. If the unit had kept a stock of holding a/c at TD or LIMES on Sunday art we should every day all the time - the worst may have not been so bad - holding 15 minutes or more away from the runway is dumb beyond words

Sunday: APP/FAD received many a/c at FL in the LIMES area after wx deviation (at which they may meet a VMMC arrival coming the other way) so special handling required. So for those HK ATC that don’t know yet - a/c as slow as is practical so crew will configure the a/c early resulting in much reduced turn radius (allowing S turns on base leg if necessary), steeper descent **angles** (greater altitude loss for miles across the ground), keeping crews briefed about what will happen next as it may be very different from normal ops.

All ATC on Sunday were loaded up watching for a/c busting out of adjacent sectors so in effect no level was assured without a really good look around first - a/c effectively on random routes due to the weather.

All ATC on Sunday were well outside our comfort zone - stretched even the most experienced and well exceed the experience and capabilities of others - and I am talking about uncertainty, fear and the mental paralysis that follows. The situation was changing so fast that prior co-ordination was often not possible.

I can’t speak for others but my motivation in posting is not to rubbish management (but some should go like yesterday, if not sooner, because they are clearly promoted well above their level of competence - doh! I just rubbished management!) - or expose any of us to FW fact twisting journalists of self-promoting politicians wanting to harm the careers of those they disagree with - we (the aviation professionals involved) were all lucky.

Nobody can assure any stated desired level of safety without published goals for the system as a whole and by part and transparency about actual performance. I and, I trust, HK ATC in general care deeply about ensuring HK ATC is safe, organized, and efficient. Those three concepts progress from what is most important to what is least important - **but there is a feedback loop** - inefficiency will impact organization as systems degrade and then break as they exceed capacity and capabilities - lack of organization will then impact safety as modern complex systems (A/C or ATM) only work because they are organized to work under expected stated conditions and contingencies.

Sorry for post length, too much caffeine today!

Well the ANSP and the Regulator are both CAD so I guess you answered your own question. Standby for some early retirements.

"Well the ANSP and the Regulator are both CAD so I guess you answered your own question. Standby for some early retirements."

Who's retiring?

With regards to:

It may be that I am a little green about the ears, but if my flight plan has been accepted with a particular alternate, then yes, I expect to go there and find room for me.

It is up to each airfield (at the flight planning stage) to say "No, pick another alternate; we have reached our capacity".

Diverting to Alternate
 

Not true about having to be accepted to your alternate. The frequency of aircraft that actually divert to an alternate is so low that they do not consider it.

Years ago I went to an Italian airfield that ended up being closed due to fog (and only cat 1 available). When we tried to divert to our alternate, they said 'cannot, they are full'. When we asked about all the other airfields in the area, we got the same response. So we ended up going over an hour away and landing on min fuel.

Long and the short of it is: If the weather is average, plan on not being able to go to your nearest alternate. OR be prepared to declare an emergency (they MUST take you then). Like the port pages say, If the wx is average at HKG OR MFM, carry another alternate. THIS INCLUDES AREA WEATHER!!

I ALWAYS carry fuel to allow AT LEAST 2 close alternates under these conditions. It doesn't happen very often, but when it does, I've never had to suck the sheepskin covers up my ar$e!!!! Andi it costs almost no extra fuel for that peace of mind!