Emirates to take 14 aircraft in next fiscal year
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Sandpit
Posts: 312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Last night shift I worked, we had 75 arrivals in a 3 hour period
As for Gatwick, they operate under different rules, with special provisions / procedures to enable the movement rate, as do many other airports. We are not so lucky. I also doubt whether aircrews are anything like as inattentive / uncooperative / selective in which clearances to follow as they are here. (please note that I am NOT saying that all pilots are as above - a considerable number in this part of the world ARE, though).
So that's ATC's fault then, is it?
You're dead right that it is because EK tries to land too many Aeroplanes on one runway at the same time, and I suggested nothing different. Having TWO runways to land on would help, but I understand it isn't, and never suggested it was, ATCs fault.
Shesh! Touchy much???
Maximum capacity is 28 per hour and that's NOT including extra space behind A380s or go-arounds caused by the idiots who blatantly ignore speed control, while saying nothing!
That being said, has anyone actually discussed whether 160kts to 4 miles is safe or achievable?
Are you aware that the approach speeds of our aircraft (which we are required to be stable at by 1000', so 3 1/2 miles roughly) can be as low as 125kts? The FASTEST would be a 777-300ER at MLW, and that's 154kts.
AD - nothing to do with Dubai CTA - no effect whatsoever. Also minimal traffic in comparison.
SJ - Depends on the situation. If the delay is due to runway capacity at DB (or lack of it), what does that have to do with SJ traffic?
SJ - Depends on the situation. If the delay is due to runway capacity at DB (or lack of it), what does that have to do with SJ traffic?
Do you often post angry comments to people, actually agreeing with what they wrote???
I also doubt whether aircrews are anything like as inattentive / uncooperative / selective in which clearances to follow as they are here. (please note that I am NOT saying that all pilots are as above - a considerable number in this part of the world ARE, though).
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Sandpit
Posts: 312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote:
So that's ATC's fault then, is it?
Where in the hell did you get the impression I said that?
So that's ATC's fault then, is it?
Where in the hell did you get the impression I said that?
Was it you sent me 'round last night because of Aeroflot? The controller obviously saw him slow down, but said nothing to me. I unilaterally slowed down early, but it wasn't enough to save the situation.
That being said, has anyone actually discussed whether 160kts to 4 miles is safe or achievable?
Are you aware that the approach speeds of our aircraft (which we are required to be stable at by 1000', so 3 1/2 miles roughly) can be as low as 125kts? The FASTEST would be a 777-300ER at MLW, and that's 154kts.
That being said, has anyone actually discussed whether 160kts to 4 miles is safe or achievable?
Are you aware that the approach speeds of our aircraft (which we are required to be stable at by 1000', so 3 1/2 miles roughly) can be as low as 125kts? The FASTEST would be a 777-300ER at MLW, and that's 154kts.
No, it wasn't me.
I'm sure it's discussed regularly but we have to base the speeds on something. Those same 777s are often the ones who "can't do" 160 kts 10 mile out!
And yes, we are painfully aware of the problems with modern aircraft and approach speeds. The number of controllers suspended recently, pending investigation of the loss of separation caused by speed control being ignored is a testament to this.
We are required to work to an approach spacing of 5 miles / vortex wake, whichever is the greater. Here's the good bit - UNLESS YOU SAY OTHERWISE, having read back "160 to 4" then that's what we are basing the speeds / vectors of the following traffic on. If you then slow to 135 knots at 5.5 dme WITHOUT A WORD (regular occurrence), then we will not be aware of the fact until the following traffic is observed to be catching up at half a mile per minute. More often than not, it is then too late to avoid the separation loss.
To give an example of this, I now systematically provide 2.5 nm GREATER than the standard spacing behind a 380 because I KNOW that this will happen. The separation at landing is almost always the required 6 miles or very slightly more - ie 2.5 miles lost during the approach.
Bottom line is - if you can't fly the "standard speeds" then say so - preferably BEFORE the following traffic is established 5 miles behind!
Quote:
AD - nothing to do with Dubai CTA - no effect whatsoever. Also minimal traffic in comparison.
SJ - Depends on the situation. If the delay is due to runway capacity at DB (or lack of it), what does that have to do with SJ traffic?
Err...that was my point- the problems are Airport, not Airway capacity.
Do you often post angry comments to people, actually agreeing with what they wrote???
AD - nothing to do with Dubai CTA - no effect whatsoever. Also minimal traffic in comparison.
SJ - Depends on the situation. If the delay is due to runway capacity at DB (or lack of it), what does that have to do with SJ traffic?
Err...that was my point- the problems are Airport, not Airway capacity.
Do you often post angry comments to people, actually agreeing with what they wrote???
SHJ and ADB traffic uses the same airspace- and DON'T get inbound delays.
I am simply trying to point out how frustrated I and some of my colleagues are with being pushed constantly to increase runway utilisation (for emirates' benefit) and regularly getting royally scre^ed by that same company's crews who not only dont fly the "agreed" speed, but don't bother to inform us either. Notwithstanding your earlier comment regarding aeroflot - the vast majority of such incidents are "initiated" by emirates' aircraft.
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Sandpit
Posts: 312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Greetings ferris - as I said, I may have read too much between the lines - the intention was not to hijack the thread, just respond to what was said.
As you are well aware, many of the problems here are down to antiquated procedures / airspace design. Unfortunately, there's little hope of improvement, at least in the short term.
As you are well aware, many of the problems here are down to antiquated procedures / airspace design. Unfortunately, there's little hope of improvement, at least in the short term.
Guy,
Completely fair and reasonable. No implication against ATC intended, I think you fellas do a great job considering the limitations put upon you.
Sounds like we need a cultural change, for which some open communication both ways would help, to get US to communicate when we can't achieve your clearances, and YOU to realize why.
For instance:-
The 777-300er at MLW, with the 154 approach speed, would have a flap 20 min speed of 169kts. To fly slower, he needs flap 30. No prob, EXCEPT we can't go beyond flap 20 without lowering the gear. Thus, to facilitate your 160 at 10 miles, he needs to go fully configured. Assuming he's down to 2000' at 10NM, dragging gear and flaps 30 to the glide-slope is worth about 1T of Kero- and we don't always arrive with that much to spare!!
Do you a deal- get a message from your management to ours that this is happening, and I'll suggest to ours they put something out saying "if you can't accept the clearance, say something every time." Be prepared for that to be a LOT of the time, however!!
Completely fair and reasonable. No implication against ATC intended, I think you fellas do a great job considering the limitations put upon you.
Sounds like we need a cultural change, for which some open communication both ways would help, to get US to communicate when we can't achieve your clearances, and YOU to realize why.
For instance:-
Those same 777s are often the ones who "can't do" 160 kts 10 mile out!
Do you a deal- get a message from your management to ours that this is happening, and I'll suggest to ours they put something out saying "if you can't accept the clearance, say something every time." Be prepared for that to be a LOT of the time, however!!
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Dubai - sand land.
Age: 55
Posts: 2,832
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by wizofoz
Assuming he's down to 2000' at 10NM, dragging gear and flaps 30 to the glide-slope
WK,
Still to early to have F30 Gear down, but true, it would be better.
It's another one for Guy- giving us a good appreciation for track-miles would certainly help. or do you WANT us down low early (not being facetious, serious question)
Still to early to have F30 Gear down, but true, it would be better.
It's another one for Guy- giving us a good appreciation for track-miles would certainly help. or do you WANT us down low early (not being facetious, serious question)
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Sydney
Age: 60
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bananaair the response might be:
PANPAN PANPAN PANPAN, fuel emergency, REQUIRE vectors for immediate return.
FFS if the ATC procedures are needing consultation with the airline to be achievable put some reports in!
PANPAN PANPAN PANPAN, fuel emergency, REQUIRE vectors for immediate return.
FFS if the ATC procedures are needing consultation with the airline to be achievable put some reports in!
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Sandpit
Posts: 312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wiz - I completely agree that communication / understanding between pilots / controllers is worryingly low - this being exacerbated by the streams of new metal arriving that don't always fly the same way the old ones did!
That is precisely my point - if we know about it, we can do something about the following trafic.
Again, agreed. I try to give track miles as often as possible - although sometimes our sub-continental friends requiring every clearance to be repeated leaves little time.
Often - yes. For example, the BUBIN-BOVET track is pretty much head on to the arriving traffic from DESDI. If everyone "floats" down at 200fpm and we can't widen the vector because of Departures /SJ traffic / MIL / PARA / WX activity we need to start applying vertical separation - meaning that if one aircraft descends slowly, then all the rest will be stuck on top. Also the persistent problem of turning final from the STAR without clearance needs to be considered. Lack of airspace is a real problem.
For all of the reasons above, plus the fact that there is a parallel approach to SJ, separated by 8nm and often vertical has to be used between the two.
The real problem is that things will only get worse as more 380s arrive and runway capacity DECREASES due to the increased vortex spacing required.
"if you can't accept the clearance, say something every time."
It's another one for Guy- giving us a good appreciation for track-miles would certainly help.
or do you WANT us down low early (not being facetious, serious question)
Why can't these guys fly a CDA?
The real problem is that things will only get worse as more 380s arrive and runway capacity DECREASES due to the increased vortex spacing required.
Thanks Guy, I'll drop our Flight Ops an email.
BTW, do YOU think Simops is on the horizon?
OH...and we seem to have had a productive, professional chat about relevant regional issues on PPRUNE- We're probably in danger of being banned!!
Err...Err... Bloody Management, EK sucks, God I hate Dubai......
That should help!!
BTW, do YOU think Simops is on the horizon?
OH...and we seem to have had a productive, professional chat about relevant regional issues on PPRUNE- We're probably in danger of being banned!!
Err...Err... Bloody Management, EK sucks, God I hate Dubai......
That should help!!
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: guess where
Posts: 371
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guys
Good to see, that this rant has turned into into something of professional benefit for both side. Piloting/ATC should be a work together and not against each other.
Just one request from my side... Knowing the track miles would help a lot!
But for the work of the blip drivers. The short comings that bother us jockeys are mainly to be found in the system and not in the individual's work.
Cheers for keeping us apart.
Good to see, that this rant has turned into into something of professional benefit for both side. Piloting/ATC should be a work together and not against each other.
Just one request from my side... Knowing the track miles would help a lot!
But
for the work of the blip drivers. The short comings that bother us jockeys are mainly to be found in the system and not in the individual's work.Cheers for keeping us apart.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Dreamland
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ya see young WIZ, sometimes you try to do the right thing for everyone by doing whats right, only to have some ignorant low life sod come and cr@p all over you and everyone else because they think their own selfish needs are more important than those ahead of or behind them. 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Not sure now
Posts: 540
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No, it wasn't me.
I'm sure it's discussed regularly but we have to base the speeds on something. Those same 777s are often the ones who "can't do" 160 kts 10 mile out!
And yes, we are painfully aware of the problems with modern aircraft and approach speeds. The number of controllers suspended recently, pending investigation of the loss of separation caused by speed control being ignored is a testament to this.
We are required to work to an approach spacing of 5 miles / vortex wake, whichever is the greater. Here's the good bit - UNLESS YOU SAY OTHERWISE, having read back "160 to 4" then that's what we are basing the speeds / vectors of the following traffic on. If you then slow to 135 knots at 5.5 dme WITHOUT A WORD (regular occurrence), then we will not be aware of the fact until the following traffic is observed to be catching up at half a mile per minute. More often than not, it is then too late to avoid the separation loss.
I'm sure it's discussed regularly but we have to base the speeds on something. Those same 777s are often the ones who "can't do" 160 kts 10 mile out!
And yes, we are painfully aware of the problems with modern aircraft and approach speeds. The number of controllers suspended recently, pending investigation of the loss of separation caused by speed control being ignored is a testament to this.
We are required to work to an approach spacing of 5 miles / vortex wake, whichever is the greater. Here's the good bit - UNLESS YOU SAY OTHERWISE, having read back "160 to 4" then that's what we are basing the speeds / vectors of the following traffic on. If you then slow to 135 knots at 5.5 dme WITHOUT A WORD (regular occurrence), then we will not be aware of the fact until the following traffic is observed to be catching up at half a mile per minute. More often than not, it is then too late to avoid the separation loss.
Take a look at this thread from more than 4 years ago Guy:
The 160 Knot thread
Typhoonpilot
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Dubai
Age: 54
Posts: 328
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We are all aware of the limitations of ATC but I would suggest it is the self-imposed rules it puts on itself. This is probably because of the lowest common demonitors working control but a good look at LHR, CDG, ORD and their min separation would help us out greatly. If a contoller can;t handle traffic like the rest of the world then get rid of them even if they are local.
Dubai is not even the top 50 of busiest airports for traffic and we always have delays arriving. It is time for ATC to look at itself and correct the problem. This will help out everyone.
Dubai is not even the top 50 of busiest airports for traffic and we always have delays arriving. It is time for ATC to look at itself and correct the problem. This will help out everyone.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: uae
Posts: 2,777
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For the ATC types: what ROD do you expect during arrivals and when given a speed reduction is there a rate which you expect A/C to slow?
Thanks for the info.
Also it seems that every time we lave the hold you want 250kts after we have slowed to hold speed @210, do you guys take that into considerations when dealing with spacing IE leave the hold a bit sooner and stay at 210?
Again thanks for the info
Thanks for the info.
Also it seems that every time we lave the hold you want 250kts after we have slowed to hold speed @210, do you guys take that into considerations when dealing with spacing IE leave the hold a bit sooner and stay at 210?
Again thanks for the info
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: sand box
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Exchange of information and ideas between controllers and pilots is the best way to iron out these questions. In my previous airline controllers would often attend our CRM days and the amount we learnt from each other was fantastic not to mention the time spent by the controllers on the jumpseat. I was lucky enough to have a day watching these guys and girls at work in the London TMA and the job they do there is outstanding
I feel for the UAE/ Dubai controllers as quite frankly the standard of RT used by pilots in these parts of the world is shocking and something that controllers in Europe do not come up against very often
I feel for the UAE/ Dubai controllers as quite frankly the standard of RT used by pilots in these parts of the world is shocking and something that controllers in Europe do not come up against very often
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: UAE
Posts: 670
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cerbus, what many don`t realise is that the ATCO`s have very little input into the procedures that they have to use. Instructions come from a higher power then that which employs us and we just have to make it work.
Minimum spacing on final is 5 miles or vortex whichever is greater and as mentioned earlier to keep the 5 miles until touchdown requires increased spacing. This is not down to controller ability it is because the rwys do not operate independantly so a departure must be rolling in the gap between an arrival touching down and the next arrival reaching 2 miles, sounds like plenty of room but it`s not.
I can only speak for the Tower side of things and unfortunately a lot of our restrictions on taxiway usage and crossing points are driven by the inability of some pilots to follow taxy instructions and to stray across red stopbars onto active runways, it is set to get worse with the withdrawal of even more routes and crossings.
Quite a few of our guys have worked at some of the busiest Units, Heathrow, Gatwick, Atlanta, Lax etc and it is very frustrating to try to increase the movement rate when we are given restrictions which make that ever more difficult.
Minimum spacing on final is 5 miles or vortex whichever is greater and as mentioned earlier to keep the 5 miles until touchdown requires increased spacing. This is not down to controller ability it is because the rwys do not operate independantly so a departure must be rolling in the gap between an arrival touching down and the next arrival reaching 2 miles, sounds like plenty of room but it`s not.
I can only speak for the Tower side of things and unfortunately a lot of our restrictions on taxiway usage and crossing points are driven by the inability of some pilots to follow taxy instructions and to stray across red stopbars onto active runways, it is set to get worse with the withdrawal of even more routes and crossings.
Quite a few of our guys have worked at some of the busiest Units, Heathrow, Gatwick, Atlanta, Lax etc and it is very frustrating to try to increase the movement rate when we are given restrictions which make that ever more difficult.