Can't be too confident of smooth implementaion as I'm carrying an hour extra holding fuel overnight back to Dxb. Reason stated on OFP- Addnl for peak arrivals and new Dxb ATC procedures.:ugh:

Thoughts after day 1?

We were lucky in a sense, came in before the rush out of DARAX, with that in mind, it worked really well, the energy management of the aircraft was addressed well with a min speed of 210 KIAS @ 6000 so you can stay clean at most weights, we expected the vectors to 10 miles final 12L and the calls were really reduced, we all did what the STAR restrictions required and it seemed to lower the ATC involvement.

Glad to know it worked for you - from the ATC perspective, as you said, R/T was greatly reduced, which, as planned, gives much more time to concentrate on getting the sequence right.

A very small number of aircraft couldn't fly the procedure and/ or had programming errors in the FMS, the main one being Fly Dubai having DB421 as a fly over, rather than a fly by waypoint, and is already being addressed.

One of the problems for us is that many of the confliction points have either changed or been compounded by new conflicts which leads many to overuse vertical of separation, resulting in quite a few aircraft turning downwind too high. This should improve rapidly with experience - although we DID simulate this, the time allocated was fairly restricted.

Another that surface was the inordinately long time that some aircraft ware taking to turn when given a base heading to shorten the downwind. While we realise that there was a howling easterly up the chuff, 4 miles to START turning, after being given the instruction, is not conducive to building a nice, tight sequence..... not sure what CRM is going on there - I guess it's something more complicated than selecting heading mode and turning the bug but we need to figure this one out sharpish.

Quite a few were also clearly expecting to fly the full "trombone" and descending accordingly - notwithstanding being offered fewer track miles - the best example of which was the Joburg (I think) flight that arrived at MIADA FL220. While we realise that this is the planned route, there are quite a number of options to shorten the track - IF the profile allows it.

On the departure front, the combination of 20KTS on the nose, (relatively) low temps and speed restrictions on the SIDs meant that climb rates were pretty good, helping a lot with crossing points.

Expect it to take a good week or so for everyone to start getting comfortable with their ability to predict the conflicts and plan accordingly and things should be a lot smoother and quieter. However, please note that this on its' own does absolutely nothing for runway capacity - in fact, for DEPS, it's probably slightly LOWER, due to us no longer being able to turn you at 1000ft.

Thanks all for your patience and understanding :D

Guy.

p.s. Air Arabia please note - YES, we DO need you to fly the STAR speeds, NO, you CAN'T go direct NOSMO (the STAR takes you around the Dubai traffic for a reason! :ugh:) and please don't even think of asking for the other end - if it is feasible, we will offer it!

Flew the BUBIN 5A in rush-hour last night & it was a non-event.

Twaddle, we got good shortcuts approaching BUBIN and then a huge shortcut from ALNET to UKRIM, knocked almost 10 minutes off the plan.

The requirement to cross GIRMI at or below 13,000' and then have another 25 miles to DB423 where you need to be at or above 8,000' requires a slow dribble down at a couple of hundred feet per minute but it's not uncomfortable.

The downwind is pretty tight, close in, only 4 miles but it worked well.

Thanks to ATC for trying to make our lives easier. :ok:

Agreed - however, if, for example, we had been on 30L, you would almost certainly NOT have got direct SEDPO, as may have happened previously. We have been more or less directed that we MUST leave you on the STAR until downwind (unless absolutely nothing is happening) - from there, shortening onto a 10-15 mile final is expected to be more or less the norm, though. Possibilities exist to turn early onto base before the downwind turn, etc., but only if the altitude is low enough, as usual.

Shorcuts will still exist but direct the FAF is a lot more unlikely than before.

That is why we will be insisting on the speed control - it has been designed with thoses speeds as requirements - if they're not adhered to, the turns won't work.

Desdi5A this morning. Didn't work out too well as told to hold at Desdi for 1 hold and then 10 miles of vectoring before hitting the procedure. Anticipated the shortcut correctly but with the holding, vectoring and postoffice queue procedure in the box had annoying reserve fuel warnings.

Sciolistes - annoying reserve fuel warnings' after one hold and a 10nm vector???

As previously stated, runway capacity has not changed - as has EK ops idea of planning more arrivals per hour than existing runway capacity ( notwithstanding the existence of other airlines!:ugh:).

Don't blame the messenger!

I should have said 10 minutes of vectoring! :O

One hold and '10 minutes' of vectoring is less than 20 minutes of delay. Sounds like a poor command decision to commit as you would have had known fuel issues already if indeed your story is true.

Give the smarty pants attitude a rest mate.

The point is the procedure is meant to reduce holding, but seems to have increased the delay and the track miles. It is also necessary to fly around 7000' low to account for possible short cuts (D4A). Today we held and flew most of the procedure. The design of these procedures is probably to deal with more issues than I am aware of, but so far in these early days hasn't helped me or the operation.

How about DB427 to UKRIM. Gear down! :ok:

The dry remark by ground "expect some delay due to the new departure procedures" says it all!

I don't want to belittle the effort, but our experience was not enlightening. Sure enough we give credit until the new stuff settles in, but frankly:
Same point of origin and same point of rejoining a couple of hundred of miles down to BALUS or similar, and applying common sense should have told us that there is not much improvement possible.

Inbound was the same story. May I quote Sciolistes:

Applying common sense shows us once more: No improvement here either.

Again, I give credit for the effort, but right now can't see the real sense in it.

Italians.............
 

Bloody italians........................:}:}

Might be good to mention the new arrival process in the briefing, tell the CC to get things locked up asap in case you get the go ahead to go straight in... have not heard any mention of it at all (I suppose after all, they figure are just cabin crew and don't need to know) but it would be useful for them to know you guys are probably going to be a little bit busier than usual and the possibility exists to get the roller skates out if ATC are feeling generous :} I only knew about it because I read it here.

I did notice that the "sitting around" from "pass the checks" to "prepare for landing" was a lot shorter than usual.... However we did not come in during 'rush hour'

Quick note to ATC, a standard 3 degree slope is (as you know) 9oo ft at 3 Nmls 1200 ft at 4 Nmls and 1500 ft at 5 Nmls. The aircraft should ideally be about 180 kts at Glide Slope intercept so that ensures a Constant Descent Apporach at idle power. Here in Dubai, often there are tailwinds up to 4ooo ft on the approach due to the sea breeze and desert temps, meaning at idle power/thrust the aircraft will only just make the G/S descent without having to add to extra drag (spoilers/speedbrake or extra flap or gear).

Having said all that, when changing from the current STARS of 40+ mls to 18 nmls aplease consider the altitude of the aircraft and the speed and don't just vector onto the ILS when 3ooo Ft above profile at 16 nmls, it makes for a 50/50 can/cant make it for us type scenario. I am :p:pnot saying this is the norm, I am saying the new STARS can lead to this and I kindly ask you to realise our concerns with such a vector onto finals from 3ooo ft above profile with tail winds and huge track shortening.

Just to say I know it can happen ;-D

Jack,

Try 1500' at 5nm, 3000' at 10nm, 4500' at 15nm and 6000' at 20nm.

The Don

Oh don't accept the turn...

First attempt at rush hour for me this morning, the whole process from Bubin seemed pretty seamless, the only moan I have was the LDG runway was 12L, all whilst the ATIS was still giving 30L, and the UAE controller gave us the STAR for 30L. Apart from that, there exists the potential to be left high if you don't keep reasonable SA, but for the most part we flew a nice CDA, with sensible speed reductions and only added 4 minutes to our flight time.

Experiences will vary depending on the time of night, just as before. Ten minutes can make all the difference at trhe wrong time of night.

The reason this procedure won't make much of a difference at the critical times is because the traffic numbers haven't changed and the airport hasn't changed.

Previously, aircraft absorbed track miles in a holding pattern. Now the miles will still be flown but in the so-called trombone instead of in a racetrack. Vectors will still be applied.

Previously, once released from the holding pattern, there was a series of known waypoints with track miles relatively easy to determine (since we are kept in the dark) if one applied familiarity and an ounce of common sense, even when being vectored.

Now, the aircraft will be sent down two sides of a "trombone" with a turn onto final possible at any point before the end. Being that much closer to the FAP (when the intercept vector is finally given) means less miles to lose altitude in. The alternative (already favoured by a lot of our guys) is to just drag it in at low altitude with power up.

The only real solution is to spread out the flight schedule - which is contrary to the fundamentals of EK's hub operation and will never happen.

Prediction: getting track-miles-to-run will still be like pulling teeth.

That would require judgment - something which doesn't always seem to be in abundance.

Gimme Wings, fret not! The solution is just to switch on the seat belt signs at 30,000 instead of at 20,000. At EK, experience shows that the more points like this are given to the crew in the briefing, the more confused and worried they get - apart from the ones who just couldn't GAF.