Perth out of control...
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: On a Ship Near You
Posts: 787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
complain right?
To be brutally honest though a mockery of the slot time system was made when a/c were waiting for up to 40min after their allocated time. The same thing goes for inbound a/c who are required to hold even though they are outside of the holding period. In both cases crew has a set amount of fuel on board based on their (more often then not minimum) legal requirements. I have returned to the ramp after excessive taxi time to uplift more fuel and I have made several intermediate stops enroute due to excessive taxi time (but to be fair it was touch and go anyway on most occassions).
Although to be fair, I think the WA situation is very visible, just not very fixable with resources.
Technology deployed in ML, SY, and BN could help; there is also a thought that long term strategic traffic management isn't worthwhile; e.g. AD, ML, CB, SY, BN to Perth flights may as well go without delay cause whatever we do we'll get wrong by the time they get on Perth Radar. This is such a narrow view, CTMS etc. could easily work as long as you implement it properly. The companies need to support it too; no point running it if they then ignore the times. Of course such long term CTMS isn't terribly accurate; so you just run it at a lower acceptance rate and that ensures no in air delays; of course that reduces throughput and efficiency, that's the trade off.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Dubai
Age: 44
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mono,
I am but a humble enroute controller (West Radar - 133.9 and soon 125.2/118.2 are my frequencies) so I have no idea about taxi delays. I agree that it is shambolic to have people get a taxi slot along with 13 others (as others have suggested happens). However, I am not blaming the tower guys for this - it is, undoubtedly like much else in AsA, the system that is probably at fault. It could be something as simple as not having enough personnel in the cabin to run this properly but management has decided to make it look like they care so they forced this on the tower crew. Like I said, not sure, but I am sure of one thing - the tower guys are doing the absolute best they can within the constraints of the system running them.
On the holding outside of the NOTAMed hours - I agree with what you say. That is why I have think having a long period of 10 mins holding NOTAMed (say 0900 PH time to 2100 PH time) so people are not caught out is the way to go. Augment this with 20-25 minutes holding NOTAMed in the peak inbound times and it will cover just about everyone for just about everything. At the same time, I know that in carrying more fuel, more fuel will be burnt for the exact same route, level, etc., which is why I think 10 minutes generally is enough.
In terms of raising complaints about the service - I fully agree with the pirate - there is no point saying anything on the frequency. The controller will just finish the transmission thinking 'w#$ker' and it will go no further. Ring up the tower and ask for the ALM - they are our new managers who will have a better idea of what happened. Still no joy, call AsA and ask to speak to the General Manager - ATC. Might get blocked by the secretary but explain the purpose of your call and if enough people do it, it will get noticed. Call the CASA field office in PH, call ATSB, call anyone else you can think of - the more who know of the problem, the more likely it will get resolved.
I am but a humble enroute controller (West Radar - 133.9 and soon 125.2/118.2 are my frequencies) so I have no idea about taxi delays. I agree that it is shambolic to have people get a taxi slot along with 13 others (as others have suggested happens). However, I am not blaming the tower guys for this - it is, undoubtedly like much else in AsA, the system that is probably at fault. It could be something as simple as not having enough personnel in the cabin to run this properly but management has decided to make it look like they care so they forced this on the tower crew. Like I said, not sure, but I am sure of one thing - the tower guys are doing the absolute best they can within the constraints of the system running them.
On the holding outside of the NOTAMed hours - I agree with what you say. That is why I have think having a long period of 10 mins holding NOTAMed (say 0900 PH time to 2100 PH time) so people are not caught out is the way to go. Augment this with 20-25 minutes holding NOTAMed in the peak inbound times and it will cover just about everyone for just about everything. At the same time, I know that in carrying more fuel, more fuel will be burnt for the exact same route, level, etc., which is why I think 10 minutes generally is enough.
In terms of raising complaints about the service - I fully agree with the pirate - there is no point saying anything on the frequency. The controller will just finish the transmission thinking 'w#$ker' and it will go no further. Ring up the tower and ask for the ALM - they are our new managers who will have a better idea of what happened. Still no joy, call AsA and ask to speak to the General Manager - ATC. Might get blocked by the secretary but explain the purpose of your call and if enough people do it, it will get noticed. Call the CASA field office in PH, call ATSB, call anyone else you can think of - the more who know of the problem, the more likely it will get resolved.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Oztrailea
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The PH taxi slot time is a work in progress. It was a knee jerk reaction to a growing problem. If you have any suggestions feel free to call the twr and speak to you ALM. He will be happy to have something to do 
As anyone who visits PH regularly the airport is straining due to lack of investment and forward planning. If you want to park - hell they cater for that. We have acres of tarmac and are building acres more for parking. Sorry can't help you with the twys or Rwy though.
The J1/H1 bottleneck it due to above. The twy to the threshold will hopefully help alleviate that. BTW ATC has been suggesting that for over 3 years at least.
WAC too busy knocking down those pesky trees and building warehouses and brickworks to be worried about those pesky little planes.
It is encouraging to see the WA Planning Fashion lass finally bringing some public pressure to WAC to lift its game. Sadly it needs Fed pressure as it is crown land they are leasing from US
The problem with 03/06 is the crossing and catch up game that is played upwind. The only real benefit was for the BIU and BINDI SIDS getting cancelled and direct tracking.
Suggest all concerned look at the PH Airport web site and bone up on the Masterplan. Now that is the airport that we need NOW and into the future:
http://www.perthairport.com/default.aspx?MenuID=42
It looks or so flash on the net. No start lobbying for them to spend the cash they are raking in on building the bloody thing. No $50 million QF band aid. Lets catch up to the new century WAC.
As anyone who visits PH regularly the airport is straining due to lack of investment and forward planning. If you want to park - hell they cater for that. We have acres of tarmac and are building acres more for parking. Sorry can't help you with the twys or Rwy though.
The J1/H1 bottleneck it due to above. The twy to the threshold will hopefully help alleviate that. BTW ATC has been suggesting that for over 3 years at least.
WAC too busy knocking down those pesky trees and building warehouses and brickworks to be worried about those pesky little planes.It is encouraging to see the WA Planning Fashion lass finally bringing some public pressure to WAC to lift its game. Sadly it needs Fed pressure as it is crown land they are leasing from US
The problem with 03/06 is the crossing and catch up game that is played upwind. The only real benefit was for the BIU and BINDI SIDS getting cancelled and direct tracking.
Suggest all concerned look at the PH Airport web site and bone up on the Masterplan. Now that is the airport that we need NOW and into the future:
http://www.perthairport.com/default.aspx?MenuID=42
It looks or so flash on the net. No start lobbying for them to spend the cash they are raking in on building the bloody thing. No $50 million QF band aid. Lets catch up to the new century WAC.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The same thing goes for inbound a/c who are required to hold even though they are outside of the holding period.
And to reiterate what others have said...complaining on frequency is not going to get anything done. By the time this stuff happens everyone is already too busy...unless it's a real safety issue (ie...not enough fuel etc) you're better off taking this up via the phone, less stress for controllers and the message goes to someone who doesn't already know the problem
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Age: 44
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry can't help you with the twys or Rwy though.
The J1/H1 bottleneck it due to above. The twy to the threshold will hopefully help alleviate that.
The J1/H1 bottleneck it due to above. The twy to the threshold will hopefully help alleviate that.
After watching 12 aircraft backtrack from H1/J1, i knew what we were going to do!
Answers To Some Questions
Ladies and Gents of PPrune, as the instigator of the Perth Taxy Slot procedure I hope that this, my first post, will answer your queries.
This procedure was initiated as a direct result of the huge delays experienced at Perth airport following the imposition of traffic metering restrictions by Melbourne Enroute (this was a safety and workload issue associated with too much traffic and not enough surveillance – radar or ADSB). On the first few mornings of the metering, Perth airport operators experienced taxi times increasing to up to 42 mins from apron to departure. (Before this 17 mins was considered a bad delay!) Further, the Perth Tower controllers were hopelessly overloaded with the sheer numbers of aircraft on the ground and all the complexities associated with runways changes and crossings that were instigated in an attempt to efficiently move the log jam of traffic. It was an accident waiting to happen and some action had to be taken.
The instigation of this procedure was as much a “knee jerk” reaction as a pilot kicking the rudder in response to an asymmetric condition… do it or die…(well we don’t die but you get the picture!)
In creating the “system” it was calculated that given the enroute restrictions, the maximum achievable departure rate was 30 per hour. We created 32 slots per hour adding the extra two to make sure the ATC system was always under “pressure” and that that there were aircraft always available at the holding point (we do not want to miss a gap for departure or arrival). Once this procedure was put in place taxi times to departure reduced to 16 mins max, 10-12 mins average. This is the way it works most of the time and besides alleviating the ATC problems it has obvious fuel burn benefits.
You ask if it’s so good why did we spend 40 mins on the ground on Tuesday? Well the reason is that we were using Runway 06 only, due excessive crosswind on runway 03. Single Runway operations on either 06 or 24 are extremely restrictive largely because of a woefully inadequate taxiway system. (In fact I believe a good argument could be made to upgrade runway 06 / 24 with a decent taxiway system before WAC commissions a parallel 21/03…. But that, as they say, is another story). A departure rate of 30 is impossible to achieve using RWY 06 only… a single arrival on RWY 06 can cause 3 departure slots to be lost. With the experience gained on 06 only days it seems we must cut available slots to 25 or lower per hour, so bear this in mind in the future when you can’t get your slot… with up to 70 planned departures within a 90 min period on the typical Tuesday morning something’s gotta give!
This thread touches on dozens of issues which make Perth operations what they are… (now don’t be rude!) Having some 36 years experience of ATC at Pearce and Perth and other places I could make a comment on all of them but frankly discussion of the issues would make for a very lengthy post indeed but as one of the other ATCs has said don’t hesitate to call an ALM in the TCU or Tower if you have an issue. I hope I can assure you that despite all the difficulties Airservices is facing at the moment, controllers are dedicated to the safe, orderly and expeditious flow of air traffic. Safety is always number 1, the orderly and expeditious is done within the constraints of the available resources and facilitation… hence the problems.
Wal Civitico
ATC Line Manager
Perth Tower
This procedure was initiated as a direct result of the huge delays experienced at Perth airport following the imposition of traffic metering restrictions by Melbourne Enroute (this was a safety and workload issue associated with too much traffic and not enough surveillance – radar or ADSB). On the first few mornings of the metering, Perth airport operators experienced taxi times increasing to up to 42 mins from apron to departure. (Before this 17 mins was considered a bad delay!) Further, the Perth Tower controllers were hopelessly overloaded with the sheer numbers of aircraft on the ground and all the complexities associated with runways changes and crossings that were instigated in an attempt to efficiently move the log jam of traffic. It was an accident waiting to happen and some action had to be taken.
The instigation of this procedure was as much a “knee jerk” reaction as a pilot kicking the rudder in response to an asymmetric condition… do it or die…(well we don’t die but you get the picture!)
In creating the “system” it was calculated that given the enroute restrictions, the maximum achievable departure rate was 30 per hour. We created 32 slots per hour adding the extra two to make sure the ATC system was always under “pressure” and that that there were aircraft always available at the holding point (we do not want to miss a gap for departure or arrival). Once this procedure was put in place taxi times to departure reduced to 16 mins max, 10-12 mins average. This is the way it works most of the time and besides alleviating the ATC problems it has obvious fuel burn benefits.
You ask if it’s so good why did we spend 40 mins on the ground on Tuesday? Well the reason is that we were using Runway 06 only, due excessive crosswind on runway 03. Single Runway operations on either 06 or 24 are extremely restrictive largely because of a woefully inadequate taxiway system. (In fact I believe a good argument could be made to upgrade runway 06 / 24 with a decent taxiway system before WAC commissions a parallel 21/03…. But that, as they say, is another story). A departure rate of 30 is impossible to achieve using RWY 06 only… a single arrival on RWY 06 can cause 3 departure slots to be lost. With the experience gained on 06 only days it seems we must cut available slots to 25 or lower per hour, so bear this in mind in the future when you can’t get your slot… with up to 70 planned departures within a 90 min period on the typical Tuesday morning something’s gotta give!
This thread touches on dozens of issues which make Perth operations what they are… (now don’t be rude!) Having some 36 years experience of ATC at Pearce and Perth and other places I could make a comment on all of them but frankly discussion of the issues would make for a very lengthy post indeed but as one of the other ATCs has said don’t hesitate to call an ALM in the TCU or Tower if you have an issue. I hope I can assure you that despite all the difficulties Airservices is facing at the moment, controllers are dedicated to the safe, orderly and expeditious flow of air traffic. Safety is always number 1, the orderly and expeditious is done within the constraints of the available resources and facilitation… hence the problems.
Wal Civitico
ATC Line Manager
Perth Tower
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: On a Ship Near You
Posts: 787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Holy Crap Wal, back in the West?
Well done Wal. Good on you for dipping your oar in, hope you don't get chastised for outing yourself. What was wrong with SY? Sorry side track.
But it does beg the question why are slots allocated on a 32 an hour (which is pressurising the system) basis if only 25 (max or so) is actually achieved on 06 only D's.
Can you 're-run' the program and make it look more realistic? Obviously if the answer is Yes, then it should be done to increase transparency, service and efficiency; and if No, what can be done to make it YES?
From this thread I'd say this is what the industry wants, given a Slot time, make it so. In Europe Slot times have a validity period for both the operators and the ATCs; we as professionals should be adopting this methodology too.
But it does beg the question why are slots allocated on a 32 an hour (which is pressurising the system) basis if only 25 (max or so) is actually achieved on 06 only D's.
Can you 're-run' the program and make it look more realistic? Obviously if the answer is Yes, then it should be done to increase transparency, service and efficiency; and if No, what can be done to make it YES?
From this thread I'd say this is what the industry wants, given a Slot time, make it so. In Europe Slot times have a validity period for both the operators and the ATCs; we as professionals should be adopting this methodology too.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Oztrailea
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Wal - very informative.
Meanwhile back at the ranch:
[QUOTE]Perth Airport reports strong first half growth
Thursday, 24th January 2008
Perth Airport continued its strong passenger growth in the first half of 2007-08 with an increase of 13.3 per cent over the same period in 2006-07.
A total of 4,579,658 passengers were processed through Perth Airport during this period, an increase of 539,056 passengers on the same period last year.
International passenger growth stood at 16.7 per cent during the period, while domestic passenger growth of 12.1 per cent was recorded.
Perth Airport CEO Brad Geatches said the high levels of growth at Perth Airport reflected the continued powerhouse performance of the Western Australian economy.
"The increased wealth provided through Western Australia’s sustained economic growth is driving business and consumer demand for aviation services. Airlines have responded by providing more capacity on domestic and international routes, with Qantas, Emirates and Tiger Airlines each adding to the international capacity on Perth routes.
"Perth Airport also serves as a vital infrastructure asset for Western Australia’s resources sector. Our partnership with the resources industry goes from strength to strength as we continue to support growth in fly-in fly-out operations."
Mr Geatches said that the strong outlook for the Western Australian economy with its exposure to resources demand from China and north Asia meant that Perth Airport’s growth was likely to outperform other major Australian airports for the foreseeable future.
Mr Geatches added that Perth Airport’s continued growth was strengthening the business case to initiate a major expansion of airport infrastructure.
"Planning has been underway for some time now to examine options to expand Perth Airport’s terminal facilities. We are in discussions with our key airline partners to understand their operational requirements.
"In the meantime, Perth Airport continues to make improvements to existing facilities. More parking has been added to the international and domestic precincts and work is underway to join the two domestic terminals. These works are supported by a $50 million program by Qantas to upgrade its domestic terminal. Perth Airport will also shortly commence a major upgrade to the road network in the domestic precinct. These changes will supplement the major airport expansion and dramatically improve the customer experience over the next few years."
/QUOTE]
Media release from WAC. So things are on the up. Looking forward to some more car parks..... er I mean infrastructure soon then.
13% growth in one year. Pretty nice work if you can get it. This is growth in passengers so revenue would have risen by a greater amount as they have also increased the parking fees etc.
Meanwhile back at the ranch:
[QUOTE]Perth Airport reports strong first half growth
Thursday, 24th January 2008
Perth Airport continued its strong passenger growth in the first half of 2007-08 with an increase of 13.3 per cent over the same period in 2006-07.
A total of 4,579,658 passengers were processed through Perth Airport during this period, an increase of 539,056 passengers on the same period last year.
International passenger growth stood at 16.7 per cent during the period, while domestic passenger growth of 12.1 per cent was recorded.
Perth Airport CEO Brad Geatches said the high levels of growth at Perth Airport reflected the continued powerhouse performance of the Western Australian economy.
"The increased wealth provided through Western Australia’s sustained economic growth is driving business and consumer demand for aviation services. Airlines have responded by providing more capacity on domestic and international routes, with Qantas, Emirates and Tiger Airlines each adding to the international capacity on Perth routes.
"Perth Airport also serves as a vital infrastructure asset for Western Australia’s resources sector. Our partnership with the resources industry goes from strength to strength as we continue to support growth in fly-in fly-out operations."
Mr Geatches said that the strong outlook for the Western Australian economy with its exposure to resources demand from China and north Asia meant that Perth Airport’s growth was likely to outperform other major Australian airports for the foreseeable future.
Mr Geatches added that Perth Airport’s continued growth was strengthening the business case to initiate a major expansion of airport infrastructure.
"Planning has been underway for some time now to examine options to expand Perth Airport’s terminal facilities. We are in discussions with our key airline partners to understand their operational requirements.
"In the meantime, Perth Airport continues to make improvements to existing facilities. More parking has been added to the international and domestic precincts and work is underway to join the two domestic terminals. These works are supported by a $50 million program by Qantas to upgrade its domestic terminal. Perth Airport will also shortly commence a major upgrade to the road network in the domestic precinct. These changes will supplement the major airport expansion and dramatically improve the customer experience over the next few years."
/QUOTE]
Media release from WAC. So things are on the up. Looking forward to some more car parks..... er I mean infrastructure soon then.
13% growth in one year. Pretty nice work if you can get it. This is growth in passengers so revenue would have risen by a greater amount as they have also increased the parking fees etc.
Pirate heh?
I am thinking wooden leg, hook hand, eye patch and a cussing parrot... could be any number of my past colleagues! How are ya anyways..
Like I said we learnt about 06 only departure rate so we will cut the number of available slots when it happens again. I had to chuckle when you mentioned "rerunning the program"... mate there is no computer or science to this, its just a sheet of paper! The dynamic nature of the departure push makes it quite difficult to respond, adjust to changes and ensure no slots or opportunities are missed, every day is different some days it works better than others but we are working with the operators to tweak the system.
Like I said we learnt about 06 only departure rate so we will cut the number of available slots when it happens again. I had to chuckle when you mentioned "rerunning the program"... mate there is no computer or science to this, its just a sheet of paper! The dynamic nature of the departure push makes it quite difficult to respond, adjust to changes and ensure no slots or opportunities are missed, every day is different some days it works better than others but we are working with the operators to tweak the system.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: On a Ship Near You
Posts: 787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I had to chuckle when you mentioned "rerunning the program"... mate there is no computer or science to this, its just a sheet of paper!
PS, wooden leg, eye patch, well yes, still got both hands, but the bloody parrot won't talk especially when I wears me headset, although I do hear voices every now and then.
Arrrhhhh!
I fly in and out of Perth quite often, sometimes a few times a month (as a pax)
It is disgusting, for a major airport its a joke. The terminal facilities are dated and are inadequate for the amount of people going through.
Just the other day i flew back from a Health & Safety meeting for work, at the time there was a 744 to SYD, 743 to MEL, 767 to BNE, 717 to Kal-boulder and a flight to Karratha.
The airport was a mess!, check in was mental, security went along the back of check in down to the regional arrivals and out the door. Finally got through securtiy and then went to the QF club, knew i wouldnt get a seat but checked anyway and sure enough wasnt a seat to be found. Went downstairs and it was just as bad, not 1 single seat could be found ended up sitting against a pole as many others did.
Food facilites are a joke, not enough toilets and no seating.
This was the worst ive seen Perth Airport in a long long time, it just proved it cant cope and no matter how QF bandaid the problem a new Terminal needs to be built sooner rather than later and i hope Alanah told Westralia Airports to pull their finger out at the meeting she had the other day, as she said she wanted to make sure rail links, roads etc were all upgraded and installed well before the new terminal development. Given them a deadline of 5 years for the terminal to be operating and 7 for all the infrastruture to be put in place, but never heard anything about what was actually discussed at the meeting.
The mulit user terminal isnt much better, try being there at 5.30 in the morning!!!! NOT FUN let me assure you.
Also everytime ive flown to Perth we've been early and ended up circling and then being late About 2 months ago we made up 30 mins due to good tail winds and we ended up circling for 45 mins even the captain said due to the "wonderful perth airport" very sarcastically
I hope Westralia airports comes up for a solution, and stop playing Business Park/Shopping centre Managers and get back to the real business of running a Major international airport that is going to grow and expand even further in the next few years.
Another runway and a terminal a bit larger than QF's in sydney is whats needed and a major expansion at the international terminal, love how WAC made all the general public area nice, soon as you go out 'back' its like the old days all over, just as bad as the domestic terminal.
Rant over........
It is disgusting, for a major airport its a joke. The terminal facilities are dated and are inadequate for the amount of people going through.
Just the other day i flew back from a Health & Safety meeting for work, at the time there was a 744 to SYD, 743 to MEL, 767 to BNE, 717 to Kal-boulder and a flight to Karratha.
The airport was a mess!, check in was mental, security went along the back of check in down to the regional arrivals and out the door. Finally got through securtiy and then went to the QF club, knew i wouldnt get a seat but checked anyway and sure enough wasnt a seat to be found. Went downstairs and it was just as bad, not 1 single seat could be found ended up sitting against a pole as many others did.
Food facilites are a joke, not enough toilets and no seating.
This was the worst ive seen Perth Airport in a long long time, it just proved it cant cope and no matter how QF bandaid the problem a new Terminal needs to be built sooner rather than later and i hope Alanah told Westralia Airports to pull their finger out at the meeting she had the other day, as she said she wanted to make sure rail links, roads etc were all upgraded and installed well before the new terminal development. Given them a deadline of 5 years for the terminal to be operating and 7 for all the infrastruture to be put in place, but never heard anything about what was actually discussed at the meeting.
The mulit user terminal isnt much better, try being there at 5.30 in the morning!!!! NOT FUN let me assure you.
Also everytime ive flown to Perth we've been early and ended up circling and then being late
About 2 months ago we made up 30 mins due to good tail winds and we ended up circling for 45 mins even the captain said due to the "wonderful perth airport" very sarcastically I hope Westralia airports comes up for a solution, and stop playing Business Park/Shopping centre Managers and get back to the real business of running a Major international airport that is going to grow and expand even further in the next few years.
Another runway and a terminal a bit larger than QF's in sydney is whats needed and a major expansion at the international terminal, love how WAC made all the general public area nice, soon as you go out 'back' its like the old days all over, just as bad as the domestic terminal.
Rant over........
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Dubai
Age: 44
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
pilotdude,
Is the QAN terminal a problem that QAN owns or the airport corporation? Either way, I think you are buggered when it comes to getting it fixed - the airport corp seems (as you alluded to) more intent on running the airport as a non-aviation business than using the land for aviation first, other uses second.
As I have previously said, get a better taxiway system and parallel runway put in, and those of us doing the controlling will be able to move much more metal more quickly. Then it will be up to the airlines to provide the unload/reload capacity, but there is not much I can do to help you there!
Is the QAN terminal a problem that QAN owns or the airport corporation? Either way, I think you are buggered when it comes to getting it fixed - the airport corp seems (as you alluded to) more intent on running the airport as a non-aviation business than using the land for aviation first, other uses second.
As I have previously said, get a better taxiway system and parallel runway put in, and those of us doing the controlling will be able to move much more metal more quickly. Then it will be up to the airlines to provide the unload/reload capacity, but there is not much I can do to help you there!
I know you guys work your arses off, listen to you's when im bored on live atc 
I guess its all the terminals which are a joke, the international is nice but once you go 'out back' through customs its like stepping back to the late 80's early 90's hasnt changed a bit.
I guess its all the terminals which are a joke, the international is nice but once you go 'out back' through customs its like stepping back to the late 80's early 90's hasnt changed a bit.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2003
Location: PH 298/7.4DME
Posts: 554
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
cac_sabre,
Thank you for that insight.
I seem to recall there was some movement on 03 despite this. At least 4 departures and a couple of heavies arriving. Did the runway become active at any stage that morning during the peak period (if you can remember) or was it used on a "on request" basis by the aircraft that did?
520.
the reason is that we were using Runway 06 only, due excessive crosswind on runway 03.
520.
No Probs 520
I wasn't on that morning but I think that one or two may have asked for 03, then part way through the morning the crosswind died enough so we were able to nominate runway 03 as a duty runway... just as well as you may still be out at the HP gathering cobwebs otherwise!
One of our concerns about Perth airport is the significant impact that Runway 06 or 24 only operations have on acceptance / departure rates. The lack of suitable taxiways means that bigger gaps between arriving aircraft have to be created to enable the first aircraft to vacate the runway before the second crosses the fence. Trying to intersperse a departure between two arrivals can be extremely entertaining for all concerned:
With increasing traffic levels "06/24 only" days are going to become a major traffic management issue, increasing holding fuel is not going to be the answer.... we are working to address this issue but it will not be resolved anytime soon.
One of our concerns about Perth airport is the significant impact that Runway 06 or 24 only operations have on acceptance / departure rates. The lack of suitable taxiways means that bigger gaps between arriving aircraft have to be created to enable the first aircraft to vacate the runway before the second crosses the fence. Trying to intersperse a departure between two arrivals can be extremely entertaining for all concerned:
- the guy backtracking at max thrust to vacate at S
- the guy backtracking and lining up at max thrust for departure and
- the guy on final rockin' and rollin' in the famous Perth "washing machine" turbulence, hanging on the straps wondering if they are gonna have to go round!
With increasing traffic levels "06/24 only" days are going to become a major traffic management issue, increasing holding fuel is not going to be the answer.... we are working to address this issue but it will not be resolved anytime soon.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Oz
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cac_Sabre...cheers for giving us your side of the story.
Not long after I moved to PH I went up the tower and spent a few hours talking with the dudes up there. They were more than welcoming (it was a weekend). Not only did I have a ball, I only then understood what they have to deal with on a day to day basis.
I highly reccommend a visit to all the frustrated folk out there..like I USED TO BE. Don't forget to bring chocky cake!!
Not long after I moved to PH I went up the tower and spent a few hours talking with the dudes up there. They were more than welcoming (it was a weekend). Not only did I have a ball, I only then understood what they have to deal with on a day to day basis.
I highly reccommend a visit to all the frustrated folk out there..like I USED TO BE. Don't forget to bring chocky cake!!
we were using Runway 06 only, due excessive crosswind on runway 03
get a better taxiway system and parallel runway put in, and those of us doing the controlling will be able to move much more metal more quickly.
following the imposition of traffic metering restrictions by Melbourne Enroute
What is excessive crosswind?
ATC can not nominate a runway for use when crosswind exceeds 20kts if there is a more suitable runway... thats the rule in the ATC Manual of Air Traffic Services and echoed in the pilot bible...AIP. Some years ago, for noise abatement issues (read politics) Sydney was permitted to nominate a more noise suitable runway with up to 25 kts of crosswind... I believe this exception was removed after industry pressure. Nothing prevents a pilot from requesting a runway that ATC may not nominate BUT such a movement has potential to create major hassles in an already complex situation and may not improve the movement rate at all.
Eg an aircraft which, for traffic management reasons, ATC would prefer off 06 is given a 20 min taxy delay. Pilot says, we'll accept RWY 03 if you give us an earlier slot. This would on the face of it seem to have potential to up the departure rate but it is just as likely to create more problems.
Fact is for traffic segregation / efficiency reasons we actually want only certain the aircraft to depart from RWY 03 (BIU5 and BINDI8 SIDS). Flights departing to the east from RWY 03 are a pain in the proverbial when trying to process departures from RWY 06.... Ah 'tis a complicated business 'tis!!! Visits by pilots always welcome and appreciated, call us on phone to make arrangements... obviously the word is out about the customary chocolate cake fee! donuts are ok too, free coffee in return.
Eg an aircraft which, for traffic management reasons, ATC would prefer off 06 is given a 20 min taxy delay. Pilot says, we'll accept RWY 03 if you give us an earlier slot. This would on the face of it seem to have potential to up the departure rate but it is just as likely to create more problems.
Fact is for traffic segregation / efficiency reasons we actually want only certain the aircraft to depart from RWY 03 (BIU5 and BINDI8 SIDS). Flights departing to the east from RWY 03 are a pain in the proverbial when trying to process departures from RWY 06.... Ah 'tis a complicated business 'tis!!! Visits by pilots always welcome and appreciated, call us on phone to make arrangements... obviously the word is out about the customary chocolate cake fee! donuts are ok too, free coffee in return.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Dubai
Age: 44
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bloggs,
That is true about the restriction being the procedural (non-radar) sectors to the north and north-east of PH. However, as sabre has alluded to, the rate of movement off 06/24 only is far lower than when we can use 03/21 as well - for departures, the next departure has to backtrack to the numbers if they need full length and for arrivals, we basically double our spacing between arrivals to hand off to approach. Put taxiways in at each end of 06/24 and we will get departures off more quickly and won't have the double spacing for arrivals.
As for the extra runway, our worst times for holding are when on instrument procedures - flow has to plan three minutes between arrivals since the tower needs space to launch aircraft between the arrivals. Put in 03R/21L and one runway handles the departures and some arrivals, the other handles just arrivals - TCU acceptance rates will increase dramatically and holding will subsequently decrease. Even in the morning this will help, eg. 03 for departures. 03R for CKL/SPUDO and PEPPA SIDs, 03L for BIU, BINDI and BOLGA SIDs. Put the runways far enough apart and can have simultaneous ops, just like in SY. The traffic will move much more quickly either way.
Speaking of SY, one of the ops directors came round to us last week and mentioned that SY was planning about 850 moves that day, PH looked like about 720 moves..... So basically, PH, with its ridiculously complicated airspace and awful infrastructure, was operating at 85% or so of SY, with its segregated routes, parallel runways, relatively well-equipped terminals, etc, etc, etc...... Made us realise that we don't do that bad a job, really. Also made us realise how much better the job would be done if given the right tools.....
That is true about the restriction being the procedural (non-radar) sectors to the north and north-east of PH. However, as sabre has alluded to, the rate of movement off 06/24 only is far lower than when we can use 03/21 as well - for departures, the next departure has to backtrack to the numbers if they need full length and for arrivals, we basically double our spacing between arrivals to hand off to approach. Put taxiways in at each end of 06/24 and we will get departures off more quickly and won't have the double spacing for arrivals.
As for the extra runway, our worst times for holding are when on instrument procedures - flow has to plan three minutes between arrivals since the tower needs space to launch aircraft between the arrivals. Put in 03R/21L and one runway handles the departures and some arrivals, the other handles just arrivals - TCU acceptance rates will increase dramatically and holding will subsequently decrease. Even in the morning this will help, eg. 03 for departures. 03R for CKL/SPUDO and PEPPA SIDs, 03L for BIU, BINDI and BOLGA SIDs. Put the runways far enough apart and can have simultaneous ops, just like in SY. The traffic will move much more quickly either way.
Speaking of SY, one of the ops directors came round to us last week and mentioned that SY was planning about 850 moves that day, PH looked like about 720 moves..... So basically, PH, with its ridiculously complicated airspace and awful infrastructure, was operating at 85% or so of SY, with its segregated routes, parallel runways, relatively well-equipped terminals, etc, etc, etc...... Made us realise that we don't do that bad a job, really. Also made us realise how much better the job would be done if given the right tools.....
Here is a link to the Perth Airport Master Plan - Ultimate Development...
http://www.perthairport.com/getfile....&ObjectID=1040
The planned 21L/03R appears quite short.
WAC need to be starting work on this NOW.
http://www.perthairport.com/getfile....&ObjectID=1040
The planned 21L/03R appears quite short.
WAC need to be starting work on this NOW.
Last edited by Icarus2001; 1st Feb 2008 at 03:07.