Perth out of control...
21L looks about 2400m ok for 737/320 and below. All we need now is the approval of ..(insert any number of special interest groups) and x years of dithering and we might get somewhere.
The first thing they would need to build is a LARGE multi story carpark. Imagine combining the chaos of the current domestic parking with 2 or three large international arrival/departures
The first thing they would need to build is a LARGE multi story carpark. Imagine combining the chaos of the current domestic parking with 2 or three large international arrival/departures
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Mae Sai
Posts: 138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not trying to denigrate the terrific job you guys do under trying conditions, westausatc, but SY average 800/day, PH 300/day. If you really had a day at 720 then that probably highlights that it's uneven scheduling that's making everyone's lives a misery?
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
26th December 2007...A Challenge
Two QF Classics broken down at the domestic terminal.
Two QF Airbuses broken down at the International.
Must have been challenging for ATC,Groundstaff, Passengers and Crew.
Biggest mess I have ever seen.
Feds were called in...pax were about to riot
Two QF Airbuses broken down at the International.
Must have been challenging for ATC,Groundstaff, Passengers and Crew.
Biggest mess I have ever seen.
Feds were called in...pax were about to riot
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Dubai
Age: 44
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Adamastor,
Am not even sure those numbers are correct - just what we were told by an ops director here (he is one of the better ones so more likely to trust him!) but it is most definitely the cr@ppy scehduling of the FIFO contracts that makes life a misery. I totally understand this is NOT Skippers, Networks, QFs, etc. fault - it is BHP, Rio, Woodside, etc. demanding that all their crew change-over at the same time.
It would not surprise me to find out that our average is 300 moves/day with peaks over double that - Mon arvos, Fri mornings and weekends are generally quiet, far removed from the craziness of Tues, Wed and Thurs morning and arvos.
Maybe the FIFO contract holders need to talk to the mines about spreading out the moves to cover the whole week, not just predominantly within three days?
Am not even sure those numbers are correct - just what we were told by an ops director here (he is one of the better ones so more likely to trust him!) but it is most definitely the cr@ppy scehduling of the FIFO contracts that makes life a misery. I totally understand this is NOT Skippers, Networks, QFs, etc. fault - it is BHP, Rio, Woodside, etc. demanding that all their crew change-over at the same time.
It would not surprise me to find out that our average is 300 moves/day with peaks over double that - Mon arvos, Fri mornings and weekends are generally quiet, far removed from the craziness of Tues, Wed and Thurs morning and arvos.
Maybe the FIFO contract holders need to talk to the mines about spreading out the moves to cover the whole week, not just predominantly within three days?
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: The World
Posts: 136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not trying to denigrate the terrific job you guys do under trying conditions, westausatc, but SY average 800/day, PH 300/day. If you really had a day at 720 then that probably highlights that it's uneven scheduling that's making everyone's lives a misery?
Maybe the FIFO contract holders need to talk to the mines about spreading out the moves to cover the whole week, not just predominantly within three days?
Oh, and by the way, expect a bad day in the west on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday, the staffing for West Radar (36PH - 200PH) is not looking good. The short staff situation is finally starting to bite!
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Aust
Posts: 378
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote:
Maybe the FIFO contract holders need to talk to the mines about spreading out the moves to cover the whole week, not just predominantly within three days?
This has been suggested for longer than I care to remember and every time it has fallen on deaf ears. It has taken an extreme amount of holding to get the schedules during the day changed very slightly.
Maybe the FIFO contract holders need to talk to the mines about spreading out the moves to cover the whole week, not just predominantly within three days?
This has been suggested for longer than I care to remember and every time it has fallen on deaf ears. It has taken an extreme amount of holding to get the schedules during the day changed very slightly.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: AUS
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WHat happened to giving the customer what they want?
Whilst I agree that the FIFO flights fill up the skys, without them we would all be pretty quiet, as QF VB etc carry many thousands in and out of Perth for the mining communites as well.
So if we move the FIFO times are QF and VB etc going to move their flights departing to the east, as many people catch those lunch time flights home?
Whilst the Industry keeps blaming the customer I feel we are diverting the attention away from the real cause. We dont have enought ATC staff, radars or runway slots in Perth. It's not one issue but multiple ones, that all all manged by different people.
There is a peak hour on the roads when everyone wants to go to work and another in the evening when they go home, so they build the roads to suit the peak. When did Perth have its last runway commisioned? I think you'll find that they have closed more in the last 20 years than they have opened!
We seem to be happy with having airports and ATC systems that are built to handle yesterdays troughs not tommorows needs, and this and other threads are telling the customer to go at another time as being the only solution.
When are we going to wake up and realise that primary transport infrastrutucte is a public issue and not realy for the private sector.
For example would private industry have built a railway to Mandurah?
The reason we dont have more runways at airports is that it has to make a positive contribution to the bottom line of the buiseness, or they cant raise the capital.
This whole issue has been raised by ASA at a CME conference and nothing major came out of it, as every one was blaming each other. So lets stop trying to prove every one else is wrong and offer the clients the servcie they want for the price it is going to cost.
Then and only then if the customers refuses to pay the price for the times they want, they will then be forced to change times.
So if we move the FIFO times are QF and VB etc going to move their flights departing to the east, as many people catch those lunch time flights home?
Whilst the Industry keeps blaming the customer I feel we are diverting the attention away from the real cause. We dont have enought ATC staff, radars or runway slots in Perth. It's not one issue but multiple ones, that all all manged by different people.
There is a peak hour on the roads when everyone wants to go to work and another in the evening when they go home, so they build the roads to suit the peak. When did Perth have its last runway commisioned? I think you'll find that they have closed more in the last 20 years than they have opened!
We seem to be happy with having airports and ATC systems that are built to handle yesterdays troughs not tommorows needs, and this and other threads are telling the customer to go at another time as being the only solution.
When are we going to wake up and realise that primary transport infrastrutucte is a public issue and not realy for the private sector.
For example would private industry have built a railway to Mandurah?
The reason we dont have more runways at airports is that it has to make a positive contribution to the bottom line of the buiseness, or they cant raise the capital.
This whole issue has been raised by ASA at a CME conference and nothing major came out of it, as every one was blaming each other. So lets stop trying to prove every one else is wrong and offer the clients the servcie they want for the price it is going to cost.
Then and only then if the customers refuses to pay the price for the times they want, they will then be forced to change times.
"Pesky" Operations
Wow....you are not related to Sun Tzu are you? Talk about bowling a handgrenade!
The short answer is: The operations you describe are a significant factor on ATC workload and their ability to provide an appropriate service to other airspace users.
I doubt that answer satisfies the professionals out there but the question cannot be answered properly or convincingly without explaining the issues...your 2 line question requires pages to answer properly, you are a member of the rotary wing fraternity so I will deal with “chopper” traffic.
Perth airport is home to 3 helicopter operators, with the bulk of movements performed by Helicopters Australia and their “helitak” operations. Perth Airport infrastructure and procedures limit ATCs capacity to efficiently process these operations. Problems include:
“Transient” helicopter operations in/out Perth are subject to the same limiting factors but because of their lack of familiarity it can be very difficult for ATC to process this traffic and ensure safe operations, similarly helicopter airwork operations in proximity to Perth airport can be extremely challenging to accommodate safely and without adversely affecting the operations of other airport users.
Helicopter pilots often seem incredulous that ATC cannot accommodate operations by their extremely versatile machines, so I will try to provide some insight into “our world”. There are 2 issues:
Workload
Any operation in proximity to the runway or to the extended centrelines of the runways is workload intensive for these reasons:
Priorities:
The Manual of Air Traffic Services and AIP list the priorities that are applied in the processing of flights:
a. with equal status:
1. scheduled commercial air transport operations;
2. non scheduled commercial air transport operations, except balloons;
3. military aircraft, except training flights;
4. aircraft engaged in the personal transport of:
a. State Governors or the Administrator of the Northern Territory;
b. State Premiers or the Chief Ministers of the Northern Territory or the Australian Capital Territory;
5. MED 2 operations; then,
b. with equal status:
1. general aviation aircraft proceeding to a primary aerodrome;
2. military and civil training flights; then,
c. other operations.
Now what priority should a number of media helicopters wishing to operate at low level in proximity to Perth airport to video tape a box containing the remains of a celebrity be given?
That’s a “c” so if the operation has potential to adversely affect higher priority flights, clearance should be withheld.
Life is never this simple … these guys are already in the air, making their requests for clearances and already contributing to ATC workload. ATCs have a high service ethic and pride in their profession, they will regularly take on traffic they should not… sometimes it seems there is as much work involved in denying a clearance and making alternative arrangements as there is in actually accommodating the request (note the word “seems”, it is false more often than not however)
One thing is for sure however, at a time when movements are increasing and every slot is precious, where the cost of fuel is high and there is a need to reduce greenhouse emissions, Air Traffic Management practises must evolve, this, like any change, is an extremely challenging task and will come at some cost.
So let’s take the media helicopter scenario again in a brave new world where hopefully, before the operation is considered / approved / undertaken, at least some of these questions will be asked:
The short answer is: The operations you describe are a significant factor on ATC workload and their ability to provide an appropriate service to other airspace users.
I doubt that answer satisfies the professionals out there but the question cannot be answered properly or convincingly without explaining the issues...your 2 line question requires pages to answer properly, you are a member of the rotary wing fraternity so I will deal with “chopper” traffic.
Perth airport is home to 3 helicopter operators, with the bulk of movements performed by Helicopters Australia and their “helitak” operations. Perth Airport infrastructure and procedures limit ATCs capacity to efficiently process these operations. Problems include:
- Lack of suitable helipad real estate
- Obstacles in flight paths
- Lack of helicopter routes that are segregated from other airport traffic
- Operations being conducted in proximity to runways where wake turbulence becomes an issue for ATC and helo pilots.
“Transient” helicopter operations in/out Perth are subject to the same limiting factors but because of their lack of familiarity it can be very difficult for ATC to process this traffic and ensure safe operations, similarly helicopter airwork operations in proximity to Perth airport can be extremely challenging to accommodate safely and without adversely affecting the operations of other airport users.
Helicopter pilots often seem incredulous that ATC cannot accommodate operations by their extremely versatile machines, so I will try to provide some insight into “our world”. There are 2 issues:
Workload
Any operation in proximity to the runway or to the extended centrelines of the runways is workload intensive for these reasons:
- ATC must ensure wake turbulence separation or caution advice is provided
- ATC must pass traffic information to all affected aircraft, in these days of TCAS it is important that traffic information is passed even though the aircraft are well segregated because pilots may go round based on a TCAS resolution advisory (and the paperwork associated with such events is horrendous!)
- Besides this extra radio chatter, the presence of this traffic can require much extra coordination between different ATC agencies (eg tower – approach)
- The presence of this traffic requires a greater proportion of the ATCs thinking, scanning and doing time, and this greater workload has great potential to, at best cause the ATC to lose a departure slot opportunity or, at worst cause a slip or error with more serious consequences.
Priorities:
The Manual of Air Traffic Services and AIP list the priorities that are applied in the processing of flights:
a. with equal status:
1. scheduled commercial air transport operations;
2. non scheduled commercial air transport operations, except balloons;
3. military aircraft, except training flights;
4. aircraft engaged in the personal transport of:
a. State Governors or the Administrator of the Northern Territory;
b. State Premiers or the Chief Ministers of the Northern Territory or the Australian Capital Territory;
5. MED 2 operations; then,
b. with equal status:
1. general aviation aircraft proceeding to a primary aerodrome;
2. military and civil training flights; then,
c. other operations.
Now what priority should a number of media helicopters wishing to operate at low level in proximity to Perth airport to video tape a box containing the remains of a celebrity be given?
That’s a “c” so if the operation has potential to adversely affect higher priority flights, clearance should be withheld.
Life is never this simple … these guys are already in the air, making their requests for clearances and already contributing to ATC workload. ATCs have a high service ethic and pride in their profession, they will regularly take on traffic they should not… sometimes it seems there is as much work involved in denying a clearance and making alternative arrangements as there is in actually accommodating the request (note the word “seems”, it is false more often than not however)
One thing is for sure however, at a time when movements are increasing and every slot is precious, where the cost of fuel is high and there is a need to reduce greenhouse emissions, Air Traffic Management practises must evolve, this, like any change, is an extremely challenging task and will come at some cost.
So let’s take the media helicopter scenario again in a brave new world where hopefully, before the operation is considered / approved / undertaken, at least some of these questions will be asked:
- Is it really necessary to film a box being taken out of the plane? What possible value does this have to our society?
- Is it worth risking a 2 min delay to a departing 747 to accommodate this operation? (lots of fuel, lots of extra CO2)
- Do you really need more than one chopper to perform the task?
- Can you “share” the vision, save fuel, engine and airframe hours and go some way to saving the planet to boot?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Dubai
Age: 44
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jetpipe,
I said in my first post on this topic that the huge lack of infrastructure at PH airport was one of two reasons why we cannot handle more traffic - the other is PEA airspace. Fix these two things and our capacity to move traffic increases markedly.
However, barring WAC pulling their finger out and producing a new runway and taxiway system overnight and the RAAF suddenly deciding the flying is better in LM, the only way to get people moved around with a minimum of fuss is to spread the schedules over a longer period.
There are times when we have at most three aircraft on frequency for a half hour period - move another three aircraft into that timeslot from a Tues arvo and it helps everyone. Then there are times like last year when we held 40 aircraft - three minutes between arrivals means a constant arrival stream for 2 hours!
I am beginning to wonder if this may have started to happen already - this morning (Mon) was the busiest I have been with outbounds for quite a while and even ended up holding a couple inbound. Or were these just 'extras' that would otherwise have filled Tues/Wed/Thurs with more fun and frivolity?
On the theme from west_atc, are any of the charter companies prepared to fly through TIBA if it happens this week? Looking at the next few days, it won't take much for us (like west_atc, from West Radar btn 36 ~ 200 PH) to go TIBA and there is no way of getting to or from PH without going through our airspace. Experience says that VB and J* will fly through but QF will wait until it is over - what happens with Skippers, Network, Skywest, etc???
I said in my first post on this topic that the huge lack of infrastructure at PH airport was one of two reasons why we cannot handle more traffic - the other is PEA airspace. Fix these two things and our capacity to move traffic increases markedly.
However, barring WAC pulling their finger out and producing a new runway and taxiway system overnight and the RAAF suddenly deciding the flying is better in LM, the only way to get people moved around with a minimum of fuss is to spread the schedules over a longer period.
There are times when we have at most three aircraft on frequency for a half hour period - move another three aircraft into that timeslot from a Tues arvo and it helps everyone. Then there are times like last year when we held 40 aircraft - three minutes between arrivals means a constant arrival stream for 2 hours!
I am beginning to wonder if this may have started to happen already - this morning (Mon) was the busiest I have been with outbounds for quite a while and even ended up holding a couple inbound. Or were these just 'extras' that would otherwise have filled Tues/Wed/Thurs with more fun and frivolity?
On the theme from west_atc, are any of the charter companies prepared to fly through TIBA if it happens this week? Looking at the next few days, it won't take much for us (like west_atc, from West Radar btn 36 ~ 200 PH) to go TIBA and there is no way of getting to or from PH without going through our airspace. Experience says that VB and J* will fly through but QF will wait until it is over - what happens with Skippers, Network, Skywest, etc???
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Dubai
Age: 44
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Icarus,
What is the time frame for the master plan being implemented? And you are dead right - 03R/21L looks far too short to be useful - especially on those 42 degree days you get over there!
How are they going to fit a consolidated terminal in the middle of the airfield? There is not enough room at the moment - how is putting it all in one place going to help??????? But then, if they kept the domestic terminal where it is now, imagine the taxi times from landing 21L to the domestic side - YUK! Or to take off full-length 03R??? Even worse!
Looks like even when they try to fix things, they make a balls-up of it!
What is the time frame for the master plan being implemented? And you are dead right - 03R/21L looks far too short to be useful - especially on those 42 degree days you get over there!
How are they going to fit a consolidated terminal in the middle of the airfield? There is not enough room at the moment - how is putting it all in one place going to help??????? But then, if they kept the domestic terminal where it is now, imagine the taxi times from landing 21L to the domestic side - YUK! Or to take off full-length 03R??? Even worse!
Looks like even when they try to fix things, they make a balls-up of it!
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 157
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sabre, thanks for answering in such detail. Incredulous? Surely you jest? 
Funny you should mention coffin chasing, I am not looking forward to tomorrow.
I can assure you that I personally try to dissuade potential extended runway centreline ops for all the reasons you state, probably at the commercial expense of our company. I always ring and ask what is the least pain in the a** time to stooge around that neck of the woods and have found this is the best way. You guys do a great job IMHO especially with the multitude of 'restrictions' you have to work with.
As we fly alongside a powerline heading toward YPPH I always give a wry smile to my 'liney' when we are held for an inbound arrival. We, in our ignorance, sitting at 30 ft AGL hover in amongst the trees, muse that if we become a traffic hazard to the RPT inbound then we are all in trouble.
Trust me when I say that the 3 questions you pose are way out of my juristiction but I concur with your sentiment. There is pressure from ground based sources to acquire the 'money shot'.
Cheers & Beers
TCF
Funny you should mention coffin chasing, I am not looking forward to tomorrow.
I can assure you that I personally try to dissuade potential extended runway centreline ops for all the reasons you state, probably at the commercial expense of our company. I always ring and ask what is the least pain in the a** time to stooge around that neck of the woods and have found this is the best way. You guys do a great job IMHO especially with the multitude of 'restrictions' you have to work with.
As we fly alongside a powerline heading toward YPPH I always give a wry smile to my 'liney' when we are held for an inbound arrival. We, in our ignorance, sitting at 30 ft AGL hover in amongst the trees, muse that if we become a traffic hazard to the RPT inbound then we are all in trouble.
Trust me when I say that the 3 questions you pose are way out of my juristiction but I concur with your sentiment. There is pressure from ground based sources to acquire the 'money shot'.
Cheers & Beers
TCF
Helicopter Ops
"As we fly alongside a powerline heading toward YPPH I always give a wry smile to my 'liney' when we are held for an inbound arrival. We, in our ignorance, sitting at 30 ft AGL hover in amongst the trees, muse that if we become a traffic hazard to the RPT inbound then we are all in trouble. 
"
I havent figured out how to do that blue quote box thingie so I just did a cut and paste!
About 15 years ago as a result of experience with helicopter power line washing ops, I as an approach controller made exactly the same comments and was able to get a proposal up to create a new separation standard to facilitate these flights. A new separation standard was created which basically said that if a helicopter was operating at less than a certain number of ft AGL (I cant remember the standard) it was deemed to be separated with other flights.
About 5 years ago this very useful "standard" was removed from the books, the information I received from the head ATC at the time was that RAAF representatives involved with procedures review didnt see a need for it and proposed that it be removed, other people not knowing any better agreed.
If you believe your operations are being unnecessarily affected why dont you contact a local ATC manager type and work together to try and get it back in the books?
"I havent figured out how to do that blue quote box thingie so I just did a cut and paste!
About 15 years ago as a result of experience with helicopter power line washing ops, I as an approach controller made exactly the same comments and was able to get a proposal up to create a new separation standard to facilitate these flights. A new separation standard was created which basically said that if a helicopter was operating at less than a certain number of ft AGL (I cant remember the standard) it was deemed to be separated with other flights.
About 5 years ago this very useful "standard" was removed from the books, the information I received from the head ATC at the time was that RAAF representatives involved with procedures review didnt see a need for it and proposed that it be removed, other people not knowing any better agreed.
If you believe your operations are being unnecessarily affected why dont you contact a local ATC manager type and work together to try and get it back in the books?
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Aust
Posts: 378
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I havent figured out how to do that blue quote box thingie so I just did a cut and paste!
With the amount of time you ATCers are starting to spend on Pprune I am sure you will work it out before long.........
Busy my @rse...............................
helicopter power line washing ops
PS: To put a quote in a box, copy the text to the clipboard, open up the reply window, click on the speech bubble icon called "Wrap quote tags..." then hit Paste.
I never used to log in and read this stuff
Busy my @rse....
Hey I think I did it!
Like I said I never used to log in to this until colleagues at work told me we were "copping some stick", I felt I had to respond... then you guys keep asking questions...
Last edited by cac_sabre; 4th Feb 2008 at 12:58. Reason: incorrect quote
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 157
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To be honest the 3-4 times it affects us on the line is not worthy of any changes, it was just an example. The bigger problem is probably at your end when we pop in and out of Radar and LOS VHF coverage coming thru the hills and the distraction it causes via 'VH-ABC we dont have you on radar now.....'
We do maintain a close liasion with ATC (I have YPPH TCU on speed dial!) and have found a helpful ear but again I think you guys are hamstrung by your own rules in many respects.
Cheers
TCF
We do maintain a close liasion with ATC (I have YPPH TCU on speed dial!) and have found a helpful ear but again I think you guys are hamstrung by your own rules in many respects.
Cheers
TCF
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 157
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey Sabre,
In light of your day-early, pre-emptive, dark comments re celebs arriving in boxes, can I deduce that any 15 minute delays in clearance for airwork of same are co-incidental?
Too many decoys anyway.
TCF
In light of your day-early, pre-emptive, dark comments re celebs arriving in boxes, can I deduce that any 15 minute delays in clearance for airwork of same are co-incidental?
Too many decoys anyway.
TCF
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thread drift on...
Was only talking about this 'standard' today. The 'standard' was appropriately qualified helicopters operating below 300FT AGL outside 4NM of all thresholds could be disregarded when processing airport traffic.
The urban myth is that a controller (who is currently at YPEA) was under his annual check in YBTL were there are some very significant terrain issues. A helicopter was operating on a 1700FT-ish spot height, cleared not above 300AGL. The controller cleared a couple of jets for a TACAN approach which was very much in conflict with the helo. The checker threw her clipboard in the air, screamed, yanked the controller, etc. The controller was all 'What? I'm using this standard. it's in the book!!'. They plotted it out and discovered that there was less than 500FT separation, not sure how much laterally. Soon after that, RAAF requested the standard be removed. I was personally mortified as I used it most days of the week...
...Thread drift off.
About 15 years ago as a result of experience with helicopter power line washing ops, I as an approach controller made exactly the same comments and was able to get a proposal up to create a new separation standard to facilitate these flights. A new separation standard was created which basically said that if a helicopter was operating at less than a certain number of ft AGL (I cant remember the standard) it was deemed to be separated with other flights.
About 5 years ago this very useful "standard" was removed from the books, the information I received from the head ATC at the time was that RAAF representatives involved with procedures review didnt see a need for it and proposed that it be removed, other people not knowing any better agreed.
About 5 years ago this very useful "standard" was removed from the books, the information I received from the head ATC at the time was that RAAF representatives involved with procedures review didnt see a need for it and proposed that it be removed, other people not knowing any better agreed.
The urban myth is that a controller (who is currently at YPEA) was under his annual check in YBTL were there are some very significant terrain issues. A helicopter was operating on a 1700FT-ish spot height, cleared not above 300AGL. The controller cleared a couple of jets for a TACAN approach which was very much in conflict with the helo. The checker threw her clipboard in the air, screamed, yanked the controller, etc. The controller was all 'What? I'm using this standard. it's in the book!!'. They plotted it out and discovered that there was less than 500FT separation, not sure how much laterally. Soon after that, RAAF requested the standard be removed. I was personally mortified as I used it most days of the week...
...Thread drift off.