Query to RPT pilots
As a controller I have to agree that most of the time you guys do an excellent job at meeting the times (I handle ML arrivals) - we're often amazed at just how much you can lose, particularly in to wind.
We have to laugh sometimes though - we get pilots (from a select few airlines) who say "we can't possibly do that" when asked at 200 miles out to lose, say, four minutes in a heavy, when I'm only giving them the time to make sure they won't be barrelling in at 330kts, and 280 will probably do it nicely.
Or the ones who are two minutes early with five minutes to run to the fix, "report speed", "300kts". Really?
And then there are the A330s who are maintaining F250 at 140 miles and only have a minute left to lose - "track direct and increase to 300kts" is the usual response.
As I said, it's only the select few.
We have to laugh sometimes though - we get pilots (from a select few airlines) who say "we can't possibly do that" when asked at 200 miles out to lose, say, four minutes in a heavy, when I'm only giving them the time to make sure they won't be barrelling in at 330kts, and 280 will probably do it nicely.
Or the ones who are two minutes early with five minutes to run to the fix, "report speed", "300kts". Really?
And then there are the A330s who are maintaining F250 at 140 miles and only have a minute left to lose - "track direct and increase to 300kts" is the usual response.
As I said, it's only the select few.
Bloggs,
Likewise on the 737, however we just enter the desired waypoint on the fix page and then select abeam (which is actually not abeam but overhead), and it gives you the ETA with a decimal point. Does the 717 have a pretty similar FMC?
The biggest pain is that the ETAs on my box aren't shown in decimal minutes (until on the last segment to the Feeder Fix). It would make life so much easier it they were
Le ping my pet hate is being given a time, which you are going to make within about 10 seconds, being given an indeterminate vector for reasons best known to the controller because they don't give you a reason and then assume you will continue to make the given time. "You" being a generic term not you specifically 
In my view, it is one or the other!
If I am set up to cross a waypoint at a given time and speed, giving me extra track miles, particularly when you don't tell me how many extra track miles you are giving me, means I MUST speed up!
I do everything I can to meet the times, descending up to 100-150 miles before I would normally just get the speed off, continually adjusting the speed to make the time, and to have someone at the end jump in and give me a vector and not tell me why just gives me the ****s.
And yes I drive an a330.
In my view, it is one or the other!
If I am set up to cross a waypoint at a given time and speed, giving me extra track miles, particularly when you don't tell me how many extra track miles you are giving me, means I MUST speed up!
I do everything I can to meet the times, descending up to 100-150 miles before I would normally just get the speed off, continually adjusting the speed to make the time, and to have someone at the end jump in and give me a vector and not tell me why just gives me the ****s.
And yes I drive an a330.
Thanks for pointing that out captain obvious! And as a point of clarification, the assumption is on their part not mine.
Yes indeed I do ask the question and the answer back is almost always to meet the same time.
Now how do you do that when you are on a vector and pointing away from the fix - what speed do you do to make good the time?
The speed you had, when pointing at the fix, had you crossing within ten or so seconds in most cases, so exactly what speed are yo supposed to do when you don't know how long the vector is or what the vector is for?
If you can answer that can you give me next weeks Lotto numbers?
Yes indeed I do ask the question and the answer back is almost always to meet the same time.
Now how do you do that when you are on a vector and pointing away from the fix - what speed do you do to make good the time?
The speed you had, when pointing at the fix, had you crossing within ten or so seconds in most cases, so exactly what speed are yo supposed to do when you don't know how long the vector is or what the vector is for?
If you can answer that can you give me next weeks Lotto numbers?
How close to the fix are you talking? Quite often the problem is the one ahead not you. Continuing with your current speed would my suggestion. One problem for us is Maestro only does times to the minute so if someone is 30 seconds late on the time given they make actually be a minute late on where they need to be and vice versa with early.
Shall we say the problem children I mentioned aren't domestic A330s.
Shall we say the problem children I mentioned aren't domestic A330s.
I'm curious.
Once the controller issued a vector does that not mean that he is accepting responsibility for your navigation and any previous clearance is cancelled unless specifically stated.
By the way, I am not going to try to find AIP references so if you guys that are more up to date then me want to sort me out, I am happy to be educated.
Once the controller issued a vector does that not mean that he is accepting responsibility for your navigation and any previous clearance is cancelled unless specifically stated.
By the way, I am not going to try to find AIP references so if you guys that are more up to date then me want to sort me out, I am happy to be educated.
I've noticed if my FMS planned descent speed is considerably different to my normal profile, either faster or slower, the controller may interfere with my cruise speed and/or vector or ask for a speed increase in an attempt to meet what he/she believes is the fix time. I will add that often if they are attempting to get us there on time it doesn't work and once on approach they do the opposite, I.e. Slow us down or speed us up.
Having said that us pilots are our own worst enemy in that a fair percentage think rough enough is close enough. If the box says 27 and that's what they asked for then continue with the coffee. 27 in my machine is from 27 until a sec before 28. Maybe 7 miles behind where your expected to be.
Having said that us pilots are our own worst enemy in that a fair percentage think rough enough is close enough. If the box says 27 and that's what they asked for then continue with the coffee. 27 in my machine is from 27 until a sec before 28. Maybe 7 miles behind where your expected to be.
Last edited by RENURPP; 22nd May 2016 at 11:43.
Bottums Up
Advice from a few ATCO jump seaters in the last year or so suggests that ATC would rather we're at the feeder fix 30 secs early, than 30 secs late. Based on this my preference is to juggle CI & FL to get the right time, then fine tune the CI so that the displayed time shows the previous minute and a CI decrease [increase Bloggs knew what I meant] of 1 shows the correct minute.
So far it seems to work ok.
So far it seems to work ok.
Last edited by Capt Claret; 22nd May 2016 at 11:47. Reason: Wrote wrong word
RENURPP, the problem is that it's a dynamic environment and getting you to the fix on time sometimes doesn't achieve the correct spacing in the sequence. Works well enough when everyone is flying through the same fix but not necessarily so well when slotting aircraft in from different directions - the time from the fix to the threshold that Maestro calculates is only as good as the wind and performance model it uses and some days it doesn't work so well.
I've had aircraft exactly on time through WENDY and ARBEY onto R16 at ML and they end up being a dead heat at Bolinda - everyone flying 250kts from the fix and the star speed restrictions.
I've had aircraft exactly on time through WENDY and ARBEY onto R16 at ML and they end up being a dead heat at Bolinda - everyone flying 250kts from the fix and the star speed restrictions.
Originally Posted by Transition Layer
fix page and then select abeam (which is actually not abeam but overhead), and it gives you the ETA with a decimal point.
