London ATC ?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 1999
Posts: 2,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
London ATC ?
English ATCO's may be the "best in the world", but I am afraid that the ATC system isn't any more. Hand over to London from Brest, France or Maastricht and these days my heart sinks. It is often difficult to establish contact because of the plethora of instructions being given to aircraft without any break in between. When a break occurs it is often corrupted by the queue of aircraft then simultaneously transmitting their check in. At the FIR/UIR boundaries most aircraft are starting or in the early stages of their descent profile which only adds to the imperitive.
I appreciate the need to better utilize spacings for the benefit of everybody and this often requires heading and speed variations from those associated with the SID's & STAR's. I don't doubt that lack of investment is also a factor in pushing the system to its limits. However the constant overlap of transmissions does nothing to enhance safety or efficiency and seems to be at least in some significant measure a result of the stream of instructions and lack of adequate transmission breaks.
Obviously this is a one way viewpoint, and I would be interested in hearing the ATCO's views. This criticism is not particularly levelled at ATCO's for the reasons I have already stated. However arriving into UK airspace may once have felt like arriving home, now it feels more like shooting the last class 5 rapid before arriving home ( only not as enjoyable!). Is there anything that can be done to improve the communications aspect ? Can SID's & STARS be better utilized or adjusted to cut down on multiple instructions without causing undue additional delays ? Any suggestions, comments, observations ?
I appreciate the need to better utilize spacings for the benefit of everybody and this often requires heading and speed variations from those associated with the SID's & STAR's. I don't doubt that lack of investment is also a factor in pushing the system to its limits. However the constant overlap of transmissions does nothing to enhance safety or efficiency and seems to be at least in some significant measure a result of the stream of instructions and lack of adequate transmission breaks.
Obviously this is a one way viewpoint, and I would be interested in hearing the ATCO's views. This criticism is not particularly levelled at ATCO's for the reasons I have already stated. However arriving into UK airspace may once have felt like arriving home, now it feels more like shooting the last class 5 rapid before arriving home ( only not as enjoyable!). Is there anything that can be done to improve the communications aspect ? Can SID's & STARS be better utilized or adjusted to cut down on multiple instructions without causing undue additional delays ? Any suggestions, comments, observations ?
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bealzebub I wonder if you fly for one of the carriers which form the Airline Group? This group bought almost half of the part privatised NATS but they did it with borrowed money and then left NATS to pay the intrest on the loan. That is just one of many reasons why NATS is so underfunded. When an organisation is underfunded R&D is one of the first things to suffer. You are seeing the results.
A few weeks ago it took us 14minutes to check in on a London frequency. Eastbound over the top of Stansted we selected the freq abeam Heathrow and finally managed to get our callsign heard as the east coastline approached. First time I've seen it really really stupidly busy.
I tip my hat to the controller though - I couldn't keep that up for more than 5 minutes without totally losing it.
Cheers
WWW
I tip my hat to the controller though - I couldn't keep that up for more than 5 minutes without totally losing it.
Cheers
WWW
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: "Gee Dubya"
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Always seems to be ok for us until we get onto that ****in 118.82 frequency just before we pass into Essex. Never heard anything like it, don't think I hear people ever check in - take a breath Mr Controller! 
Moderator
Join Date: May 1998
Location: .
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Baywatcher.... ditto that, i.e. just continue with your nominated SID / STAR / flight plan route, comply with it's latteral, vertical and speed constraints and wait for ATC to call you.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am one of those on 118.82. Thank you for your kind words.
We work to standard procedures and levels. We see you on radar on departure and coming towards the stacks. If you have not checked in, because it is too busy, don't worry too much we know you are there and can see you. We will call you ASAP.
When you first check in to UK Airspace you are given your route and SID info, it would be great if this info could come on a data-link. Do all aircraft carry ACARS ? I wonder if a link like that could be used. It would certainly cut R/T TX.
We work to standard procedures and levels. We see you on radar on departure and coming towards the stacks. If you have not checked in, because it is too busy, don't worry too much we know you are there and can see you. We will call you ASAP.
When you first check in to UK Airspace you are given your route and SID info, it would be great if this info could come on a data-link. Do all aircraft carry ACARS ? I wonder if a link like that could be used. It would certainly cut R/T TX.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: the Tearooms of Mars
Posts: 206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Data-link clearance trials have been going on for some time in Europe. It would be an improvement clearly. But on a busy frequency, the concern is that we may be unable to interject with a safety critical message, for example a TCAS resolution.
Whilst I might be broadly happy to accept the increasing use of ‘negative handovers’, ie the assumption that an aircraft will have arrived on a frequency without a formal check-in, this would have to be backed up by vigorous protocols. For instance both pilots should cross-check the frequency has been correctly selected, and that the traffic on the new frequency involves the expected stations. 121.5 must be monitored in case the frequency hand-off was erroneous. This procedure might be suitable for some ground stations such as Apron, Tower, and en-route sectors, but it is unlikely to ever be suitable for a TMA/RAPCON controller.
Still more reason for us all to strictly adhere to RT discipline.
Whilst I might be broadly happy to accept the increasing use of ‘negative handovers’, ie the assumption that an aircraft will have arrived on a frequency without a formal check-in, this would have to be backed up by vigorous protocols. For instance both pilots should cross-check the frequency has been correctly selected, and that the traffic on the new frequency involves the expected stations. 121.5 must be monitored in case the frequency hand-off was erroneous. This procedure might be suitable for some ground stations such as Apron, Tower, and en-route sectors, but it is unlikely to ever be suitable for a TMA/RAPCON controller.
Still more reason for us all to strictly adhere to RT discipline.
Bealzebub,
as an ATCO, I couldn't agree with you more. many of our frequencies are getting overloaded and the problem is getting worse not better with barely enough time for a basic service provision and no capacity for when things go wrong.
NATS is short of controllers, particularly on the busy sectors. Market forces over the last decade have forced NATS to cut costs and privitisation has led to a serious funding problem.
That said, privitisation makes NATS more customer focused and comments like yours, from pilots or from airlines should force NATS to address your concerns. Have you tried getting these issues raised with NATS, through your chief pilot or ATC liason ?
"Still more reason for us all to strictly adhere to RT discipline."
- well said Capt H.
as an ATCO, I couldn't agree with you more. many of our frequencies are getting overloaded and the problem is getting worse not better with barely enough time for a basic service provision and no capacity for when things go wrong.
NATS is short of controllers, particularly on the busy sectors. Market forces over the last decade have forced NATS to cut costs and privitisation has led to a serious funding problem.
That said, privitisation makes NATS more customer focused and comments like yours, from pilots or from airlines should force NATS to address your concerns. Have you tried getting these issues raised with NATS, through your chief pilot or ATC liason ?
"Still more reason for us all to strictly adhere to RT discipline."
- well said Capt H.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 159
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All the above true, and data link certainly wont hurt. Meanwhile, us drivers could help a little while we wait for funding and solutions, by cutting down on the chatter.
There´s always some joker who insists on his good mornings and good afternoons, others feel like they have to read back everything word for word with callsign front and back. Essentials only will do just fine when it´s busy. With a simple frequency change, a simple ¨roger¨ will do. Maybe not quite what the book says, but so what. If you fly the leg every day and know what´s coming, it´s ok. (If it´s your first time in 3 months, then it might not be, but use your head.)
One major airline flying into LHR has a lot of pilots who for some reason insist on giving certain ¨descend¨ info that´s not required, yet at the same time leave out present altitude when checking in. So atc has to make an extra transmition ¨verify altitude...¨
So guys: help out, cut the niceties and keep it short and sweet.
There´s always some joker who insists on his good mornings and good afternoons, others feel like they have to read back everything word for word with callsign front and back. Essentials only will do just fine when it´s busy. With a simple frequency change, a simple ¨roger¨ will do. Maybe not quite what the book says, but so what. If you fly the leg every day and know what´s coming, it´s ok. (If it´s your first time in 3 months, then it might not be, but use your head.)
One major airline flying into LHR has a lot of pilots who for some reason insist on giving certain ¨descend¨ info that´s not required, yet at the same time leave out present altitude when checking in. So atc has to make an extra transmition ¨verify altitude...¨
So guys: help out, cut the niceties and keep it short and sweet.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bigmouth
I don't think your reply of "roger" to a frequency change is really ideal. All the seconds you save will be lost in spades the first time someone gets it wrong and comes back to ask again. As for familiarity, just look at the confusion between 129.2 and 129.225 that happens every day (is it Scottish and DTY high?).
G W-H
I don't think your reply of "roger" to a frequency change is really ideal. All the seconds you save will be lost in spades the first time someone gets it wrong and comes back to ask again. As for familiarity, just look at the confusion between 129.2 and 129.225 that happens every day (is it Scottish and DTY high?).
G W-H
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Mahlangeni
Posts: 204
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't know how much this is appreciated, but when we fail to get into contact with ATCO's into or out of the London area, we simply squawk IDENT to say: "We are here". That's when they then call us and the problem is solved pronto.
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Hants
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As another one of the ATCOs who works 118.82 (and the even more frantic 119.77) I can only say that at times it is just as frustrating for us when the R/T is really going. All of us working those sectors are aware that aircraft are waiting to check in, and often are waiting for you to do so, but we are keen to "keep control of the R/T". The trouble with this is that, as mentioned previously, we end up with a backlog of aircraft waiting to check in, which means that as soon as there is a suitable gap in transmissions three or four different aircraft try to transmit at once! This means that we then take over the R/T again by saying "Three at once there, was one the BAW***?" Once that crew have responded we are likely to say "Was the other RYR***?" They respond and off we go again doing what is needed with those aircraft. The trouble now is that another two or three aircraft come on freq, and cannot get in on the R/T and so the cycle continues!
How we can solve this problem is difficult to answer at the moment, as sectors will always be split as far as traffic dictates, subject to the appropiate number of staff being available. In the meantime stick with us, and keep the R/T standard!
How we can solve this problem is difficult to answer at the moment, as sectors will always be split as far as traffic dictates, subject to the appropiate number of staff being available. In the meantime stick with us, and keep the R/T standard!
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Costa del Swanwick
Posts: 834
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As Over+Out states you will get your route on first contact with a LACC frequency. Couldn't we come up with a system that on first call the crew tell ATC which STAR they are flying and then we only amend it as and when required. eg. London BAW292 FL370 on a BNN2A. I accept that there will inevitably be headings required but at least we know that if you Radio fail you will follow the STAR that we expect. We would also be required to amend it if any en-route holding was required
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Morocco
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
squawk ident?
squawk IDENT?
square leg, nice way to get your anxiety level down a few notches when failing to make first contact in terminal area, but then again, i imagine a couple of us doing so, i'm not sure the atco would appreciate his scope burgeonning with a/c symbols going two or three times larger...
i've been taught to avoid doing so, unless requested by atc, due to the corresponding plot/symbol getting much bigger and overlapping others for a significant lenth of time, thus making things worse in a crowded atco scope.
happy landings
square leg, nice way to get your anxiety level down a few notches when failing to make first contact in terminal area, but then again, i imagine a couple of us doing so, i'm not sure the atco would appreciate his scope burgeonning with a/c symbols going two or three times larger...
i've been taught to avoid doing so, unless requested by atc, due to the corresponding plot/symbol getting much bigger and overlapping others for a significant lenth of time, thus making things worse in a crowded atco scope.
happy landings
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
127.95, 131.92 on the Lam's out of EGKK, can be just as bad, even with the DB controllers that we have.
Clacton Sector is always a bit silly.
Paris has got a couple of airports, 4 runways using not much capacitiy
We've got 4 airports 5 runways 100% + at peak times capacity.
No wonder as with all our transport systems there are probs.
Clacton Sector is always a bit silly.
Paris has got a couple of airports, 4 runways using not much capacitiy
We've got 4 airports 5 runways 100% + at peak times capacity.
No wonder as with all our transport systems there are probs.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: the Milky Way
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Busy as London ATC may be, its always a relief to leave Paris ATC and get handed over. Nice to get instructions in clear concise English without the "benefit" of numerous "aaaahhhhh"s, "disregard"s and "call you back"s... And of course none of the lunacy of half the transmissions not being in English.