Slowing down on final approach.....
I know just a poke at the guy's whose paycheck I'm jealous of. My best was 250 to 2.5 dme at MHT "controller requested due traffic" Only thing that came close below 10k was the F28.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Southern England
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
126.825 - I agree with you're original post in so far as some people do regularly ignore the speeds given by ATC. I think however that we generally fall into 2 categories.
1. Foreign or unfamiliar operators (usually with a poor grasp of English) who simply ignore the speeds given and do their own thing.
2. Regular operators who know the various gates you use, believe you have forgotten or are too busy to issue further speed control and apply it themselves.
With regards to the first category there is no real excuse and the airlines responsible should be brought to task, the second group however is slightly more complex.
Like many of the other posters I have operated out of the south for a while now and the problem we have is that when given an ATC speed instruction we can only comply as far as is practical. Several times I have been asked to maintain 220kts and given no further instruction until fully established at around 7 miles (160 to 4), there is absolutely no way we would be able to conduct a stablised approach\landing from that position.
Like all the others here I have a huge amount of respect for the job you and others do in what is an extremely busy piece of airspace but until positive speed control is given on every approach I think you will find that pilots will assume\second guess when you want them to reduce (especially with a busy frequency).
1. Foreign or unfamiliar operators (usually with a poor grasp of English) who simply ignore the speeds given and do their own thing.
2. Regular operators who know the various gates you use, believe you have forgotten or are too busy to issue further speed control and apply it themselves.
With regards to the first category there is no real excuse and the airlines responsible should be brought to task, the second group however is slightly more complex.
Like many of the other posters I have operated out of the south for a while now and the problem we have is that when given an ATC speed instruction we can only comply as far as is practical. Several times I have been asked to maintain 220kts and given no further instruction until fully established at around 7 miles (160 to 4), there is absolutely no way we would be able to conduct a stablised approach\landing from that position.
Like all the others here I have a huge amount of respect for the job you and others do in what is an extremely busy piece of airspace but until positive speed control is given on every approach I think you will find that pilots will assume\second guess when you want them to reduce (especially with a busy frequency).
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by maui
Spitoon.
Do you mean "no less important than any other instruction?"
Do you mean "no less important than any other instruction?"
On a more general point, I am surprised by the number of pilots that wanmt standard speeds to be made the rule - this would be inefficient when it is not necessary for traffic reasons. Having said that, if crews want to fly at specific 'standard' speeds when there are no ATC speed restrictions, then they can.....and I always thought they did!
Lastly, one thing that does not seem to have come up is that some SLPs are there for reasons other than sequencing or other traffic management purposes. Rather, the speed restrictions are there to assure containment within airspace or separation from other procedures.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: washington,dc
Posts: 486
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
one additional thought...as pilots we have all experienced the need for SPEED restrictions.
at certain airports, for example that 747 chap going into EWR, after the first time you are hosed by atc in this sort of rude manner, next time you make your initial call to the facility, simply:
Approach control, Callsign, level at 4000, NO ASSIGNED SPEED.
of course a wise guy will say, DO YOU WANT A SPEED ASIGNMENT?
at certain airports, for example that 747 chap going into EWR, after the first time you are hosed by atc in this sort of rude manner, next time you make your initial call to the facility, simply:
Approach control, Callsign, level at 4000, NO ASSIGNED SPEED.
of course a wise guy will say, DO YOU WANT A SPEED ASIGNMENT?
Join Date: May 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 796
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
westie,
All the major London airports will use 2.5nm as a minimum separation on final approach when the wx is suitable and there are no wake vortex considerations.
That's obviously fairly close and it requires quite fine tuning from the ATC perspective and it doesn't take much non-compliance from the cockpit for it to reduce below 2.5nm. If it reduces to less than 2nm as happens occasionaly (not always our own fault!) we get suspended and go through the no tea and biscuits routine
126.82 - I assume 3-4 mile seperation in non low vis conditions is the minimum seperation? so any speed violations by pilots will cause a delaying in the approach. Also in these days of upgraded TCAS, just how helpful is a constant a/c speed readout to you? So do you sometimes feel you want to issue some a/c with a 'ticket' who obviously ignore you?
That's obviously fairly close and it requires quite fine tuning from the ATC perspective and it doesn't take much non-compliance from the cockpit for it to reduce below 2.5nm. If it reduces to less than 2nm as happens occasionaly (not always our own fault!) we get suspended and go through the no tea and biscuits routine
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Deepest darkest Inbredland....
Posts: 606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All the major London airports will use 2.5nm as a minimum separation on final approach when the wx is suitable and there are no wake vortex considerations.
As a tower controller we see the lack of speed control as a real problem. If you are the only Aircraft in the sky, quite often you come over at 7 or 8 miles flying about 200-220 kts ground speed. When radar is challenged they say that there is no need to use speed as this is the only aircraft in the sky. Yes as far as you are concerned it is but what about the departures and my planning etc.
Also pilots not complying. A certain operator is well known for flying at high speed. When you ask the speed they will reply "160 to 4" so I then have to say "what is your speed NOW?" and they still lie (I know because radar have mode s and can tell me). Please make the effort because if you are 3 miles behind a Citation at 115kts and you are at 185kts, there is a good chance that you will go around. So please try and comply and if you are told to reduce to min safe there is a reason why and don't do as a pilot did the other day and still be at 175kts at 2 miles and then get snotty when sent around. I will always try and make it work but we all have to try (that includes you radar!!!
)
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Surprisingly enough, one of the locations where speed contol is absolutely required is during the Hajj season at JED.
Many times aircraft in close trail to three parallel runways, and it works like clockwork.
Then, one day I receive a request from the JED approach controller...
EAN3037, are you a TriStar?
Affirmative.
Can you maintain 200 knots until five miles final?
210 if you wish.
Even better, thank you, call the tower.
And yes, it is possible with the 'ole Lockheed tri-motor, if you pay attention.
The point to this little story is...if ATC folks want maximum co-operation as regards requested speeds, all they have to do is ask, BUT they do need to state when that speed is no longer needed.
Many times aircraft in close trail to three parallel runways, and it works like clockwork.
Then, one day I receive a request from the JED approach controller...
EAN3037, are you a TriStar?
Affirmative.
Can you maintain 200 knots until five miles final?
210 if you wish.
Even better, thank you, call the tower.
And yes, it is possible with the 'ole Lockheed tri-motor, if you pay attention.
The point to this little story is...if ATC folks want maximum co-operation as regards requested speeds, all they have to do is ask, BUT they do need to state when that speed is no longer needed.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: washington,dc
Posts: 486
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
lies:
wouldn't it be nice if all pilots told the truth all the time? speeds, airport in sight, having weight and balance info...
and I'll be the flight attendAnts would like it if we told the truth too! ;0
wouldn't it be nice if all pilots told the truth all the time? speeds, airport in sight, having weight and balance info...
and I'll be the flight attendAnts would like it if we told the truth too! ;0
Join Date: May 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 796
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
terrain safe, I did say the major London airports 
Gonzo, your Pt 2 must be different to ours? Ours says that whilst 3nm may be considered to be the standard final approach spacing, it is incumbent on the tower WM to maximise runway capacity i.e. offer 2.5nm spacing if at all possible (all criteria met).
That doesn't mean we're aiming for 3nm allowing a reduction to 2.5nm if it decreases for any reason. It means we're aiming for 2.5nm from the start and all the way down the approach, but I'm sure you did know that so I'm unsure why you replied as you did?
Gonzo, your Pt 2 must be different to ours? Ours says that whilst 3nm may be considered to be the standard final approach spacing, it is incumbent on the tower WM to maximise runway capacity i.e. offer 2.5nm spacing if at all possible (all criteria met).
That doesn't mean we're aiming for 3nm allowing a reduction to 2.5nm if it decreases for any reason. It means we're aiming for 2.5nm from the start and all the way down the approach, but I'm sure you did know that so I'm unsure why you replied as you did?
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: LHR/EGLL
Age: 45
Posts: 4,392
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ours says that whilst 3nm may be considered to be the standard final approach spacing, it is incumbent on the tower WM to maximise runway capacity i.e. offer 2.5nm spacing if at all possible (all criteria met).
Guest
Posts: n/a
Slight thread creep here - sorry.
I've always though that a separation minima was just that, a minima. If you only get the tea and biscuits if the spacing gets to less than 2NM then what about all of the losses of separation where spacing was between 2 and 2.5NM?
If I end up with two aeroplanes with less than the standard space between them (not half a mile - or 20% less) I'm going to be asked to explain...and pretty promptly! I guess separation means different things to different units.
Originally Posted by Roffa
All the major London airports will use 2.5nm as a minimum separation on final approach when the wx is suitable and there are no wake vortex considerations.
That's obviously fairly close and it requires quite fine tuning from the ATC perspective and it doesn't take much non-compliance from the cockpit for it to reduce below 2.5nm. If it reduces to less than 2nm as happens occasionaly (not always our own fault!) we get suspended and go through the no tea and biscuits routine
That's obviously fairly close and it requires quite fine tuning from the ATC perspective and it doesn't take much non-compliance from the cockpit for it to reduce below 2.5nm. If it reduces to less than 2nm as happens occasionaly (not always our own fault!) we get suspended and go through the no tea and biscuits routine
If I end up with two aeroplanes with less than the standard space between them (not half a mile - or 20% less) I'm going to be asked to explain...and pretty promptly! I guess separation means different things to different units.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 796
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Spitoon,
2nm is where the separation monitoring function will trigger, if it triggers a fair way out on final approach then something has obviously gone fairly awry and needs to be investigated. If it's less than 2.5nm but more than 2nm then I guess it's up to the individual controller to report themselves because it won't be picked up automatically.
Otherwise, it is accepted that closer to the airfield as traffic starts to reduce to final approach speed the separation behind will reduce below 2.5nm.
That is why there are strict weather criteria for using the procedure such that at the point it normally reduces below 2.5nm the a/c will be visible to and talking to the tower controller and reduced separation in the vicinity of an aerodrome applies.
2nm is where the separation monitoring function will trigger, if it triggers a fair way out on final approach then something has obviously gone fairly awry and needs to be investigated. If it's less than 2.5nm but more than 2nm then I guess it's up to the individual controller to report themselves because it won't be picked up automatically.
Otherwise, it is accepted that closer to the airfield as traffic starts to reduce to final approach speed the separation behind will reduce below 2.5nm.
That is why there are strict weather criteria for using the procedure such that at the point it normally reduces below 2.5nm the a/c will be visible to and talking to the tower controller and reduced separation in the vicinity of an aerodrome applies.
Last edited by Roffa; 10th Jun 2007 at 19:29.
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: UK
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In my company (UK charter & schedule, Airbus & Boeing) we are required to be 160kt max at 4nm, and are advised that we need to reduce at 8 nm to achieve it. It's increasingly common at LGW in particular to be asked for 180 to 4 - but company SOPs require us to refuse it.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 104
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This morning at Hounslow Municipal, it was more like 2.4nm!!
I felt like a cat slipping down formica, with the following cat's nose up my arse.
Two go arounds in half an hour too.
What a day
I felt like a cat slipping down formica, with the following cat's nose up my arse.
Two go arounds in half an hour too.
What a day
Speaking as a gatwick radar controller, I've never heard of anyone being asked for 180kts to 4.
I'd say over 30% of aircraft inbound to gatwick reduce speed below 160kts outside 4dme. The worst offenders in my experience are BA 735s, A330s and Easyjet A319s. I wonder if there's been a change in Easyjet SOPs or an increase in training as Easyjet used to be a lot better?
I'd be happy to let every aircraft reduce below 160kts at 7dme but the increased spacing requirement would lead to unacceptable delays. (unacceptable to the airlines!)
I'd say over 30% of aircraft inbound to gatwick reduce speed below 160kts outside 4dme. The worst offenders in my experience are BA 735s, A330s and Easyjet A319s. I wonder if there's been a change in Easyjet SOPs or an increase in training as Easyjet used to be a lot better?
I'd be happy to let every aircraft reduce below 160kts at 7dme but the increased spacing requirement would lead to unacceptable delays. (unacceptable to the airlines!)
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: UK
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The problem with the 330 is that it's a 230t glider - wind the speed back and power goes to idle (it was almost there anyway) and speed bleeds off very, very slowly. Without a headwind nothing discernible happens to IAS - hence the temptation to increase drag and reduce speed earlier.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: uk
Posts: 474
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the Airbus alot of the speed reduction occurs when in the managed speed mode, rather than using manual interjection as you start droping the gear and flaps. The system brings you right back on speed using mini g/s.