Shamrock A330 and New York tracon run-in
Ok.
The wrap;
Two professionals were working with the best of intentions under challenging and dynamic circumstances.
One professional, in his frustration, deviated from managing the situation to highlight how the situation had come about( “you got yourself into this” ). This foray increased the tension and stress of both parties without operational benefit.
Both parties continued to actively manage the situation to a successful conclusion, at that point the other party deviated from strictly operational transmissions to voice his frustration/ displeasure, also to no operational benefit.
Nobody was hurt.
The end.
The wrap;
Two professionals were working with the best of intentions under challenging and dynamic circumstances.
One professional, in his frustration, deviated from managing the situation to highlight how the situation had come about( “you got yourself into this” ). This foray increased the tension and stress of both parties without operational benefit.
Both parties continued to actively manage the situation to a successful conclusion, at that point the other party deviated from strictly operational transmissions to voice his frustration/ displeasure, also to no operational benefit.
Nobody was hurt.
The end.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: transient
Age: 76
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If we all agree that an error happened in managing traffic and providing service to a customer ( aircraft ) is it possible we might want to delve into nature of this error?
Is it possible to suggest that nature of this error is a planning error rather than an error made by frontline soldiers?
Is it possible to suggest that nature of this error is a planning error rather than an error made by frontline soldiers?
If we all agree that an error happened in managing traffic and providing service to a customer ( aircraft ) is it possible we might want to delve into nature of this error?
Is it possible to suggest that nature of this error is a planning error rather than an error made by frontline soldiers?
Is it possible to suggest that nature of this error is a planning error rather than an error made by frontline soldiers?
If we all agree that an error happened in managing traffic and providing service to a customer ( aircraft ) is it possible we might want to delve into nature of this error?
Is it possible to suggest that nature of this error is a planning error rather than an error made by frontline soldiers?
Is it possible to suggest that nature of this error is a planning error rather than an error made by frontline soldiers?
Join Date: May 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wonder how much fuel that used?
i guess it's down to the different ATC systems in the US and Europe. In Europe the traffic heading up to MERIT or wherever would just be put under vectors 5nm left/right of the other departing traffic, without the need the need for the "in trail" spacing they use in the US through the entry/exit points. It does seem much more "procedural" in the US.
i guess it's down to the different ATC systems in the US and Europe. In Europe the traffic heading up to MERIT or wherever would just be put under vectors 5nm left/right of the other departing traffic, without the need the need for the "in trail" spacing they use in the US through the entry/exit points. It does seem much more "procedural" in the US.
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I always thought the whole point of our miles in trail spacing was because the next sector has to merge several flows. How is he going to do that if there's a constant stream of 5NM spacing?
Pegase Driver
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 73
Posts: 3,669
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
:Wrap up ?yes time to do so. everything has been said already. we are now debating if mine is bigger than yours, and whether ATC is an advisory service 
. Not really worthwhile anymore while there were were great opportunity to learn from each other frustrations and stress in this discussion.. Traffic is raising fast every year while infrastructure is the same and available airspace is sometimes even shrinking. People are working to the limits and stress and fatigue are both becoming an issue. Both in cockpits and in the OPS rooms on the ground.
Remember the main aim of ATC is to keep you 5 NM and 1000 feet to other aircraft and keep you clear of other people airspace. The rest is extra . In time of stress the extras might not always be there .You'll get more of those in the future .
. Not really worthwhile anymore while there were were great opportunity to learn from each other frustrations and stress in this discussion.. Traffic is raising fast every year while infrastructure is the same and available airspace is sometimes even shrinking. People are working to the limits and stress and fatigue are both becoming an issue. Both in cockpits and in the OPS rooms on the ground.Remember the main aim of ATC is to keep you 5 NM and 1000 feet to other aircraft and keep you clear of other people airspace. The rest is extra . In time of stress the extras might not always be there .You'll get more of those in the future .
Prior success is not a perfect predictor of future success; we end up with a positive bias that things are not that bad given the previous outcomes, and so risk rises over time. Overall, I cannot fault a Captain for rejecting a clearance where his judgement on the spot is the final legal authority. The controller, dealing with the issue also seemed to manage the disruption in a reasonable way from his perspective, however the questioning of the Captains judgement tends to look bad in the subsequent enquiry when the wheels thereafter happen to come off the wagon. NY particularly JFK's airspace is a mess, and the controllers are dealing with lousy layouts and options, which the radar guided holds suggest was constrained by the available controller options.
Overall, the guys seemed to keep their cool and the end comments were professional, it was appropriate for the captain to make comment, and it is also appropriate for the controller to explain the issues related to the airspace that he has to work within.
Years ago, a foreign wide body going into a notoriously irritating airport was given the weather which was favoring the long runway, and asked for the long runway, even though flow control was using a shorter runway with gusty xwinds, and being wet. The controller went to great pains to talk the visiting widebody to accept an at best marginal runway, when a very good option was obvious. After 5 minutes of haggling, the controller got his wish, and the visiting aircraft relented and accepted the lousy option. I piped up and commented that it would look pretty stupid in an enquiry if that plane ended up with dirt onits treads from some event on that runway, having been hounded to making a decision that the captain and crew were obviously not happy with. About 5 seconds later, the controller changed the runway for the arriving aircraft and they landed on the best choice runway.
We are a system; the controllers and the flight crew are in the majority professional at their duties and will bend over backwards to do things efficiently and safely, not in that order. Sometimes, the wood gets lost in the trees, and it is worthwhile appreciating the other components that are needed to make the system work.
In the end, the PIC has the legal final responsibility in respect to the disposition of his/her aircraft, and thats unlikely to change anytime soon.
Given how bad the design of JFK is, and the amount of lousy weather, it is a wonder that so few issues arise to the point of commentary.
Overall, the guys seemed to keep their cool and the end comments were professional, it was appropriate for the captain to make comment, and it is also appropriate for the controller to explain the issues related to the airspace that he has to work within.
Years ago, a foreign wide body going into a notoriously irritating airport was given the weather which was favoring the long runway, and asked for the long runway, even though flow control was using a shorter runway with gusty xwinds, and being wet. The controller went to great pains to talk the visiting widebody to accept an at best marginal runway, when a very good option was obvious. After 5 minutes of haggling, the controller got his wish, and the visiting aircraft relented and accepted the lousy option. I piped up and commented that it would look pretty stupid in an enquiry if that plane ended up with dirt onits treads from some event on that runway, having been hounded to making a decision that the captain and crew were obviously not happy with. About 5 seconds later, the controller changed the runway for the arriving aircraft and they landed on the best choice runway.
We are a system; the controllers and the flight crew are in the majority professional at their duties and will bend over backwards to do things efficiently and safely, not in that order. Sometimes, the wood gets lost in the trees, and it is worthwhile appreciating the other components that are needed to make the system work.
In the end, the PIC has the legal final responsibility in respect to the disposition of his/her aircraft, and thats unlikely to change anytime soon.
Given how bad the design of JFK is, and the amount of lousy weather, it is a wonder that so few issues arise to the point of commentary.
