BAW and NY approach at it
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Uk
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I’ve flown that approach a lot,and it’s a bit frustrating to be at the edge of what it can do all the time.
I don’t think Nigel helped as he went in aggressive from the off. I’d just say “ unable, 180 to 8/ 160 to 4 is the best “.
i went to Florida a while back and they wanted 190/5. Id love to know what aircraft/ airlines can do that and be stable at 1000’ or do other airlines use lower stabilisation points ?
I don’t think Nigel helped as he went in aggressive from the off. I’d just say “ unable, 180 to 8/ 160 to 4 is the best “.
i went to Florida a while back and they wanted 190/5. Id love to know what aircraft/ airlines can do that and be stable at 1000’ or do other airlines use lower stabilisation points ?
Only half a speed-brake
The response on the tape is plain wrong, but that is a case closed. Why did the controller ask for something unthinkable needs a bit of investigating.
Falling back on the CRM class: Ask not what you hear nor what they are saying, ask what their thinking is.... an honest question: If the NY ATC demands a speed until "5", do they mean the 5DME reading (offset towards the runway by 1,2NM which would be massively important with my type) or 5 NM distance from the threshold?
I can see either being a possible mindset. Which one is it?
Check Airman If instructed to keep 180 until 3.8 to THR, what would be the best response from your pilot group - I gather you're reasonably local?
Falling back on the CRM class: Ask not what you hear nor what they are saying, ask what their thinking is.... an honest question: If the NY ATC demands a speed until "5", do they mean the 5DME reading (offset towards the runway by 1,2NM which would be massively important with my type) or 5 NM distance from the threshold?
I can see either being a possible mindset. Which one is it?
Check Airman If instructed to keep 180 until 3.8 to THR, what would be the best response from your pilot group - I gather you're reasonably local?
Last edited by FlightDetent; 4th Oct 2019 at 19:36.
What's important is that he took the time on the frequency to announce that he was flying a 747, that his company has criteria that must be maintained, and that he didn't believe the controller breaking him off was "an FAA-approved procedure". Riveting and powerful stuff that we couldn't have enjoyed had he just replied "Unable".
Perhaps some BA fleet management need to visit New York and have a chat with the controllers regarding their company criteria and landing a large widebody on a short runway. . It does however seem completely unreasonable for the controller to ask for 180 to
5 and those who comply must have very lax stable criteria.
5 and those who comply must have very lax stable criteria.
Perhaps some BA fleet management need to visit New York and have a chat with the controllers regarding their company criteria and landing a large widebody on a short runway. . It does however seem completely unreasonable for the controller to ask for 180 to
5 and those who comply must have very lax stable criteria.
5 and those who comply must have very lax stable criteria.
Got it.
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 929
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Me retired for a few years now. But when I was flying I found it amusing in that sop stabilisation of 1000’ was thrown out the window and the last resort 500’ used as the norm. Even 160 to 4 on an A330 didn’t always work but was accepted. Why oh why don’t the airlines who want stabilised approaches (most) lobby the control centres instead of waiting in the wings with a big stick to beat the crews with.
Only half a speed-brake
Just to add in perspective. BA pilots are flying to EASA regs, as well as the other industrial pressures. Whilst raising everyone’s blood pressure and cluttering up the airwaves I can understand why the ba’s response was tetchy. Not condoning it. But I can understand it. And as stated New York is a breed apart. If you’re not a regular it can catch you out. You have to be forceful in what you can and cannot accept.
The suggestion was for a meeting between pilots and controllers. It is a very popular concept this side of the ocean.
You follow your employers rules so who gives a square root about other operators.A professional controller should know what a widebody is capable of and the gates operators have to operate to. The rest of the world certainly seem capable of managing it but a lot of US controllers think talking fast equates to skill and thus they are often very mediocre at controlling.
The suggestion was for a meeting between pilots and controllers. It is a very popular concept this side of the ocean.
The suggestion was for a meeting between pilots and controllers. It is a very popular concept this side of the ocean.
BA needs to shut up. Let the PIC or their management speak with them after the fact on the phone.
Tactically speaking: “unable, can maintain X till Y” is all that needs to be said.
Tactically speaking: “unable, can maintain X till Y” is all that needs to be said.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Castletown
Posts: 241
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ATC discretion (I do believe) is to cancel the approach clearance. Interesting reading the AIM and ATC manual.
I don’t think Nigel helped as he went in aggressive from the off. I’d just say “ unable, 180 to 8/ 160 to 4 is the best “.
You follow your employers rules so who gives a square root about other operators.A professional controller should know what a widebody is capable of and the gates operators have to operate to. The rest of the world certainly seem capable of managing it but a lot of US controllers think talking fast equates to skill and thus they are often very mediocre at controlling.
The suggestion was for a meeting between pilots and controllers. It is a very popular concept this side of the ocean.
The suggestion was for a meeting between pilots and controllers. It is a very popular concept this side of the ocean.
JFK/NY TRACON: Been routinely handling 747s for 50 years this coming January. Departure point of first commercial 747 flight ever (Pan Am).
US Controllers being mediocre due to fast-talking and don't even know it, rest of the world is so much better at efficiently moving airborne metal: An amusing assessment for anyone who's operated in and out most of the rest of the world.
Fast-talking NY controllers: Bring your "A" game. Try to keep up. If asked a question by ATC, try just answering it before transmitting a dissertation that doesn't.
BA pilot in love with the sound of his own "radio voice" chewing-up the freq, gonna 'splain to the American ATC girl about her own FAA-approved procedures: Not entirely unpredictable, yet still comedy gold.
Last edited by PukinDog; 5th Oct 2019 at 03:02.
JFK/NY TRACON: Been routinely handling 747s for 50 years this coming January. Departure point of first commercial 747 flight ever (Pan Am).
Fast-talking NY controllers: Bring your "A" game. Try to keep up.
Agreed that BA should’ve spared them the lecture, but I can kind of sympathise.
Probably ought to know better than to demand 180 kts down to 1200’ then, don’t you think?
What’s the ultimate aim here? Is it for pilots to prove themselves worthy by rising to the special challenge posed by NY controllers? Or for ATC to facilitate the safe and efficient arrival of aircraft? Because if it’s the latter, I’m not sure that high-speed, often non-standard transmissions (with a bit of attitude thrown in for good measure) really help.
Agreed that BA should’ve spared them the lecture, but I can kind of sympathise.
If the aim is the efficient and safe movement of aircraft, then answering a simple question by ATC when asked instead of immediately being triggered into Pompous Mode and avoiding it would serve as a start.
Last edited by PukinDog; 5th Oct 2019 at 04:21.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 2,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The response on the tape is plain wrong, but that is a case closed. Why did the controller ask for something unthinkable needs a bit of investigating.
Falling back on the CRM class: Ask not what you hear nor what they are saying, ask what their thinking is.... an honest question: If the NY ATC demands a speed until "5", do they mean the 5DME reading (offset towards the runway by 1,2NM which would be massively important with my type) or 5 NM distance from the threshold?
I can see either being a possible mindset. Which one is it?
Check Airman If instructed to keep 180 until 3.8 to THR, what would be the best response from your pilot group - I gather you're reasonably local?
Falling back on the CRM class: Ask not what you hear nor what they are saying, ask what their thinking is.... an honest question: If the NY ATC demands a speed until "5", do they mean the 5DME reading (offset towards the runway by 1,2NM which would be massively important with my type) or 5 NM distance from the threshold?
I can see either being a possible mindset. Which one is it?
Check Airman If instructed to keep 180 until 3.8 to THR, what would be the best response from your pilot group - I gather you're reasonably local?
My first question would have been “5 DME or 5 miles?”. If she really wanted 5 DME, my next transmission would’ve been, “unable, can we do 170 to 5 DME?”
If I had an approach speed that was unusually slow, I’d be sure to let approach know on initial contact, so they can plan.
I’ve never flown in Europe, but here, you’re best advised to use that secondary flight plan or RTE 2 for another runway.