BAW and NY approach at it
Only half a speed-brake
As much as I love the shoulder rub from Essex RAD and Heathrow DCT, movements (arrivals, departures and transits) over airspace volume is a valid metric.
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Uk
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Who cares which is busier, that’s not my....problem.
what I do care about is standard RT at a pace I can understand , and a controller that has a basic grasp of aerodynamics, gravity and stabilised criteria
what I do care about is standard RT at a pace I can understand , and a controller that has a basic grasp of aerodynamics, gravity and stabilised criteria
It's also the proximity of the three airports in NY. To put the airport alignments in perspective image LHR being EWR, LGA being in Regents Park with 3/4 of the traffic that LHR has, and JFK being at the Royal Observatory in Greenwich.
LGW is 25 nm from LHR. In 20 nm NYC has EWR, JFK, LGA and TEB. So in the space that LHR has 475,000 movements NYC has 1, 485,000.
LGW is 25 nm from LHR. In 20 nm NYC has EWR, JFK, LGA and TEB. So in the space that LHR has 475,000 movements NYC has 1, 485,000.
The closest proximity between any of the 4 busiest London airports is between the 2 least busy, STN - LTN, at 22 nm, which are farther away from each other than the greatest distance between any pair of NY's 4. LGA alone handles significantly more traffic (372,000) than STN and LTN do put together (324,000)
To compare, NY's 2 least busy airports of the 4 are LGA and TEB, sited 11 nm apart, and together have 547,000 movements, 72,000 more than LHR itself.
LGA's most distant neighbor is EWR, still just 14 nm away, and together those 2 handle 825,000 movements. LGA's closest neighbor is JFK, only 9 nm away, and together they are moving 828,000.
JFK - LGA is 9 nm, JFK - EWR is 18 nm, JFK - TEB is 20 nm (the greatest distance between any 2). If one sat at a central point amongst them on the East River between Midtown Manhattan and Queens, JFK, EWR, LGA, and TEB are all happening within a distance of 5 LHR runway lengths.
Yet somehow and despite the close proximity (9 - 20 nm) to one another as compared to say, London, the "horribly inept" NY TRACON controllers manage to use the airspace around them to move almost 1.456 million flights a year in and out of these 4 airports (to say nothing of handling the additional 500,000 IFR and VFR flights taking-off/landing/going elsewhere). Perhaps if they re-built the 4 main NY airports spread out to double the distances between them while at the same time knocking-back the traffic to less than 1.085 million a year everyone could lollygag a bit, feelings would never be hurt, and simple questions answered when asked.
Last edited by PukinDog; 7th Oct 2019 at 05:26.
What's most amusing about this non-event is the way 1 particular BA pilot's feathers getting ruffled in NY is elevated to Big Deal status and used as catalyst to vent every moan or gripe about US Controllers, the US ATC system in general, and even CBP officers as it pertains to "mindset" while at the same time pumping the tires of everywhere else, pretending that's where perfection exists and all conditions are equal, believing nobody knows any better.
Myself, I've been criss-crossing the globe my entire career, been based outside the U.S. for the last 20 in Europe, Middle East, and Asia operating in and out the long-haul hubs plus many more large and small, and find the idea everything is so wonderful out there in the world but the U.S. falls flat by comparison incredibly funny. London controllers are good, but let's not pretend NY can be worked in exactly the same manner, or that imperfections and things not happening exactly the way we'd like them to don't exist in even the long-haul destinations like Beijing, Dubai, Hong Kong, Paris, etc etc., let alone the rest.
There are few places one doesn't have to adapt to local procedures, imperfect/weird communications, and differences with ICAO. Anyone who's ever been spanked by Oz ATC for not reporting they are "maintaining" a FL when switching to a new freq (the mere absence of a "climbing" or "descending" won't do) or not transmitting a confirmation of a Chinese controller's confirmation of radar contact can tell you that. The amount of "Charlie Charlie" heard on the HF varies depending on the continent, as does using "Romeo" or "Lima" to denote Right or Left course offsets yet nobody is using "Romeo" or "Lima" in place of "Right" and" Left" when it comes to heading vectors, taxi instructions, or runway designators.
All these these funny things and more important, procedural differences exist out there. Far worse controlling certainly does. If I got indigent or upset every time a non-US controller asked to make impossible rate descents-while-slowing or gave crap vectors to intercept something I'd have to carry around a couple steel balls to fidget with like a stressed-out Captain Queeg.
Last edited by PukinDog; 7th Oct 2019 at 06:57.
BAW- “ I cant do that ma’am, I can do 160 or greater until 5”
”I can’t do that” sounds a lot like “unable” to me when it comes to plain English.
what he said he could do came BEFORE she questioned him.
Yes I do agree that unable would have been a better choice of words, however the USofA isn’t particularly standard with the phraseology and do use a lot of plain English instead, so I’d imagine “I can’t do that” should get the point across the same.
I asked before but nobody answered, if BAW just said “unable” and nothing else, would he still have been vectored off the approach or would he have been allowed to continue? But, without a crystal ball I doubt we will know the real answer there.
JFK- “speedbird 15k heavy, 180 or greater to 5dme”
BAW- “ I cant do that ma’am, I can do 160 or greater until 5”
”I can’t do that” sounds a lot like “unable” to me when it comes to plain English.
what he said he could do came BEFORE she questioned him.
Yes I do agree that unable would have been a better choice of words, however the USofA isn’t particularly standard with the phraseology and do use a lot of plain English instead, so I’d imagine “I can’t do that” should get the point across the same.
After his statement that amounted to "unable" and what he able to do at 5.0, her question to him was simply how long he could maintain the speed assignment of 180/when he was going to slow to 160. He never answered that question. He could have answered he was able to do 180 "until 6", or "until 7", or even "for X more miles" (then begin to slow in order to be at the160@5 ), but he didn't.
All she needed was the point where he would begin to slow below 180 to 160 in order to calculate how much effect it would have on those in trail and how much adjusting might need to happen. Perhaps he didn't know where that point in space was and/or was too busy announcing he was flying a 747 and giving a lecture on company stabilized approach criteria to figure it out.
If he had responded with "unable" and nothing more she would have still asked him the same question about when/at what point he would slow from his speed assignment.
Last edited by PukinDog; 7th Oct 2019 at 08:05.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: My views - Not my employer!
Posts: 1,031
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Comparing just the 4 busiest (by aircraft movement) airports in each area last year...
New York
JFK - 456,000
EWR - 453,000
LGA - 372,000
TEB - 175,000
Total - 1,456,000
London
LHR - 475,000
LGW - 286,000
STN - 190,000
LTN - 134,000
Total - 1,085,000
Difference: 371,000, or 1,000+ per day. In other words, to reach comparable traffic numbers the London 4 would have to add 1 LaGuardia airport.
New York
JFK - 456,000
EWR - 453,000
LGA - 372,000
TEB - 175,000
Total - 1,456,000
London
LHR - 475,000
LGW - 286,000
STN - 190,000
LTN - 134,000
Total - 1,085,000
Difference: 371,000, or 1,000+ per day. In other words, to reach comparable traffic numbers the London 4 would have to add 1 LaGuardia airport.
However, the airspace volume issue is very relevant to the discussion!
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Riga
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
After his statement that amounted to "unable" and what he able to do at 5.0, her question to him was simply how long he could maintain the speed assignment of 180/when he was going to slow to 160. He never answered that question. He could have answered he was able to do 180 "until 6", or "until 7", or even "for X more miles" (then begin to slow in order to be at the160@5 ), but he didn't.
All she needed was the point where he would begin to slow below 180 to 160 in order to calculate how much effect it would have on those in trail and how much adjusting might need to happen. Perhaps he didn't know where that point in space was and/or was too busy announcing he was flying a 747 and giving a lecture on company stabilized approach criteria to figure it out.
If he had responded with "unable" and nothing more she would have still asked him the same question about when/at what point he would slow from his speed assignment.
All she needed was the point where he would begin to slow below 180 to 160 in order to calculate how much effect it would have on those in trail and how much adjusting might need to happen. Perhaps he didn't know where that point in space was and/or was too busy announcing he was flying a 747 and giving a lecture on company stabilized approach criteria to figure it out.
If he had responded with "unable" and nothing more she would have still asked him the same question about when/at what point he would slow from his speed assignment.
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Uk
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JFK- “speedbird 15k heavy, 180 or greater to 5dme”
BAW- “ I cant do that ma’am, I can do 160 or greater until 5”
”I can’t do that” sounds a lot like “unable” to me when it comes to plain English.
what he said he could do came BEFORE she questioned him.
Yes I do agree that unable would have been a better choice of words, however the USofA isn’t particularly standard with the phraseology and do use a lot of plain English instead, so I’d imagine “I can’t do that” should get the point across the same.
I asked before but nobody answered, if BAW just said “unable” and nothing else, would he still have been vectored off the approach or would he have been allowed to continue? But, without a crystal ball I doubt we will know the real answer there.
There is no element here of a rant against US ATC in general, I think the vast majority do a great job. But factor in the most dangerous part of the flight with numerous fast requests to a tired crew and nerves can fray fast.
Maybe it’s just a NYC thing, that the whole place is fairly aggressive, rude and everyone seems to be looking for a fight.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Between a rock and a hard place
Posts: 1,267
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
By asking BA to cancel the approach you don't really solve the problem, you literally add more moving pieces to your puzzle.. All she needed to do was to ask following guys to slow down..
yes, but then he goes on in a condescending diatribe about his stabilised criteria.I’ d have sent him back to ENE to start again.
There is no element here of a rant against US ATC in general, I think the vast majority do a great job. But factor in the most dangerous part of the flight with numerous fast requests to a tired crew and nerves can fray fast.
Maybe it’s just a NYC thing, that the whole place is fairly aggressive, rude and everyone seems to be looking for a fight.
Shut up and deal with it on the ground.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: LHR
Posts: 556
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shut up and deal with it on the ground.
I don't know about looking for a fight.... but I'll bet the approach brief included "They are gonna to ask us to do final speeds that we simply can't do... How are we gonna deal with that?"
- ATC should know better than to peg a heavy at 180kts so late on and they have been told enough times about the 744 SAC
- The crew did not communicate the issue at all well.
- Sending them round would have pissed any crew off
- We can all learn to communicate better
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: New York
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Follow thew River
Believe me, I have the same issues when I go to JFK. Between the accent, the non-std RT and the speed at which they speak, it’s difficult. NY is the only place I’ve been told, as an IFR aircraft to “follow the river”. Admittedly, that’s fun when you turn off the automation, look outside and fly.
LGA 22 arrivals (generally from the south) use the Hudson as downwind. The instruction is typically fly to the Verrazano bridge and follow the Hudson. with the statue of Liberty on the left (aka 'the lady') I christened the procedure "The Britch, the Bitch & the Ditch...'
Just south of the George Washington Bridge 'The GW' you'll get a vector for base.
Kennedy has te Wonderfull VOR/DME 22L (the Canarsie curve..) IIRC AN Emirates 380 grazed the employee parking lot after misunderstanding the procedure last year and LGA the Expressway Visual. Aside from Kai Tak (RIP) and the River Visual into DC; the most fun you can have at work...
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: CYUL
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
I did more than a few controller initiated Go Arounds in LGA too. At 300 AGL, they wouldn't even give the flight number, just an "A..C... GO AROUND" . Good practice for new F.O.s on the Airbus.
Kennedy has te Wonderfull VOR/DME 22L (the Canarsie curve..)
I think you're confusing LGA & JFK.
LGA 22 arrivals (generally from the south) use the Hudson as downwind. The instruction is typically fly to the Verrazano bridge and follow the Hudson. with the statue of Liberty on the left (aka 'the lady') I christened the procedure "The Britch, the Bitch & the Ditch...'
Just south of the George Washington Bridge 'The GW' you'll get a vector for base.
Kennedy has te Wonderfull VOR/DME 22L (the Canarsie curve..) IIRC AN Emirates 380 grazed the employee parking lot after misunderstanding the procedure last year and LGA the Expressway Visual. Aside from Kai Tak (RIP) and the River Visual into DC; the most fun you can have at work...
LGA 22 arrivals (generally from the south) use the Hudson as downwind. The instruction is typically fly to the Verrazano bridge and follow the Hudson. with the statue of Liberty on the left (aka 'the lady') I christened the procedure "The Britch, the Bitch & the Ditch...'
Just south of the George Washington Bridge 'The GW' you'll get a vector for base.
Kennedy has te Wonderfull VOR/DME 22L (the Canarsie curve..) IIRC AN Emirates 380 grazed the employee parking lot after misunderstanding the procedure last year and LGA the Expressway Visual. Aside from Kai Tak (RIP) and the River Visual into DC; the most fun you can have at work...
