speed control on final
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
<<Thirdly, for DIRECTOR and 120.4, please could you pass the word that, no matter how frustrated you are, there is no point in saying "one at a time please" when two people transmit - if we both start at the same time, then we have no way of telling that anybody else is transmitting.>>
Apologies on behalf of my colleagues. I'm afraid we're not taught too much about communications other than to use standard phraseology hence you'll also get controllers saying something like "someone has an open mic; please everyone check your transmitters" when the chances of the bloke with the open mic hearing that is pretty well nil.... isn't it?
L337 said: "Eeeer this is a wind up? Yes? Or do you wish to open another thread entitled, "Pilots have it easy, ATC guys work for a living" We can deal with your point in that thread"
Nah, me old mate.. no need for another thread. After 36 years in this game I KNOW who's busiest! Tee Hee!
Apologies on behalf of my colleagues. I'm afraid we're not taught too much about communications other than to use standard phraseology hence you'll also get controllers saying something like "someone has an open mic; please everyone check your transmitters" when the chances of the bloke with the open mic hearing that is pretty well nil.... isn't it?
L337 said: "Eeeer this is a wind up? Yes? Or do you wish to open another thread entitled, "Pilots have it easy, ATC guys work for a living" We can deal with your point in that thread"
Nah, me old mate.. no need for another thread. After 36 years in this game I KNOW who's busiest! Tee Hee!
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Hartlepool
Age: 79
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have to say that the control of traffic into LHR is about as good as it gets. I can certainly live with 160 to 4 and still get stable by the required point.
It's when we go into ORD where the fun really starts; 3 runway changes when within 15 n.m of the airfield and being instructed to keep "180 to the marker" is the norm - I just dream about being able to get back into LHR where even when things are starting to hit the fan, the controllers always manage to remain cool, calm and collected - at least that's the impression they manage to convey!
My remarks are not in anyway meant to imply disrespect to the ORD controllers, given the traffic levels into that place, it amazes me that they manage to remain sane! The stress that those guys experience in a single shift must be unbelievable.
It's when we go into ORD where the fun really starts; 3 runway changes when within 15 n.m of the airfield and being instructed to keep "180 to the marker" is the norm - I just dream about being able to get back into LHR where even when things are starting to hit the fan, the controllers always manage to remain cool, calm and collected - at least that's the impression they manage to convey!
My remarks are not in anyway meant to imply disrespect to the ORD controllers, given the traffic levels into that place, it amazes me that they manage to remain sane! The stress that those guys experience in a single shift must be unbelievable.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: uk
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the old speed chestnut
one thing i have learnt is that i am almost certainly in the wrong when i ask for certain speeds from you guys!!!
whoever it was - yes you are quite right we in atc are only down here 'cos you lot are up there - but we are there for everybody's "needs" and not just the odd few
me - i use 180 to a closing heading then 160 to 4 - this means i can meet the criteria set to try to keep most happy!
and i believe these speeds are in the air pilot along the lines of 180 between 12-8d and 160 8-4d
if i can i leave speed to your discretion - sometimes can't though
but i have used the "report when ready to reduce speed" so i can sort the traffic out behind and only rarely do i get this so now i impose speed contol
as previously stated - if you can't or don't want to fly at the speeds requested - tell us and we'll accomodate you - after all that's why we're here
and come round for visits - not just a quick looksee but a listen in if you can spare the time most of us are quite happy for that and explain why we do things the way we do!
have been on fam flights and asked if there are any issues the crew want to talk about and usually get the " no no questions - everythings fine !" - stop being polite!!!
prof
one thing i have learnt is that i am almost certainly in the wrong when i ask for certain speeds from you guys!!!
whoever it was - yes you are quite right we in atc are only down here 'cos you lot are up there - but we are there for everybody's "needs" and not just the odd few
me - i use 180 to a closing heading then 160 to 4 - this means i can meet the criteria set to try to keep most happy!
and i believe these speeds are in the air pilot along the lines of 180 between 12-8d and 160 8-4d
if i can i leave speed to your discretion - sometimes can't though
but i have used the "report when ready to reduce speed" so i can sort the traffic out behind and only rarely do i get this so now i impose speed contol
as previously stated - if you can't or don't want to fly at the speeds requested - tell us and we'll accomodate you - after all that's why we're here
and come round for visits - not just a quick looksee but a listen in if you can spare the time most of us are quite happy for that and explain why we do things the way we do!
have been on fam flights and asked if there are any issues the crew want to talk about and usually get the " no no questions - everythings fine !" - stop being polite!!!
prof
the lunatic fringe
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Everywhere
Age: 67
Posts: 618
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know its off topic, so I am looking out for the thread police, but, where does "Heathrow Director" live. I know I should know, but where... Below the tower I have always assumed, in a dark box, or some such place...
/me coughs and gets coat.
L337
/me coughs and gets coat.
L337
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: LONDON
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
L337
In a big bright room in the old West Drayton centre. In the same room are: Gatwick approach, Stansted Approach, Luton Approach and shortly to be London city/ Biggin approach. In addition to these are the London TMA controllers. Square, high definition colour displays.
Point 4
In a big bright room in the old West Drayton centre. In the same room are: Gatwick approach, Stansted Approach, Luton Approach and shortly to be London city/ Biggin approach. In addition to these are the London TMA controllers. Square, high definition colour displays.
Point 4
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
120.4
Re your comment about spacing and 757s... Not surprised you worked that out a long time ago!
Re. what we can actually achieve / want seemingly inconsistent. Its very type dependant, even between different engine marks on the same airframe (E4 engines on a 757 used to run down occasionally with Engine Anti Ice on - Mr Rolls' answer was to turn the "idle screw" up. Engines no longer flame out, but aeroplane refuses to slow down). Also OAT & wind dependent, and weight of course (light = takes longer to slow down AND you have to slow down more).
I'm RHS, and the LHS attitude can make a difference too(!). Our rules actually say "SHOULD be all in Final App config / Pwr etc." at 1000', but "MUST be by 500'". So if I miss the 1000' by a bit, so what - its what I aim for. Unfortunately, and as is their right, some LHS are unhappy at not being 100% setup at 1000'.
Aircraft you see going much faster - QAR missing / broken / Mgmt don't care? I'm sure you can tell us better tales than we know about some approaches into LHR... A certain Spanish airline springs to mind...?!
NoD
Re your comment about spacing and 757s... Not surprised you worked that out a long time ago!
Re. what we can actually achieve / want seemingly inconsistent. Its very type dependant, even between different engine marks on the same airframe (E4 engines on a 757 used to run down occasionally with Engine Anti Ice on - Mr Rolls' answer was to turn the "idle screw" up. Engines no longer flame out, but aeroplane refuses to slow down). Also OAT & wind dependent, and weight of course (light = takes longer to slow down AND you have to slow down more).
I'm RHS, and the LHS attitude can make a difference too(!). Our rules actually say "SHOULD be all in Final App config / Pwr etc." at 1000', but "MUST be by 500'". So if I miss the 1000' by a bit, so what - its what I aim for. Unfortunately, and as is their right, some LHS are unhappy at not being 100% setup at 1000'.
Aircraft you see going much faster - QAR missing / broken / Mgmt don't care? I'm sure you can tell us better tales than we know about some approaches into LHR... A certain Spanish airline springs to mind...?!
NoD
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Newcastle, UK
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mister Geezer,
Interesting what you say about having to maintain the last speed given until 4d if we are not told otherwise. Where is this written? I have never heard of it before (I'm not saying it isn't true but just that it's news to me). I can say this though - if I am given a speed of say 180, I will not be maintaining that to 4d ever, because the captain beside me will have either a) told me to slow down, or b) taken control.
Lazlo
Interesting what you say about having to maintain the last speed given until 4d if we are not told otherwise. Where is this written? I have never heard of it before (I'm not saying it isn't true but just that it's news to me). I can say this though - if I am given a speed of say 180, I will not be maintaining that to 4d ever, because the captain beside me will have either a) told me to slow down, or b) taken control.
Lazlo
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You all may like to revisit ATC thread where this was discussed at length and it also came up in another thread on RP on approach sequencing into LGW which I cannot locate at the moment.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Svarte granskauen
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flanker
The problem with flying with F5 @ 160 KTS on an NG is that you then have roughly 1 NM to extend gear, call for F15 and then F30/40 plus read the landing check (we do it after GD F15) in order to be stabilized by 1000' (our SOP too) A bit tight in my opinon.
Vertigo
Is the problem that pilots are slowing down below 160 way before 4 NM (ie 7-8 miles). Is it a problem for you if we start extending gear and configuring further around 5 miles or just below that (4.5-4.7) That one mile helps quite a bit in order for us to be stab by 1000'.
The problem with flying with F5 @ 160 KTS on an NG is that you then have roughly 1 NM to extend gear, call for F15 and then F30/40 plus read the landing check (we do it after GD F15) in order to be stabilized by 1000' (our SOP too) A bit tight in my opinon.
Vertigo
Is the problem that pilots are slowing down below 160 way before 4 NM (ie 7-8 miles). Is it a problem for you if we start extending gear and configuring further around 5 miles or just below that (4.5-4.7) That one mile helps quite a bit in order for us to be stab by 1000'.
Well apart from all the fine examples, I do believe that if you are "Cleared approach" by ATC, that clearenace cancels all speed restrictions etc. That's it.
If ATC wants to have a say, they are required to say that in the clearence given ie. "Airline xx 123, Cleared ILS 12, maintain 160 to 4" or whatever.
A simple "Cleared app." instruction cancels all said before.
If ATC wants to have a say, they are required to say that in the clearence given ie. "Airline xx 123, Cleared ILS 12, maintain 160 to 4" or whatever.
A simple "Cleared app." instruction cancels all said before.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: LONDON
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OY
In the London area we tend not to say "cleared pproach" because it has implications as far a descent is concerned. We would more usually say descend on the glide path and I always then add maintain 180kts or 160kts to 4D as I require. I would suggest that most other ATCOs would be the same.
Dick
Yes, I think the problem tends to be people slowing up before 4D, presumably in order to stablise. If you slow earlier the gaps will shrink outside 4 D which is the point at which we are no longer responsible for vortex. We would therefore have to increase the spacing.
Also, as has been said the problem these days is the different requirements of the various types. If ATC have to allow for each of the types then the final director's brain will soon overload. B757, B737 and B773 already desire significantly different appraoch speeds to work at their optmum. We have had some KLM B739s say they can do 160to 4D but want to increase inside! It is something that perhaps would be best left to a computer talking to the FMS systems and then giving us the "slow down" at the appropriate moment to get the optimum gap/ speed profile.
Point 4
In the London area we tend not to say "cleared pproach" because it has implications as far a descent is concerned. We would more usually say descend on the glide path and I always then add maintain 180kts or 160kts to 4D as I require. I would suggest that most other ATCOs would be the same.
Dick
Yes, I think the problem tends to be people slowing up before 4D, presumably in order to stablise. If you slow earlier the gaps will shrink outside 4 D which is the point at which we are no longer responsible for vortex. We would therefore have to increase the spacing.
Also, as has been said the problem these days is the different requirements of the various types. If ATC have to allow for each of the types then the final director's brain will soon overload. B757, B737 and B773 already desire significantly different appraoch speeds to work at their optmum. We have had some KLM B739s say they can do 160to 4D but want to increase inside! It is something that perhaps would be best left to a computer talking to the FMS systems and then giving us the "slow down" at the appropriate moment to get the optimum gap/ speed profile.
Point 4
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My mum once said to me: "Son, you'll learn something new every day". She sure was right.... Yesterday afternoon in quite strong wind conditions we had a go-around at Heathrow ("short-haul" flight). The pilot asked for an expeditious approach duel to fuel shortage and although he never mentioned "emergency" we got him back in fairly quickly. He later telephoned and told us an astounding thing - apparently when we issue speed instructions, A320 and A321 crews fly them as GROUND-SPEED.
All I want to say is this: "Mum, can you hear me? You were dead right!"
It'll soon be time for me to be let out of this rubber room for an afternoon duty.............
All I want to say is this: "Mum, can you hear me? You were dead right!"
It'll soon be time for me to be let out of this rubber room for an afternoon duty.............
Ut Sementem Feeceris
Groundspeed Minimum (GS Mini)
The reference to flying approaches at a groundspeed is a function on the bus called "Groundspeed Minimum". It is designed to take advantage of the aircraft inertia in windshear or turbulent conditions.
During the approach the FMGS continuously computes the target approach speed value to keep the GROUNDSPEED at a minimum value based on the actual encountered winds and the tower given runway wind. The theory is as follows.
If you should encounter say a positive shear of 25 knots on the approach in a "conventional" aircraft the IAS would increase above target IAS and thrust would be reduced to maintain target speed. On the bus the target IAS is INCREASED as the shear hits and power is INCREASED to match the new target. If the shear then reduces (or worse reverses) the "conventional" is in a low thrust and IAS reducing scenario
. The bus is in the same reducing IAS scenario but the power is already UP.
When it is very windy this can result in the approach target speed getting quite close to full flap limiting speed - but it has to be very windy!
Of course if controller says 160 to 4d then the GS Mini can be over-ridden by just going to a selected speed of 160knots - it's not rocket science! The chances are that when you return to "managed" speed at 4d the GS Mini target speed is going to be fairly close to 160 anyway if it's that gusty.
The bus is difficult to slow down. If it's heavy then F2 + geardown will hold 160 ok, but I've started to take F3 at about - 5 miles recently and F Full at 4 by the latest to give it chance to be on target, thrust up by 1000agl. Company minimum is 500agl VMC but that's a limit NOT a target!
A4
The reference to flying approaches at a groundspeed is a function on the bus called "Groundspeed Minimum". It is designed to take advantage of the aircraft inertia in windshear or turbulent conditions.
During the approach the FMGS continuously computes the target approach speed value to keep the GROUNDSPEED at a minimum value based on the actual encountered winds and the tower given runway wind. The theory is as follows.
If you should encounter say a positive shear of 25 knots on the approach in a "conventional" aircraft the IAS would increase above target IAS and thrust would be reduced to maintain target speed. On the bus the target IAS is INCREASED as the shear hits and power is INCREASED to match the new target. If the shear then reduces (or worse reverses) the "conventional" is in a low thrust and IAS reducing scenario
. The bus is in the same reducing IAS scenario but the power is already UP.When it is very windy this can result in the approach target speed getting quite close to full flap limiting speed - but it has to be very windy!
Of course if controller says 160 to 4d then the GS Mini can be over-ridden by just going to a selected speed of 160knots - it's not rocket science! The chances are that when you return to "managed" speed at 4d the GS Mini target speed is going to be fairly close to 160 anyway if it's that gusty.
The bus is difficult to slow down. If it's heavy then F2 + geardown will hold 160 ok, but I've started to take F3 at about - 5 miles recently and F Full at 4 by the latest to give it chance to be on target, thrust up by 1000agl. Company minimum is 500agl VMC but that's a limit NOT a target!
A4
Last edited by A4; 14th Oct 2002 at 09:43.
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: BC
Posts: 450
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 777 won't "go down and slow down'. As previously mentioned here...stablized approaches are now the name of the game.
I simply won't risk having an airplane out of profile by being at 160 Kts to 4 miles. Compound this with a few airports allowing tailwind landings due to noise abatement procedures and the problems are compounded. A mile and a half from the fix...the speed is being dialed back for landing flap.
I simply won't risk having an airplane out of profile by being at 160 Kts to 4 miles. Compound this with a few airports allowing tailwind landings due to noise abatement procedures and the problems are compounded. A mile and a half from the fix...the speed is being dialed back for landing flap.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 1,294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CaptAirprox.
going back to a point you made a few days ago. This relates to an adage used among some of the old school of ATCO's that never use speed control when vectors will do.
It of course simply doesn't work in a busy traffic environment, but at quieter airfields many controllers don't have to sequence and have never learnt anything else.
Fam Flights and Crew visits of course would help many of these problems to be sorted.
going back to a point you made a few days ago. This relates to an adage used among some of the old school of ATCO's that never use speed control when vectors will do.
It of course simply doesn't work in a busy traffic environment, but at quieter airfields many controllers don't have to sequence and have never learnt anything else.
Fam Flights and Crew visits of course would help many of these problems to be sorted.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
777AV8R said: "I simply won't risk having an airplane out of profile by being at 160 Kts to 4 miles. "
I fully appreciate and accept what you say, as long as you tell ATC in good time. I'm not going to risk my licence on someone who won't follow standard procedures which have been agreed with the airlines and I've broken off plenty of guys who wouldn't slow down and will continue to do so. If the speeds are wrong the matter should surely be brought to the attention of Fleet Managers., etc?
Incidentally, for those who think Airbuses are difficult to slow down... this afternoon a straight in A320 on 27R off LAM was given no speed control. At 10DME he was doing 280kts GS and at 4nm he was doing 200kts GS.. and he landed safely!
I fully appreciate and accept what you say, as long as you tell ATC in good time. I'm not going to risk my licence on someone who won't follow standard procedures which have been agreed with the airlines and I've broken off plenty of guys who wouldn't slow down and will continue to do so. If the speeds are wrong the matter should surely be brought to the attention of Fleet Managers., etc?
Incidentally, for those who think Airbuses are difficult to slow down... this afternoon a straight in A320 on 27R off LAM was given no speed control. At 10DME he was doing 280kts GS and at 4nm he was doing 200kts GS.. and he landed safely!
Ut Sementem Feeceris
HEATHROW DIRECTOR said:
"Incidentally, for those who think Airbuses are difficult to slow down... this afternoon a straight in A320 on 27R off LAM was given no speed control. At 10DME he was doing 280kts GS and at 4nm he was doing 200kts GS.. and he landed safely!"
Was it safe? If your groundspeed at 4D is 200 knots then the chances are your IAS is in excess of 200 knots. That means Flap 1 only (200 limit for F2). So at the very least you got 3 more flap extensions and possibly (usually ) the gear as well. At 200 knots your doing approx 3 and a bit miles per minute (ok your going to be decelerating - just). If you wish to be stable by 500agl MINIMUM (1.5 miles from threshold) by my calculations you've got 2.5 miles or about 45 seconds to reduce from 200 knots to about 140ish, get fully configured, get the thrust up and complete the landing checks........
A bit of an academic analysis I know, but IMHO that is not the way to operate a modern medium jet (or small or heavy for that matter).
It's obvious that some people have not learned the dangers of unstable approaches. The Gulf Air A320 accident in Bahrain started as a result of simply being too damned fast! Two go arounds, the second of which killed all on board
I'd be interested to know what the companys flight safety department would have to say. I can only assume they don't have QAR's or SESMA (?). At least it will be mandatory for all in a couple of years, then some may adjust their behaviour accordingly if they don't want tea and biccies with the CP.
Ask yourself, would you want your family on board an aircraft being operated in such a manner.
A4
"Incidentally, for those who think Airbuses are difficult to slow down... this afternoon a straight in A320 on 27R off LAM was given no speed control. At 10DME he was doing 280kts GS and at 4nm he was doing 200kts GS.. and he landed safely!"
Was it safe? If your groundspeed at 4D is 200 knots then the chances are your IAS is in excess of 200 knots. That means Flap 1 only (200 limit for F2). So at the very least you got 3 more flap extensions and possibly (usually
) the gear as well. At 200 knots your doing approx 3 and a bit miles per minute (ok your going to be decelerating - just). If you wish to be stable by 500agl MINIMUM (1.5 miles from threshold) by my calculations you've got 2.5 miles or about 45 seconds to reduce from 200 knots to about 140ish, get fully configured, get the thrust up and complete the landing checks........A bit of an academic analysis I know, but IMHO that is not the way to operate a modern medium jet (or small or heavy for that matter).
It's obvious that some people have not learned the dangers of unstable approaches. The Gulf Air A320 accident in Bahrain started as a result of simply being too damned fast! Two go arounds, the second of which killed all on board
I'd be interested to know what the companys flight safety department would have to say. I can only assume they don't have QAR's or SESMA (?). At least it will be mandatory for all in a couple of years, then some may adjust their behaviour accordingly if they don't want tea and biccies with the CP.
Ask yourself, would you want your family on board an aircraft being operated in such a manner.
A4