R/T status in KL FIR
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Dubayy
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello Gentlemen,
No longer fly much in the region but do visit from time to time.
Mr. Veloo - with regard the level bust by the MH airplane, I guess the RT reception which is poor has something to do with it. Also worth investigating if the pilots had their headsets on or were they listening out on speakers.
For ATC - maybe an added phrase at the end/beginning of the clearance if the airwaves were not too congested - which I guess it was in this case:
"Malaysian xxx -traffic for your descent is a Cathay xxx maintaining FL380 -10nm at your 11 o'clock - descend initially FL390"
or
"Malaysian xxx - due traffic descend initially FL390"
May clue the guys in/raise their situational awareness. Hopefully the guys were looking at their TCAS display as well and keeping a good listening watch being aware of the surrounding traffic.
Always easier said from the backseat.
No longer fly much in the region but do visit from time to time.
Mr. Veloo - with regard the level bust by the MH airplane, I guess the RT reception which is poor has something to do with it. Also worth investigating if the pilots had their headsets on or were they listening out on speakers.
For ATC - maybe an added phrase at the end/beginning of the clearance if the airwaves were not too congested - which I guess it was in this case:
"Malaysian xxx -traffic for your descent is a Cathay xxx maintaining FL380 -10nm at your 11 o'clock - descend initially FL390"
or
"Malaysian xxx - due traffic descend initially FL390"
May clue the guys in/raise their situational awareness. Hopefully the guys were looking at their TCAS display as well and keeping a good listening watch being aware of the surrounding traffic.
Always easier said from the backseat.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: malaysia
Posts: 404
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Level Bust and Traffic Info
Hello Marcellus W. Tq much 4 your input.
132.6 is a sector whereby transmissions are made more than the other 3 sectors. This sector also encompasses a very short airway of aprox 120nm from PK/Padli//taxul. Controllers have to vector and give the STARs etc within a short period of time. Not only does he/she has to talk to those around the three positions mentioned but also to traffic at VKB and IGARI(This position is outside radar coverage). Not forgetting those tfc that is on climb from SIN towards VKB. These days we also have to monitor the traffic inbound to SIN from the North inorder to ensure they cross PK at FL330, a requirement by SIN ATCC. With this in mind, The ATCers at 132.6 always tend to speak fast to get the message across. These days pilots too do not listen out b4 pressing their mikes. Hence a garbled message down at the ATCC leading to time being lost in repetitions. Pilots are also waiting to get their descent clearance quickly. With so much of transmissions(some can be long..MHxxx identified cleared to Kidot3A arr runway 14L Pibos A trans). This is all ok with the local pilots. Someone from the US comes along and clearance has to be repeated. So it is with pilots from mainland China and Phillipines etc. So we have to go slow here.This is the reason why the 132.6 Controllers shy away from giving long transmissions UNLESS if it is an absolute necessity.
Back to your advice..I totally agree and accept it. However..I have this thing in my mind. These two particular traffic has been flying along the same route for quite awhile. They have both on their TCAS. I am also sure the distances are also available to each other. Hence the absence of traffic info.
ATC will have no knowledge of the reception status inside the cockpit unless told so. What bothers me is whether the TCAS alerts the aircraft that is going through the level of the other, in this case the MH acft. Yes we surely have learnt something from this incident, an incident that could have been prevented in the first place if only either one of the parties were alert.Unlike pilots, ATCers in KUL are not exposed to studies in CRM and Human Factors in Aviation Incident and Accidents.The only knowledge one gets is thru aviation magazines and other related articles which is read by the interested ATCer.No organised seminars or workshops for the guys in the Subang ATCC. Maybe the Airlines in this region can organise one or at least invite ATCers to one. I'll be more than willing to assist anyone in this matter.
132.6 is a sector whereby transmissions are made more than the other 3 sectors. This sector also encompasses a very short airway of aprox 120nm from PK/Padli//taxul. Controllers have to vector and give the STARs etc within a short period of time. Not only does he/she has to talk to those around the three positions mentioned but also to traffic at VKB and IGARI(This position is outside radar coverage). Not forgetting those tfc that is on climb from SIN towards VKB. These days we also have to monitor the traffic inbound to SIN from the North inorder to ensure they cross PK at FL330, a requirement by SIN ATCC. With this in mind, The ATCers at 132.6 always tend to speak fast to get the message across. These days pilots too do not listen out b4 pressing their mikes. Hence a garbled message down at the ATCC leading to time being lost in repetitions. Pilots are also waiting to get their descent clearance quickly. With so much of transmissions(some can be long..MHxxx identified cleared to Kidot3A arr runway 14L Pibos A trans). This is all ok with the local pilots. Someone from the US comes along and clearance has to be repeated. So it is with pilots from mainland China and Phillipines etc. So we have to go slow here.This is the reason why the 132.6 Controllers shy away from giving long transmissions UNLESS if it is an absolute necessity.
Back to your advice..I totally agree and accept it. However..I have this thing in my mind. These two particular traffic has been flying along the same route for quite awhile. They have both on their TCAS. I am also sure the distances are also available to each other. Hence the absence of traffic info.
ATC will have no knowledge of the reception status inside the cockpit unless told so. What bothers me is whether the TCAS alerts the aircraft that is going through the level of the other, in this case the MH acft. Yes we surely have learnt something from this incident, an incident that could have been prevented in the first place if only either one of the parties were alert.Unlike pilots, ATCers in KUL are not exposed to studies in CRM and Human Factors in Aviation Incident and Accidents.The only knowledge one gets is thru aviation magazines and other related articles which is read by the interested ATCer.No organised seminars or workshops for the guys in the Subang ATCC. Maybe the Airlines in this region can organise one or at least invite ATCers to one. I'll be more than willing to assist anyone in this matter.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Kuala Lumpur
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Level Bust
Hello,
There is a common misconception that all TCAS system is the same. On some aircrafts, traffic information is not depicted in the display. On some others, in case of RA, the climb or descent maneuvre is carried out based only on information given in the VSI. All these are perfectly legal and the equipment is certified for use..
From the grapevine, the incident was between a A330 and the B777. If anyone is willing to verify this, the B777 actually made an evasive maneuvre by changing their heading to keep away from the traffic that was descending from the back. So, because of that, there could have been a possibility that RA was not triggered in both aircraft. If the other aircraft is not equipped with TCAS equipment that shows traffic info in their display, they wouldn't have known where the traffic is under this circumstances.
Off course finger pointing is the easiest way out. Otherwise, we should ask these few questions before we actually point to anyone for blame:
1) Why did both pilots in the aircraft that busted the level understood the clearance wrongly?
2) Why was this mistake not spotted by the ATC?
3) Why did the B777 pilot not question the readback if he knows there could be a potential conflict?
Off course under this circumstance, we would surmise that everyone would have behaved responsibly and professionally. No one would have wanted to knowingly break the rule. However, the fact remains; Even with the best of equipments, experience and professionalism, an accident could have happened on that fated day...
It would seem, without blaming anyone, with the problems we are having on 132.6, if nothing is done to solve this issue, there is bound to be another incident in the near future. If nothing is done even after that, we are staring at an accident waiting to happen. Maybe we should look at what are the 'low hanging fruits' that could easily be plucked to solve this issue. If a statistical study is done as to what are the mistakes made on 132.6 on a daily basis, we can easily identify the problems associated with this issue and what are the majority of the problems...
Off course someone need to do the statistical study first la...
Regards..
There is a common misconception that all TCAS system is the same. On some aircrafts, traffic information is not depicted in the display. On some others, in case of RA, the climb or descent maneuvre is carried out based only on information given in the VSI. All these are perfectly legal and the equipment is certified for use..
From the grapevine, the incident was between a A330 and the B777. If anyone is willing to verify this, the B777 actually made an evasive maneuvre by changing their heading to keep away from the traffic that was descending from the back. So, because of that, there could have been a possibility that RA was not triggered in both aircraft. If the other aircraft is not equipped with TCAS equipment that shows traffic info in their display, they wouldn't have known where the traffic is under this circumstances.
Off course finger pointing is the easiest way out. Otherwise, we should ask these few questions before we actually point to anyone for blame:
1) Why did both pilots in the aircraft that busted the level understood the clearance wrongly?
2) Why was this mistake not spotted by the ATC?
3) Why did the B777 pilot not question the readback if he knows there could be a potential conflict?
Off course under this circumstance, we would surmise that everyone would have behaved responsibly and professionally. No one would have wanted to knowingly break the rule. However, the fact remains; Even with the best of equipments, experience and professionalism, an accident could have happened on that fated day...
It would seem, without blaming anyone, with the problems we are having on 132.6, if nothing is done to solve this issue, there is bound to be another incident in the near future. If nothing is done even after that, we are staring at an accident waiting to happen. Maybe we should look at what are the 'low hanging fruits' that could easily be plucked to solve this issue. If a statistical study is done as to what are the mistakes made on 132.6 on a daily basis, we can easily identify the problems associated with this issue and what are the majority of the problems...
Off course someone need to do the statistical study first la...
Regards..
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: malaysia
Posts: 404
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Level Bust
Tq CI54..I , like most other ATCers in Subang are under the impression that all modern jets' TCAS gives both TA and RA. This info now gives me a better insight into TCAS operating methods. U have raised good points. There already exists a Safety Management System in DCA which undertakes to look into all this incidents. The only problem is that it takes about two months to complete an inquiry out of which recommendations follow. By this time more incidents take place. Perhaps we at the Subang ATCC need to seriously look into the low hanging fruits that need to be plucked soon. Even this morning I had to request the help of another MH to relay an instruction to a C130 at ADNUT cruising at FL260. Have to further discuss this matter with SMS guys.Thanks once again...oh yeah finger pointing is defintely out of the question.
Weather observation
Would someone from the inside enlightern me this:
When the ATIS of an airport say 'distant rain', what sort of distance are we talking about? Many times such observation is actually some 30 to 40nm from the airport which doesn't affect the flight in at all.Isn't terminal wather observation limited to 10nm which fits the defination of 'vicinity' of the airfield?
FL
When the ATIS of an airport say 'distant rain', what sort of distance are we talking about? Many times such observation is actually some 30 to 40nm from the airport which doesn't affect the flight in at all.Isn't terminal wather observation limited to 10nm which fits the defination of 'vicinity' of the airfield?
FL
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Dubayy
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
VC - In the vicinity - within 8 km but not at the aerodrome.
Most modern jets - certainly the 2 that were involved would display the TA and RA plus other traffic and also traffic between +/- 2700 feet and +/-9900 feet of the airplane - if the "ABOVE/BELOW" switch is installed - otherwise it will still display +/- 2700 feet for most basic displays.
Most if not all will have a TA ONLY or TA/RA switch as well. When in TA ONLY - then other airplanes will maneuver as the TCAS is clever enough to send a signal to the other airplane that it is in "passive mode". Generally practised when an airplane suffers and engine failure or has an abnormal which affects performance e.g. gear down.
Have not flown non-glass types but am guessing TCAS on non-glass types have separate display much like a weather radar for the traffic information and a "VSI" like type of display for the maneuvers with red/green bands. On the EFIS equipped airplanes obviously these displays are integrated.
I agree totally that the quality of the RT on 132.60 is much to be desired. Plus the numerous airways that criss-cross make it a hazardous sector.
"1000 feet ROC/ROD" as recommended by Eurocontrol is definitely worth practising 1000 feet before any assigned level off. Especially so because ACASII software will command maneuvers which require the minimum change in vertical profile in encounters. i.e. Climbing airplane will be given climb,crossing climb, descending aircraft will be given descend,crossing descend RA's in co-ordination.
Not teaching anyone how to "suck eggs".
Mainly for Mr. Veloo's benefit and that of his colleagues. I believe a seminar on TCAS/ACASII was organised some years back where one of the MH FM's gave a briefing to ATC. If you could get hold of the training material for the ATC's benefit it would be good.
Why ATC did not do anything in this case? By the time the controller picks up the level bust - it may be a little too late especially if the airplane was kept high and was in a hurry to get down. Mainly to do with the refresh rate that ATC radar picks up Mode C is much slower than TCAS. That's why ATC should not transmit when airplane are in a TCAS maneuver - let the TCAS do it's job.
Sorry I digress - but the TCAS is certainly not the solution - better radio's are needed.
1) Why did both pilots in the aircraft that busted the level understood the clearance wrongly?
You have to ask the pilots in question - mindset maybe?
2) Why was this mistake not spotted by the ATC?
Explained above
3) Why did the B777 pilot not question the readback if he knows there could be a potential conflict?
Frequency could have been busy/congested/
Why no RA? Maybe because the airplanes were not within the calculated envelope of "Closest Point of Approach". Differing speeds and diverging as speculated. They would not have collided but as far as the law goes - there was a separation breakdown.
Most modern jets - certainly the 2 that were involved would display the TA and RA plus other traffic and also traffic between +/- 2700 feet and +/-9900 feet of the airplane - if the "ABOVE/BELOW" switch is installed - otherwise it will still display +/- 2700 feet for most basic displays.
Most if not all will have a TA ONLY or TA/RA switch as well. When in TA ONLY - then other airplanes will maneuver as the TCAS is clever enough to send a signal to the other airplane that it is in "passive mode". Generally practised when an airplane suffers and engine failure or has an abnormal which affects performance e.g. gear down.
Have not flown non-glass types but am guessing TCAS on non-glass types have separate display much like a weather radar for the traffic information and a "VSI" like type of display for the maneuvers with red/green bands. On the EFIS equipped airplanes obviously these displays are integrated.
I agree totally that the quality of the RT on 132.60 is much to be desired. Plus the numerous airways that criss-cross make it a hazardous sector.
"1000 feet ROC/ROD" as recommended by Eurocontrol is definitely worth practising 1000 feet before any assigned level off. Especially so because ACASII software will command maneuvers which require the minimum change in vertical profile in encounters. i.e. Climbing airplane will be given climb,crossing climb, descending aircraft will be given descend,crossing descend RA's in co-ordination.
Not teaching anyone how to "suck eggs".
Mainly for Mr. Veloo's benefit and that of his colleagues. I believe a seminar on TCAS/ACASII was organised some years back where one of the MH FM's gave a briefing to ATC. If you could get hold of the training material for the ATC's benefit it would be good.
Why ATC did not do anything in this case? By the time the controller picks up the level bust - it may be a little too late especially if the airplane was kept high and was in a hurry to get down. Mainly to do with the refresh rate that ATC radar picks up Mode C is much slower than TCAS. That's why ATC should not transmit when airplane are in a TCAS maneuver - let the TCAS do it's job.
Sorry I digress - but the TCAS is certainly not the solution - better radio's are needed.
1) Why did both pilots in the aircraft that busted the level understood the clearance wrongly?
You have to ask the pilots in question - mindset maybe?
2) Why was this mistake not spotted by the ATC?
Explained above
3) Why did the B777 pilot not question the readback if he knows there could be a potential conflict?
Frequency could have been busy/congested/
Why no RA? Maybe because the airplanes were not within the calculated envelope of "Closest Point of Approach". Differing speeds and diverging as speculated. They would not have collided but as far as the law goes - there was a separation breakdown.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LCCT
Veloo,
I was reading through this thread for the first time last week and noted your query on whether there was a task group formed, or any studies being done on the effects of the LCCT.
I can tell you that for the past year MAHB have been conducting several detailed simulation studies on the LCCT, associated taxiways, mixed mode operations, new terminals and increased traffic schedules. They have also been studying the impact of future traffic growth on the terminals and other infrastructure.
There have been a couple of DCA ATC (KLIA) representatives involved in these studies and I am sure you can get the details of the studies from them. They have had some great input into the studies.
Hope this helps.
Dave The Snail
I was reading through this thread for the first time last week and noted your query on whether there was a task group formed, or any studies being done on the effects of the LCCT.
I can tell you that for the past year MAHB have been conducting several detailed simulation studies on the LCCT, associated taxiways, mixed mode operations, new terminals and increased traffic schedules. They have also been studying the impact of future traffic growth on the terminals and other infrastructure.
There have been a couple of DCA ATC (KLIA) representatives involved in these studies and I am sure you can get the details of the studies from them. They have had some great input into the studies.
Hope this helps.
Dave The Snail
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: malaysia
Posts: 404
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Controller Reply
Hi FL..The info that goes into the ATIS totally depends on the kind of data we receive from the MET Services Dept. Therefore Distant Rain is given to the TWR without the distance given but only the direction and we have to tx accordingly. What can be helpful is an additional info called Tower Observation, which the Controllers rarely tx. I don't work at KLIA Twr, but when I am in Subang Tower, I make sure that sigmets n tower observations are included.The KLIA Metar is tx every half hour whereas at SZB it is every hourly. We cannot alter the info given by the MET Dept.
Let me talk to the KLIA guys n c what we can come up with.
Hi Marcellus W. tks 4 the info. Certainly u are not teaching us to suck eggs. We are learning every bit. All these threads are printed out n passed to the various sector/Approach Controllers to gather knowledge.I sincerely believe that we can learn much from each other. Why didn't the ATCer spot the level bust? While discussing this issue during the last night shift, an interesting point was raised. A very senior ATCer, who has been on many incident investigation board meetings, explained that ATCers think in 'packets'. In other words, he/she had already decided on a particular decision before the pilot would ask. However for reasons best known only to the ATCer at that moment, something else was uttered, still believing in his/her mind that that was the decision he/she had made earlier. All these is happening while he/she is still thinking and talking to a few other acft in his/her sector. At least this was what he has observed during his many sittings in investigations. I am not trying to cover up the error here but I have personally talked to ATCers who were involved in incidents where there were separation b/downs and they too revealed this startling point.I wonder why does the human mind decides on something and says something else.Marcellus.. at the end of the day...it is the responsibility of the ATCer to provide a safe and efficient system of Air Trafic Control.Period.
Let me talk to the KLIA guys n c what we can come up with.
Hi Marcellus W. tks 4 the info. Certainly u are not teaching us to suck eggs. We are learning every bit. All these threads are printed out n passed to the various sector/Approach Controllers to gather knowledge.I sincerely believe that we can learn much from each other. Why didn't the ATCer spot the level bust? While discussing this issue during the last night shift, an interesting point was raised. A very senior ATCer, who has been on many incident investigation board meetings, explained that ATCers think in 'packets'. In other words, he/she had already decided on a particular decision before the pilot would ask. However for reasons best known only to the ATCer at that moment, something else was uttered, still believing in his/her mind that that was the decision he/she had made earlier. All these is happening while he/she is still thinking and talking to a few other acft in his/her sector. At least this was what he has observed during his many sittings in investigations. I am not trying to cover up the error here but I have personally talked to ATCers who were involved in incidents where there were separation b/downs and they too revealed this startling point.I wonder why does the human mind decides on something and says something else.Marcellus.. at the end of the day...it is the responsibility of the ATCer to provide a safe and efficient system of Air Trafic Control.Period.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: malaysia
Posts: 404
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Task Force Meetings
Hi Dave the Snail...great to hear from u. That question regarding a task force being formed was actually directed to MAS not anyone else. If u observe it is the MH guys who has been very pro active with ATC in PPRUNE. There may be one or two others but the MH guys have been very forthcoming in trying to solve issues for the betterment in the ATC enviroment. At least this is what my colleagues and I have gathered. They even went as far as to meet us for a teh-tarik session. This proves their sincererity in working with ATC. Good to hear that u have an on-going task force working towards in providing the many services that u have highlighted. Maybe u can highlight all interested parties of the developments with regards to the plans regarding mixed mode operations and rwy upgrading in anticipation of the A380 into KLIA.Pilots need such info fast. Definitely there is going to be delays in departures and arrivals with single rwy ops. How is MAB's anticipation towards all this? What are your plans to increase rwy capacity?
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Kuala Lumpur
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
VKL U/S
VKL has been U/S for a few days and is not expected to be available for some time. According to our procedures drawn up by consultants, SIDs can still be issued to RNAV capable aircraft. However we have received queries on Clearance Delivery from foreign carriers about the "flyability" of the SIDs with VKL out. To avoid a hole in the Swiss Cheese becoming a potential "threat", we have stopped issuing SIDs on Clearance Delivery. It is replaced by RADAR DEPARTURE. The radar heading shall then be issued by Lumpur Tower together with take-off instructions.
I'd like to hear from pilots on
- how do you know when to execute the turn if the DME is out?;
- how do you track on the outbound radial when the VOR is out?;
- are they based on guess work or are you using other sensors like GPS etc?
We have checked with our Flight Ops and were told it can be done. We hope to find out more before allowing SIDs to be issued.
So guys, your views please.
I'd like to hear from pilots on
- how do you know when to execute the turn if the DME is out?;
- how do you track on the outbound radial when the VOR is out?;
- are they based on guess work or are you using other sensors like GPS etc?
We have checked with our Flight Ops and were told it can be done. We hope to find out more before allowing SIDs to be issued.
So guys, your views please.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Uptown
Posts: 217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Depending on individual company policy, most airlines will continue to adopt SID as published, in line with the clearance given as long as they have GPS on primary mode, accuracy of their navs eqpt are high and the intended route is programed in FMS/FMGS. Not really a problem for modern day jetliners. Ground beacons are mainly used to crosscheck the computer onboard. However, this procedure may not be suitable with "classic" type of aircraft. In fact, some latest aircraft are not fitted with ADF at all. Does that mean non ADF equipped aircraft will not be able to depart from eg. Beijing rwy 18R? (RENOB departure - mainly use NDB for initial outbound tracking). This may not be the case.
Therefore, with or without VOR/DME/NDB, one can still fly normal SID as long as the aircraft is fully equipped with other 'serviceable' sensors and individual company policy allows that to be flown.
Hong Kong TMA is an example where RNAV departure is fully adopted although they still have procedures for non RNAV equipped aircraft.
I guess, Lumpur Delivery is doing a good job for giving radar departure instead of normal SID to all aircraft to cater for all generation jetliners and different SOPs adopted by different airlines when VKL is U/S.
I personally tend to like Hong Kong ATCers, they are very positive and flow controls are very smooth considering such a small airspace with more than 1000 (one thousand) dep and arr daily that they have to handle, excludes arr and dep MFM and SZX. May be KL ATCers could learn something from them. Just a thought ....
Therefore, with or without VOR/DME/NDB, one can still fly normal SID as long as the aircraft is fully equipped with other 'serviceable' sensors and individual company policy allows that to be flown.
Hong Kong TMA is an example where RNAV departure is fully adopted although they still have procedures for non RNAV equipped aircraft.
I guess, Lumpur Delivery is doing a good job for giving radar departure instead of normal SID to all aircraft to cater for all generation jetliners and different SOPs adopted by different airlines when VKL is U/S.
I personally tend to like Hong Kong ATCers, they are very positive and flow controls are very smooth considering such a small airspace with more than 1000 (one thousand) dep and arr daily that they have to handle, excludes arr and dep MFM and SZX. May be KL ATCers could learn something from them. Just a thought ....
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: malaysia
Posts: 404
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
VKL U/S
Hi Virtual Reality..chew has taken note of your reply. Many tks. Further inputs on this topic is welcome. News is that VKL will be u/s for awhile as no spare parts are available yet. Apparantly the VOR was hit by lightning. So there u are my friends, it is going to be Radar Departures for awhile. The toll is on the Approach Controllers as they have to scroll every dep to see the SID. U may experience the wrong turns(not always) b4 they bcome experts at scrolling the screens. What do u mean by the Hong Kong ATCers are +ve and their flow control is smooth. Kindly elaborate as we would like to know their style. One thing is for sure, their work culture is high above ours. That's a fact.
Last edited by veloo maniam; 11th May 2006 at 04:42.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Kuala Lumpur
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by veloo maniam
Hi Virtual Reality..chew has taken note of your reply. Many tks. Further inputs on this topic is welcome. News is that VKL will be u/s for awhile as no spare parts are available yet. Apparantly the VOR was hit by lightning. So there u are my friends, it is going to be Lumpur Radar Departures for awhile. The toll is on the Approach Controllers as they have to scroll every dep to see the SID. U may experience the wrong turns(not always) b4 they bcome experts at scrolling the screens. What do u mean by the Hong Kong ATCers are +ve and their flow control is smooth. Kindly elaborate as we would like to know their style. One thing is for sure, their work culture is high above ours. That's a fact.
With regards to RNAV departures, all it requires to be legal for departure is for the aircraft to be fitted with suitable equipment. A facility is not specifically required to ensure compliance. The aircraft onboard navigation system will crosscheck the position accuracy by comparing its position relative to any available facility. To push this idea further, there are a few airports in remote areas that do not have any facility except a few RNAV charts for departure and VNAV arrival charts. In this case, what's needed is onboard navigation computer that is able to check its own accuracy.
Off course what is always needed is professionalism from all interested parties. If an aircraft is not fitted with such an equipment, the crew must file it as such in their flight plan. If an aircraft is experiencing an equipment failure on board, the crew must inform the ATC immediately and ask for radar headings. If there is a warning message in the aircraft concerning navigation accuracy, the crew must verify its position with the radar controller. In order to facilitate everyone, the first assumption must be all equipment will be working. Assistance will be given as and when needed. Having said all that, to enable an RNAV only departure, what is needed is RNAV certified departure. If the departure is not certified as RNAV departure, I must say the job of approach radar in KL is definitely going to be a lot tougher in the next few months.
With regards to Hong Kong Atc, yes I must say, it gives me great pleasure to fly into that place. The tone of their voice and phraseology gives me the impression they are professionals, trained to and using the best facilities available. Information is always forthcoming and they will try to accommodate your requests. If they are not able to acommodate, they will suggest available options. Clearances are given on time with no indication of rushing. Everything seems to be well planned...
Hope that helps a bit...
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Uptown
Posts: 217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With regards to Hong Kong Atc, yes I must say, it gives me great pleasure to fly into that place. The tone of their voice and phraseology gives me the impression they are professionals, trained to and using the best facilities available. Information is always forthcoming and they will try to accommodate your requests. If they are not able to acommodate, they will suggest available options. Clearances are given on time with no indication of rushing. Everything seems to be well planned...
Apart from what had been written by C154 WRT Hong Kong ATC, it seems that they really mean business to make HKG as the preferred 'HUB' in Asia. HKG Intl arpt is The Airport of The Year for the last 4 consecutive years, which housed the Airline of The Year and if there is any award for ATC, may be they will get it as well.
To create the smoothness of the traffic flow, they have gates cum speed limit point (SLP) called 'SIERA' for traffics from PRC airspace, 'MANGO' for traffics from W, SW and S, "MELON' for traffics from E and SE. Apart from Area Radar Contlr, they have App Contlr and Director b4 be handed over to twr contlr. Although lots of freq change during arrival, one can expect un-interrupted descent until establish on LOC, except once in a while especially when you are coming from the E and rwy 07 L/R are in used, where dep and arr traffic will be crossing each other at wpt TD or RAMEN. As far as ATCer is concerned, I never hear anyone of them 'screaming & yelling' over the radio, unlike KL FIR, it is quite common to hear pilots get scolded or being told off when they make mistakes or even late in answering the radio call. I would say they are more professional in that sense although they have to face more challenges especially dealing with airlines from mainland China (hundreds of them everyday & their English ......??? eemmmm .... )
ATIS - I can get as far as 250-300 nm away or simply get it from D-ATIS.
METAR - Hundreds of miles away from 'HKG' NDB, apart from HF.
Overall, I think HKG and SIN ATC are the best in this region as far as ATC controllers are concerned. If I were to compare other services, I will be embarrassed myself. I am not trying to offend anyone but would prefer to give my sincere opinion and observation so that everyone can learn and improve.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: malaysia
Posts: 404
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ATC Professionalism in KUL
Tq 4 speaking your heart out. It all boils down to a concerted effort from top down. As long as it is not there, I doubt u will ever see HKG or SIN standards that most pilots speak about. It is not only in this forum, I do get calls from off-duty pilots regarding the kind of services rendered. However, there are still some good and mild mannered ATCers that I personally sat down and worked with in Subang. These are the remnants(though few and dwindling in numbers) who keep the flags flying. I am not putting my colleagues down for I know that there are other factors beyond our control that irritates us, like poor tx from us. Obviously the pilot didnt hear us at all. We didnt know about it. After three tx the pilot says 'cfm calling XXX?' . With 10-15 tfc in one's sector, that's the last thing an ATCer wants to hear from a pilot when timing is crucial (we have to meet Flow Control's requirements).Hence the rise in his/her BP and the beginning of scoldings as u have mentioned. The problem is we are still doing Air Traffic Control whereas we should be doing Air Traffic Management. The Air Traffic Control "culture" is still the norm in KUL.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Home
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Veloo,
I think there is not much to be sorry about when it comes to atc KUL.
HKG and SIN do have the best equiptment around, and I have on numerous occasions heard HKG ATC lose their cool as well, and come up with some goof ups. SIN atc have their bad hair days as well. We pilots have our share of screwups as well.
This is my take on the ATC situation.
You guys need to be provided with the latest tools and the politicians need to get out of the whole bloody picture. PERIOD! ( excuse the anger). I see whats happening. Shots are being called by the wrong people. And the able people who make it somewhat halfway up the stairs, have got to tow the line, otherwise the litttle good they can do, will not happen because they will be sacked for speaking the right things. Everybody wants to have their cut.
The most disgraceful department in malaysia is not the dca its the aca.
When the most logical solutions are staring you at the face and we have more than enough money to implement it, but actually go ahead and do something else, in the interest of ........whatever....."nation building" if you like........then......then..... then....( its got something to do with the way you voted the last time).The issue about equiptment that came up some time ago and the lame excuse given by the minister is so symtomatic of this disease.
This is not a problem with ATC alone. It is a cancer that is eating up the whole nation. Its gonna crumble real soon.
Really Veloo and guys in KUL atcers. Some of you guys are the best I have seen anywhere in the world, and I have been around a bit.
The problem is that its you guys who should be given the free hand with the task of ensuring that this excellence is not going to go away with mandatory retirement.
If I was the boss. I would say.
"Veloo......pick your team. do whatever it takes. I want KUL ATC to be the best. Forget about past contracts, we will hire some lawyers and accountants to solve those problems. No middle men will be getting any contracts. You decide what you need and want.Just do it"
Let me tell you!
You guys will be the best in the world.
I think there is not much to be sorry about when it comes to atc KUL.
HKG and SIN do have the best equiptment around, and I have on numerous occasions heard HKG ATC lose their cool as well, and come up with some goof ups. SIN atc have their bad hair days as well. We pilots have our share of screwups as well.
This is my take on the ATC situation.
You guys need to be provided with the latest tools and the politicians need to get out of the whole bloody picture. PERIOD! ( excuse the anger). I see whats happening. Shots are being called by the wrong people. And the able people who make it somewhat halfway up the stairs, have got to tow the line, otherwise the litttle good they can do, will not happen because they will be sacked for speaking the right things. Everybody wants to have their cut.
The most disgraceful department in malaysia is not the dca its the aca.
When the most logical solutions are staring you at the face and we have more than enough money to implement it, but actually go ahead and do something else, in the interest of ........whatever....."nation building" if you like........then......then..... then....( its got something to do with the way you voted the last time).The issue about equiptment that came up some time ago and the lame excuse given by the minister is so symtomatic of this disease.
This is not a problem with ATC alone. It is a cancer that is eating up the whole nation. Its gonna crumble real soon.
Really Veloo and guys in KUL atcers. Some of you guys are the best I have seen anywhere in the world, and I have been around a bit.
The problem is that its you guys who should be given the free hand with the task of ensuring that this excellence is not going to go away with mandatory retirement.
If I was the boss. I would say.
"Veloo......pick your team. do whatever it takes. I want KUL ATC to be the best. Forget about past contracts, we will hire some lawyers and accountants to solve those problems. No middle men will be getting any contracts. You decide what you need and want.Just do it"
Let me tell you!
You guys will be the best in the world.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: malaysia
Posts: 404
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Better ATC Services
Hi Brianigham....your 1st line explains everything.A week ago the radar tecnician told me that 6 new radar monitors are ready to be fixed. I said "wow...that's news". and he said..don't get too excited, they are going to Kinabalu first.Why? the monitors over there are in a worse situation than Subang.Bulk of the traffic is controlled from Subang ATCC. If I were the decision maker, Subang will be the priority.Period.Observe what Virtual Reality said about HKG's ATIS and METAR transmissions. The DCA pays the vendors tons of RM and in return pilots still have to go thru SIN ATC to ask for RWY in use at KUL. And what was his position? a mere 150nm from VKL. One ATCer summed it up very well when he said " with the present scenario, I think we are already providing the best ATC service in KUL". Of course..I beg to differ bcos for me AVERAGE IS NOT AN OPTION. Being a mediocre leads u nowhere. People who live defensively never rise above being average. Brian..I think most ATCers have come to the point of "kais pagi makan pagi, kais petang makan petang". These days most ATCers just go to work and give their best to cross the bridge, whatever the bridge is. As for me and the remnants, we still can afford to smile bcos we have the PASSION for the job. AMEN and PRAISE THE LORD!
One ATCer summed it up very well when he said " with the present scenario, I think we are already providing the best ATC service in KUL". Of course..I beg to differ bcos for me AVERAGE IS NOT AN OPTION. Being a mediocre leads u nowhere. People who live defensively never rise above being average. Brian..I think most ATCers have come to the point of "kais pagi makan pagi, kais petang makan petang". These days most ATCers just go to work and give their best to cross the bridge, whatever the bridge is. As for me and the remnants, we still can afford to smile bcos we have the PASSION for the job. AMEN and PRAISE THE LORD!
Join Date: May 2005
Location: PKR Party
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Brianigham,
you are spot on! You pointed out the root of the problem and what this country is lacking- Integrity & Honesty
Uncle Veloo,
KUL ATCers will be among the best, the best is yet to come. Keep it up!
you are spot on! You pointed out the root of the problem and what this country is lacking- Integrity & Honesty
Uncle Veloo,
KUL ATCers will be among the best, the best is yet to come. Keep it up!
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: thunderStormPeninsula
Age: 52
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
velloooo......
absolutely agree.....can never accept being ok only. even being best is not enough......it's all about being BETTER...........
enough of "boleh lah...."
absolutely agree.....can never accept being ok only. even being best is not enough......it's all about being BETTER...........
enough of "boleh lah...."
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: malaysia
Posts: 404
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rwy upgrading for A380
Still no concrete outcome despite latest meeting on 18/5/06. Talk is that despite the availability of aprox 2500m, delays are still going to be anticipated somewhere in the region of about 15mins to get to the 2nd runway( this is due to the number of equipment that will be placed for the upgrading work). At the end of the day, looks like it doesn,t pay to go for the limited distance. However we still have to wait and see what the final arrangement is going to be. KLIA Ground has to devise a surface movement flow control system if delays are to be reduced. They must work with all the airlines to ensure up-to-date info is available by the minute so that pilots themselve can determine whether to push back or not.Those guys behind the mike in the Tower has to go all out to achieve this knowing the kind of problems contractors can pose. After all they are contractors and not air traffic managers. It's all in the hands of the ground ATCers. Any better ideas?