ATC and flow management.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Brisvegas
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ATC and flow management.
Ladies and gents (ATCO's).
I would like to find out your opinion on some issues.
1. When approaching the holding point, we would appreciate a line up clearance prior to bringing the a/c to a stop. The brake energy and fuel required to get the a/c stopped and then moving again are considerable, not to mention the time wasted. We are regularly stopping short for no apparent reason then get cleared to line up/ t/o with no traffic within a considerable distance. There may be a valid reason, I would just like to know what it is.
2. Do you prefer pilot's to pass on significant weather info on departure and arrival as we experience it or do you prefer us to tell the ground freq/en-route frew when the tfaffic is not quite as dense? Some ATCO's seem a bit perplexed (by the tone in their voice) when advised on dep/arr freqs. Just an observation, not a criticism!
3. How early is too early to call ready? At SY we call the twr 124.7 for 16L and 34R well before t/o. 34R is at least 3to 4 mins before we get to the other end.
4. Do you mind us saying ready for immediate t/o when approaching the holding point as a prompt if for some reason you have been distracted etc?
5. Is there anything you guys/gals would like to see/hear from us to make the flow of information and procedures run more smoothly? I know some pilots don't do the rest of us any favours with their demeanour and snide comments from time to time. I trust that is not a common occurrence!
Your constructive comments/criticism would be greatly appreciated. Thank in advance.
I would like to find out your opinion on some issues.
1. When approaching the holding point, we would appreciate a line up clearance prior to bringing the a/c to a stop. The brake energy and fuel required to get the a/c stopped and then moving again are considerable, not to mention the time wasted. We are regularly stopping short for no apparent reason then get cleared to line up/ t/o with no traffic within a considerable distance. There may be a valid reason, I would just like to know what it is.
2. Do you prefer pilot's to pass on significant weather info on departure and arrival as we experience it or do you prefer us to tell the ground freq/en-route frew when the tfaffic is not quite as dense? Some ATCO's seem a bit perplexed (by the tone in their voice) when advised on dep/arr freqs. Just an observation, not a criticism!
3. How early is too early to call ready? At SY we call the twr 124.7 for 16L and 34R well before t/o. 34R is at least 3to 4 mins before we get to the other end.
4. Do you mind us saying ready for immediate t/o when approaching the holding point as a prompt if for some reason you have been distracted etc?
5. Is there anything you guys/gals would like to see/hear from us to make the flow of information and procedures run more smoothly? I know some pilots don't do the rest of us any favours with their demeanour and snide comments from time to time. I trust that is not a common occurrence!
Your constructive comments/criticism would be greatly appreciated. Thank in advance.
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 513
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Evening, SB
MATS (controllers' AIP) says that ATCs shall make every effort to avoid unncecessarily stopping a jet aircraft - for the reasons you state, and also to minimise the useof breakaway thrust and its attendant effect on traffic behind.
If you're moving, we should try to keep you moving.
If you're stopped, or will have to stop, we should, as much as possible, manage it so that you only have to stop once, either at the holding point or in the lined-up position.
Reasons why it may not work that way:
Traffic - if you're in a queue it's going to be start-stop until you take off.
Release - Until recently we (tower) had to verbally coordinate a release from the departures controller and that was done as you approached the holding point. If for some reason tower couldn't get the release, then you'd have to hold at the holding point. (Only an imprudent tower controller would line up an aircraft without a release from departures. I once saw someone do it with the next arrival 30 miles out. It went around.) Murphy's law states that as soon as the aircraft stops at the holding point and the park brake applied a release will be forthcoming.
In this regard you should have seen an improvement at SY in the last few months. We have implemented auto-release procedures which eliminate the verbal coordination for aircraft on standard runways and standard clearances. MATS says this should be the default procedure at radar towers, but I don't know to what extent, or with what local restrictions, it is implemented around the country.
Distractions - Control positions may be combined, increasing workload and complexity for the controller concerned. As a result traffic handling, while safe, may not be optimal until the positions are split.
At Sydney, LTOP Runway Modes - In certain crossing runway modes it is better to have an aircraft lined up and ready to go to take advantage of a tight gap than to try to do it from the holding point. That may involve going from stationary at the holding point to stationary in the lined-up position. Sorry.
Presume you're referring to weather around the airport and inside the FAF. Play it as you see it, depending on safety issues and frequency workloads. SY Ground is often too busy to take other than the briefest of reports. Probably tell the tower if you're arriving, departures if you're departing (because the change to departures freq, while a directed change, should normally be as soon as possible after airborne).
In theory it doesn't matter, in practice it's probably better done as you approach the holding point. IMO this particularly applies to your example of SY RWY 34R where you have to change to TWR 124.7 way before you get to the holding point. Reason being that if you call very early the controller is probably dealing with more immediate issues involving other aircraft and may not register or record your call and may have to confirm your status. Human factors, I guess ...
AIP says that READY means ready to roll on and go, but if you say READY IMMEDIATE when you figure you can get away in the gap you see, and if I happen to be thinking the same way, then it gives me a little confirmation. In my opinion it doesn't hurt and it may work to your advantage. (Not queue jumping! Just using the gap.) Others with a more literal interpretation of AIP may disagree ...
Thanks for asking, and only a couple of minor things from my point of view (tower). If we don't offer you a roll through, please vacate the runway as quickly as possible. I don't mean burn the brakes, just be as quick as you reasonably can and in particular, use rapid exit taxiways RAPIDLY.
If we offer a roll-through, best speed for as long as possible on the runway.
That's about it.
AA
1. When approaching the holding point, we would appreciate a line up clearance prior to bringing the a/c to a stop. ...snip ...
If you're moving, we should try to keep you moving.
If you're stopped, or will have to stop, we should, as much as possible, manage it so that you only have to stop once, either at the holding point or in the lined-up position.
Reasons why it may not work that way:
Traffic - if you're in a queue it's going to be start-stop until you take off.
Release - Until recently we (tower) had to verbally coordinate a release from the departures controller and that was done as you approached the holding point. If for some reason tower couldn't get the release, then you'd have to hold at the holding point. (Only an imprudent tower controller would line up an aircraft without a release from departures. I once saw someone do it with the next arrival 30 miles out. It went around.) Murphy's law states that as soon as the aircraft stops at the holding point and the park brake applied a release will be forthcoming.
In this regard you should have seen an improvement at SY in the last few months. We have implemented auto-release procedures which eliminate the verbal coordination for aircraft on standard runways and standard clearances. MATS says this should be the default procedure at radar towers, but I don't know to what extent, or with what local restrictions, it is implemented around the country.
Distractions - Control positions may be combined, increasing workload and complexity for the controller concerned. As a result traffic handling, while safe, may not be optimal until the positions are split.
At Sydney, LTOP Runway Modes - In certain crossing runway modes it is better to have an aircraft lined up and ready to go to take advantage of a tight gap than to try to do it from the holding point. That may involve going from stationary at the holding point to stationary in the lined-up position. Sorry.
2 Passing weather info
3. How early is too early to call ready?
4. Do you mind us saying ready for immediate t/o when approaching the holding point ...?
5. Is there anything you guys/gals would like to see/hear from us ...?
If we offer a roll-through, best speed for as long as possible on the runway.
That's about it.
AA
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Australia when not slaving
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Your wasting your time SB, that yank that after years of flying in and out of Oz on his last trip out of SYD thanked them for the wonderful service over the years as "The 2nd Best Controllers in The World" had it right.
The confused locals accepting that they were 2nd in the World asked: "who were the best in the World"
Answer "THE REST OF THE WORLD"
But then Oz ATC is constrained by ridiculous arcahic rules and regs, BUT Boys and Girls a bit of lateral thinking would go a long way and you might just squeeze into the 21st century with the rest of us.
The confused locals accepting that they were 2nd in the World asked: "who were the best in the World"
Answer "THE REST OF THE WORLD"
But then Oz ATC is constrained by ridiculous arcahic rules and regs, BUT Boys and Girls a bit of lateral thinking would go a long way and you might just squeeze into the 21st century with the rest of us.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Brisvegas
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ausatco thanks for that.
Sniffer I can understand your angst however antagonism at this point is not what I was after. I lived and worked in Europe for a good while and witnessed what I consider to be some of the best ATCO's around with some very pro-active procedural thinking.
The troops in Oz (as ausatco illuded to) are changing their ways to accomodate some new thinking in Oz. I think we should try and get a handle on what they expect and in turn inform them of what we would like to see.
A bit of open two communication is probably one good way to kick things off on the right foot.
I don't appreciate being jerked around by ATC but even more so I can't stand hearing pilots tearing them a new bottom for a transgression they are not full bottle on. It has got to go both ways.
Sniffer I can understand your angst however antagonism at this point is not what I was after. I lived and worked in Europe for a good while and witnessed what I consider to be some of the best ATCO's around with some very pro-active procedural thinking.
The troops in Oz (as ausatco illuded to) are changing their ways to accomodate some new thinking in Oz. I think we should try and get a handle on what they expect and in turn inform them of what we would like to see.
A bit of open two communication is probably one good way to kick things off on the right foot.
I don't appreciate being jerked around by ATC but even more so I can't stand hearing pilots tearing them a new bottom for a transgression they are not full bottle on. It has got to go both ways.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Australia when not slaving
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK SB point taken I wasn't meaning to offend but the question should be asked over the years how many supervisors and ATC policy makers have gone O/S on the "cocktail circuit" on a "freebee junket" to see how it IS DONE and come back and done ****** all about it.
They still have a "looooong way to go"
They still have a "looooong way to go"
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Big Southern Sky
Posts: 233
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmmmm.....
Sperm, nothing to add to AusA’s responses to those questions.
Sniff, evidently you are armed with a good knowledge of ATC, care to elaborate on your wild assertions with examples?
Sniff, evidently you are armed with a good knowledge of ATC, care to elaborate on your wild assertions with examples?
A river to my people
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: No fixed abode, No 29a
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EPIRB
As you would undoubtedly be aware, The Manual of Air Traffic Services Section regarding "Separation Using Visual Observation" states:
4.5.2.1
When weather conditions permit, the aerodrome controller may provide separation based on visual observations as coordinated with Approach provided that:
a. the tower controller is in agreement and accepts responsibility for the provision of such visual control;
b. where required, the aircraft concerned are on the aerodrome control frequency;
c. where required, specific airspace is released to the tower controller for the purpose of providing such control.
I am sure you would agree that 4.5.2.1 (b) leaves the tower controller with no option, other than to keep the departing aircraft on frequency.
For example, a tower controller may offer to separate departing traffic with airborne traffic based on the fact that the departing aircraft will track via a SID that will provide the required separation once the initial turn has commenced.
In this case the tower controller would keep the departing aircraft on his/her frequency until the the turn has been visually observed. To not keep the aircraft on frequency would be tempting fate under "Murphy's Law". Pilots have been known to not fly a SID as published for a variety of reasons ranging from misreading the plates to just plain forgetting. By keeping them on frequency the tower controller can readily and instantly issue a reminder or other instructions to those concerned
As for the frequency change occuring during a period of high cockpit workload, unfortunately despite the tower controller's extensive list of skills, they are not normally considered to be skilled mind readers or psychics, though some could pass for psychotics.
I have broached this very topic with a number of pilots over the years and have received a varied range of responses ie at one end of the scale: "Nah, never a drama, just a matter of flicking a switch, if you can't do that you shouldn't be allowed to fly" to the other end of the scale: "Oh my God, the world will come to end if we don't get 10 minutes warning to change frequencies, preferably in writing co-signed by the village priest."
One airline seemed to have a policy of adopting a posture exactly 180 degrees from that assumed by their major competitor. For example if Airline B complained that a particular procedure or requirement was causing them to drop their Tim Tams in the post departure phase, Airline A would automatically disagree, stating "We've never had a problem with that, but then you never do have a problem if you know how to fly the aircraft properly."
And vice versa, of course.
An endless source of amusement to us all.
sep
As you would undoubtedly be aware, The Manual of Air Traffic Services Section regarding "Separation Using Visual Observation" states:
4.5.2.1
When weather conditions permit, the aerodrome controller may provide separation based on visual observations as coordinated with Approach provided that:
a. the tower controller is in agreement and accepts responsibility for the provision of such visual control;
b. where required, the aircraft concerned are on the aerodrome control frequency;
c. where required, specific airspace is released to the tower controller for the purpose of providing such control.
I am sure you would agree that 4.5.2.1 (b) leaves the tower controller with no option, other than to keep the departing aircraft on frequency.
For example, a tower controller may offer to separate departing traffic with airborne traffic based on the fact that the departing aircraft will track via a SID that will provide the required separation once the initial turn has commenced.
In this case the tower controller would keep the departing aircraft on his/her frequency until the the turn has been visually observed. To not keep the aircraft on frequency would be tempting fate under "Murphy's Law". Pilots have been known to not fly a SID as published for a variety of reasons ranging from misreading the plates to just plain forgetting. By keeping them on frequency the tower controller can readily and instantly issue a reminder or other instructions to those concerned
As for the frequency change occuring during a period of high cockpit workload, unfortunately despite the tower controller's extensive list of skills, they are not normally considered to be skilled mind readers or psychics, though some could pass for psychotics.
I have broached this very topic with a number of pilots over the years and have received a varied range of responses ie at one end of the scale: "Nah, never a drama, just a matter of flicking a switch, if you can't do that you shouldn't be allowed to fly" to the other end of the scale: "Oh my God, the world will come to end if we don't get 10 minutes warning to change frequencies, preferably in writing co-signed by the village priest."
One airline seemed to have a policy of adopting a posture exactly 180 degrees from that assumed by their major competitor. For example if Airline B complained that a particular procedure or requirement was causing them to drop their Tim Tams in the post departure phase, Airline A would automatically disagree, stating "We've never had a problem with that, but then you never do have a problem if you know how to fly the aircraft properly."
And vice versa, of course.
An endless source of amusement to us all.
sep
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 513
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EPIRB,
Adding to Separator's info on freq changes after TKOF ...
It used to be an automatic change for domestic scheduled aircraft (which gave you latitude and discretion) and directed for everyone else. A few years ago MATS and AIP were changed and now it's a directed change for everyone.
Part of the reason for the change is the visual separation requirement and monitoring of compliance with the early part of the SID that Separator described. Another is that with auto-releases TWR must ensure that the airborne aircraft is squawking the correct xponder code and that the radar return is properly coupled with the TAAATS flight data record so that the departures controller has correct info before him when the aircraft calls - SAR, identification and system integrity issues. At radar towers there is an SSR supression area around the airport which kills xponder responses in order to minimise label clutter. Departing aircraft must be outside this area before they can couple. The resulting delay in coupling means that it's quite likely that by the time the TWR controller is allowed by the rules described above to transfer you, you're in that high workload after take-off situation. Most of us would like to say "Call departures airborne", but we're no longer allowed to.
The system doesn't usually NEED you to call departures as soon as TWR tells you to - there's a rubbery buffer there, so if you're busy with the aeroplane you generally have a few moments after receiving the transfer instruction to get sorted - not long, but enough to probably dilute that "one-armed paper hangar" feeling. Use your professional discretion, but I wouldn't take more than a minute.
Initial restrictions are a big factor in how urgent the freq transfer to departures is, eg the maintain 3000 for props, 5000 for jets at SY. There are probably other estrictions at other airports. If you don't get a timely transfer instruction, ask for one.
Cheers
AA
Adding to Separator's info on freq changes after TKOF ...
It used to be an automatic change for domestic scheduled aircraft (which gave you latitude and discretion) and directed for everyone else. A few years ago MATS and AIP were changed and now it's a directed change for everyone.
Part of the reason for the change is the visual separation requirement and monitoring of compliance with the early part of the SID that Separator described. Another is that with auto-releases TWR must ensure that the airborne aircraft is squawking the correct xponder code and that the radar return is properly coupled with the TAAATS flight data record so that the departures controller has correct info before him when the aircraft calls - SAR, identification and system integrity issues. At radar towers there is an SSR supression area around the airport which kills xponder responses in order to minimise label clutter. Departing aircraft must be outside this area before they can couple. The resulting delay in coupling means that it's quite likely that by the time the TWR controller is allowed by the rules described above to transfer you, you're in that high workload after take-off situation. Most of us would like to say "Call departures airborne", but we're no longer allowed to.
The system doesn't usually NEED you to call departures as soon as TWR tells you to - there's a rubbery buffer there, so if you're busy with the aeroplane you generally have a few moments after receiving the transfer instruction to get sorted - not long, but enough to probably dilute that "one-armed paper hangar" feeling. Use your professional discretion, but I wouldn't take more than a minute.
Initial restrictions are a big factor in how urgent the freq transfer to departures is, eg the maintain 3000 for props, 5000 for jets at SY. There are probably other estrictions at other airports. If you don't get a timely transfer instruction, ask for one.
Cheers
AA
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Living next door to Alan
Posts: 1,521
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agree with Ausatco.
When I'm handed off in the middle of after takeoff drills, I finish them before worrying about radio stuff. Sure R/T it has some priority, but flying the plane comes first
Bring back famil rides
When I'm handed off in the middle of after takeoff drills, I finish them before worrying about radio stuff. Sure R/T it has some priority, but flying the plane comes first
Bring back famil rides
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Infinity.... and beyond.
Posts: 354
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hugh
Could not agree with you more. ATCs are (or should be) aware of you priorities - -i.e. aviate, navigate, communicate - or as I prefer: "Do what I tell you, where I tell you and get off my frequency"
Ausatco's 'rubbery buffer' is a good rule of thumb. As he says, probably no more than a minute is a good rule of thumb, as we are supposed to initiate SAR action (i.e. start calling you) if we haven't heard from you within 3 minutes.
Famil flights (and famil visits to towers and centres) are still the way to go. Beers and war stories are not a bad educational tool either.
Sperm Bank
I aim to issue a line-up and rolling take-off wherever possible. Ausatco has given a pretty good explanation of why this is not always possible. Suffice to say that auto-release procedures should lead to improvements in this area.
As far as weather info is concerned, my rule of thumb would be to pass it to whoever you are talking to at the time (i.e. if it affects their airspace) if they don't sound too busy. The problem with passing it to en-route is that when you're out of Sydney, the en-route controller is sitting in Melbourne or Brisbane. They will, of course, pass on any critical information to Sydney, but are less inclined to do so if it is just 'nice to know' information.
On the 'ready immediate' call: I consider a 'ready' and a 'ready immediate' call to be two distinct things. If you call 'ready immediate' when approaching the holding point, it may make my job (and yours) a lot easier. Less useful is a second 'ready' call. Just one thing: please don't call 'ready immediate' and then take out a lease on the threshold.
Sniffer
Or..."but the question should be asked over the years how many people have had an unsubstantiated whinge, and when asked to back it up have done ****** all about it.
They still have a "looooong way to go"
I guess, since you haven't been able to put up, you've decided to .....
Could not agree with you more. ATCs are (or should be) aware of you priorities - -i.e. aviate, navigate, communicate - or as I prefer: "Do what I tell you, where I tell you and get off my frequency"
Ausatco's 'rubbery buffer' is a good rule of thumb. As he says, probably no more than a minute is a good rule of thumb, as we are supposed to initiate SAR action (i.e. start calling you) if we haven't heard from you within 3 minutes.
Famil flights (and famil visits to towers and centres) are still the way to go. Beers and war stories are not a bad educational tool either.
Sperm Bank
I aim to issue a line-up and rolling take-off wherever possible. Ausatco has given a pretty good explanation of why this is not always possible. Suffice to say that auto-release procedures should lead to improvements in this area.
As far as weather info is concerned, my rule of thumb would be to pass it to whoever you are talking to at the time (i.e. if it affects their airspace) if they don't sound too busy. The problem with passing it to en-route is that when you're out of Sydney, the en-route controller is sitting in Melbourne or Brisbane. They will, of course, pass on any critical information to Sydney, but are less inclined to do so if it is just 'nice to know' information.
On the 'ready immediate' call: I consider a 'ready' and a 'ready immediate' call to be two distinct things. If you call 'ready immediate' when approaching the holding point, it may make my job (and yours) a lot easier. Less useful is a second 'ready' call. Just one thing: please don't call 'ready immediate' and then take out a lease on the threshold.
Sniffer
...but the question should be asked over the years how many supervisors and ATC policy makers have gone O/S on the "cocktail circuit" on a "freebee junket" to see how it IS DONE and come back and done ****** all about it.
They still have a "looooong way to go"
They still have a "looooong way to go"
They still have a "looooong way to go"
I guess, since you haven't been able to put up, you've decided to .....
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Brisbane
Age: 69
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Famil rides
Hugh,
Famil rides are still on. Gets a little difficult with staff levels, time off and insurance/compo if done in private time. DoTARS will still allow it, however it is very hard if not impossible to get non company people up front these days.
Famil rides are still on. Gets a little difficult with staff levels, time off and insurance/compo if done in private time. DoTARS will still allow it, however it is very hard if not impossible to get non company people up front these days.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Australia when not slaving
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think I'd be wasting my time going over the problems in the Aus system foisted on you by the boffins, as I have had many a beer with a few ATC mates who say there hands are tied BY STUPID BL....DY PROCEEDURES over which they have no control.
I intend to hang up the wings this year after 30+ years in the industry and can honestly say that I do not enjoy operating into the Aus Air Traffic System as much as the media pushes the BS about how safe it is. In my humble opinion it is not.
I have had more incidents and TCAS warnings in this airspace than any other.
One of the reasons that I do not consider Australia as safe as say Honkong or Singas airspace is that the Australian system is to worried about being legally correct all the time and forgetting that there prime reason for existence is aircraft separation.
I could go on and on but as I am just back from a tour I need a decent rest.
I intend to hang up the wings this year after 30+ years in the industry and can honestly say that I do not enjoy operating into the Aus Air Traffic System as much as the media pushes the BS about how safe it is. In my humble opinion it is not.
I have had more incidents and TCAS warnings in this airspace than any other.
One of the reasons that I do not consider Australia as safe as say Honkong or Singas airspace is that the Australian system is to worried about being legally correct all the time and forgetting that there prime reason for existence is aircraft separation.
I could go on and on but as I am just back from a tour I need a decent rest.
SD,
Can you give us an example of a rule that particularly bugs you so the collective wisdom of the group may be able to shed some light on the reason(s) why which a rule exists. Also, using the same example, what avenues you have explored to have it changed.
With respect to aircraft taxying to RWY 34R I'd like the ready call as you turn onto TWY B10 rather than an on frequency call and a later ready call.
WRT "auto-releases" at Sydney, have you noticed anything different this year to last year. I have from my end but if the pilots haven't then what is the point one might ask.
Can you give us an example of a rule that particularly bugs you so the collective wisdom of the group may be able to shed some light on the reason(s) why which a rule exists. Also, using the same example, what avenues you have explored to have it changed.
With respect to aircraft taxying to RWY 34R I'd like the ready call as you turn onto TWY B10 rather than an on frequency call and a later ready call.
WRT "auto-releases" at Sydney, have you noticed anything different this year to last year. I have from my end but if the pilots haven't then what is the point one might ask.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Utopia
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hold short of Rwy 07 - Grrrrrrrr
One question I have is why are aircraft continually instructed to hold short of Rwy 07 when it is non active whilst they are taxiing either on Charlie or Bravo?
If another aircraft has been instructed to taxi via the runway I can understand but on most occasions this is rare. As we approach the holding point we are instructed to continue if not stopped.
Why is this instruction continually given for what seems no reason when so much chat is encountered on the SMC frequency?
If another aircraft has been instructed to taxi via the runway I can understand but on most occasions this is rare. As we approach the holding point we are instructed to continue if not stopped.
Why is this instruction continually given for what seems no reason when so much chat is encountered on the SMC frequency?
Good question. There are a number of reasons for this some more valid that others.
Consistent expectation. Since a pilot may not know when the runway is active (the runway may be active but not advertised on the ATIS) each and every aircraft get the same instruction unless they are in such a position that the aircraft is close to RWY 07/25 e.g. aircraft vacating RWY 34L via the rapid B9
Traffic management. Holding aircraft either side of RWY 07/25 provides a natural break is terms of conflictions. As the aircraft approaches the runway (and hopefully before stopping) the aircraft gets an onwards clearance (runway crossing clearance) and a clearance to the bay if an arrival or to the holding point in the case of RWY 16L/34R.
Preventing runway incursions. The worst thing that can happen on the aerodrome is a collision due to a runway incursion, as it is a two diamensional area whereas airborne there is the vertical option. Drawing on the experience from Copenhagen where they had pilots cross the cross runway even with stop bar lighting active because they always got a clearance to cross so cross they did (without a clearance). As yet, after nearly 10 years we haven't had that, and that's a good thing.
The downside is that sometimes the controller is busy giving a hold short and getting the readback that they can't give a more timely crossing clearance. Yep, but its better than the worst thing...
Good question but
Consistent expectation. Since a pilot may not know when the runway is active (the runway may be active but not advertised on the ATIS) each and every aircraft get the same instruction unless they are in such a position that the aircraft is close to RWY 07/25 e.g. aircraft vacating RWY 34L via the rapid B9
Traffic management. Holding aircraft either side of RWY 07/25 provides a natural break is terms of conflictions. As the aircraft approaches the runway (and hopefully before stopping) the aircraft gets an onwards clearance (runway crossing clearance) and a clearance to the bay if an arrival or to the holding point in the case of RWY 16L/34R.
Preventing runway incursions. The worst thing that can happen on the aerodrome is a collision due to a runway incursion, as it is a two diamensional area whereas airborne there is the vertical option. Drawing on the experience from Copenhagen where they had pilots cross the cross runway even with stop bar lighting active because they always got a clearance to cross so cross they did (without a clearance). As yet, after nearly 10 years we haven't had that, and that's a good thing.
The downside is that sometimes the controller is busy giving a hold short and getting the readback that they can't give a more timely crossing clearance. Yep, but its better than the worst thing...
Good question but
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 1,219
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I find it more annoying when pilots of other aircraft are asked "Are you ready immediate" and reply "Affirm". Then they manage to sit on the threshold for another 30-60 secs..
All just to get in front of me in line!
All just to get in front of me in line!
not sy tower related but did the concerned pilots and companies know that the only reason north bound turbo prop aircraft have to play willy nicla is because the raaf do not want to hit a coord button and get a clearance for willy-destination. I wonder how much this practice costs the airlines each year having to plan for extra miles and therefore carry extra fuel.
Just Binos
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Mackay, Australia
Age: 71
Posts: 1,397
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Listening to sniffer dog and his ilk... "I've been everywhere, man, and aussies are the worst" makes me wonder whether there is any hope for mutual understanding.
Perhaps the sooner SD's generation retires the better for all of us.
Roll on the impossible dream of "understanding the other man's job".
Perhaps the sooner SD's generation retires the better for all of us.
Roll on the impossible dream of "understanding the other man's job".
