[jhb_airlines] Re: FPI

  • From: <mhlucas@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <jhb_airlines@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 8:37:37 +0100

I wasn't conscious of any server lag last night - but in retrospect, given the 
comments from Bones and Gerry, it may explain my airproxes with Alastair and 
Gerry.  I had assumed, perhaps uncharitably, that EGTT_CTR was a bit off-colour 
and had failed to spot these potential 'incidents'.  On the first, I called ATC 
to report what I considered was going to be a close call (still > 10 nm 
separation, but closing fast) as I was cleared to climb through the approaching 
JHB180's FL.  At the last minute Al was told to stop his climb and we probably 
just about achieved 1000 ft separation.  On the second occasion, I was just 
about to call with a similar concern over conflict with Gerry when EGTT_CTR 
called and told me to stop climbing immediately - again I think JHB067 and I 
were very close to minimum separation.  Phew ...

Mike L
> From: Gerry Winskill <gwinsk@xxxxxxx>
> Date: 2005/10/06 Thu AM 08:21:24 BST
> To: jhb_airlines@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [jhb_airlines] Re: FPI
> Going around was good experience, apart from my not knowing whether to 
> call "Missed approach" or "Going around". Fortunately I usually reset 
> heading and altimeter bugs, once the ILS is captured, just in case.
> It was made a bit difficult by the fact that, as with the other ATC 
> positions, I seemed to be not receiving the middle figure of each 
> requested heading, yet the sound wasn't distorted.
> Apart from the quantity, plus not getting us handed over with 
> respectable separation, I'm sure that server lag must have been 
> compounding the problem. Also the volume of voice traffic. I'd have been 
> able to establish voice contact earlier but for the absence of gaps into 
> which I could jump. Another oddity last night, on my system, was the 
> fact that every time I double clicked on an ATC position, it then 
> switched to the position immediately below. I should have used the GF 
> kit but FPI hasn't been accepting its input on all flights, recently.
>  Server lag was horrendous but in a very odd way. At Aldergrove, 
> Anthony's instructions indicated he wasn't suffering from it. In my 
> case, I had doubts about being turned onto finals ahead of Alastair. He 
> then announced he was on the blocks and leaving the system. When I 
> taxied in he was still showing up behind me, both on the screen tags and 
> using FSNav as TCAS. The latter produced a dramatic density on 
> approaching Ronaldsway. It was equally dramatic as Mike and I closed, 
> with only 500' separation, during my Aldergrove to Leeds sector. When I 
> looked out the window it looked more like 5'!!!
> Very enjoyable evening.
> Gerry Winskill
> Bones wrote:
> >I thought it quite a  good night last night with just a few niggles to take
> >the edge off for some people. Not sure if this was just Ronaldsway or
> >problems existed elsewhere! <g>
> >
> >Steve had a lockup just as his wheels got about an inch from the runway on
> >touchdown - probably the most frustrating point of any flight to have FS
> >bomb on you. Mike got a similar hang up just as he vacated the runway. I
> >know Alex had severe lag on his PC about 45min into the session which put
> >aircraft well behind their real positions - and could possibly account for
> >the slight voice problems he was having.
> >
> >Despite all this I felt it was a good evening with Dave's idea of a set of
> >in line airfields really cramming the aircraft along one route. The light
> >winds at Ronaldsway also helped as it meant both 08 and 26 could be used to
> >expedite the traffic.
> >
> >The sudden flurry of arrivals at EGNS was very good - and it would have been
> >nice to get everyone down first time around but that was not to be. Normally
> >we get aircraft from Manchester quite early because it is only 8nm from
> >VANIN to 26 approach - not much room to play with. I got everyone a bit
> >later than I had hoped and so it was hard work for a short while, especially
> >with two fast aircraft catching up two slow ones. It would have worked well
> >too - if only I had remembered to drop JHB068 from FL50 to 3000ft for the
> >ILS. Apologies to Gerry therefore as he had no chance to capture the ILS
> >and, rightly, called a missed approach. I was annoyed about that.
> >
> >It's odd but this is a purely FPI situation that would not happen in real
> >life. Inbounds to VANIN are normally dropped to FL50 and handed over to EGNS
> >about ten miles to run. Manchester know this as it's part of the rules -
> >aircraft having just 8nm to get from FL50 to 3000ft to pick up the ILS. I
> >got the aircraft later than expected and was trying my best not to give
> >anyone a hold - but it rather unravelled on me.. <g>
> >
> >Again only a few non JHB aircraft were present - we seem to have lost our
> >friends at EuroFly and German Airwings who really made the sessions a lot
> >more interesting.
> >
> >bones
> >bones@xxxxxxx
> >http://fsaviation.net
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >  
> >

Email sent from www.ntlworld.com
Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software 
Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information

Other related posts: