[jhb_airlines] Re: FPI

  • From: "Bones" <bones@xxxxxxx>
  • To: <jhb_airlines@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 14:46:04 +0100

I'm beginning to realise a couple of other things too. Alex was very late
with the handovers as I mentioned last night - a couple of aircraft actually
inside the zone before I got them and others not even starting descent as
they reached VANIN. If Alex has very bad server lag then it's probable that,
on his radar, you were all still halfway across the water.

I think ATC will have to include a position check with the handovers in
future just to ensure that lag isn't creeping up on us.


-----Original Message-----
From: jhb_airlines-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:jhb_airlines-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of mhlucas@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: 06 October 2005 08:38
To: jhb_airlines@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [jhb_airlines] Re: FPI

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: