No more "into position and hold"?

[densoo]

"To improve safety margins, the FAA has recommended to control towers nationwide that they not let planes hold for takeoff at the edge of the runway and instead keep them back on the taxiway until they get permission to go.

The change would give controllers an extra minute to assess aircraft movements but that extra time could lead to delays over the course of a day at a busy airport.

Aviation regulators say airports can opt out of its recommendation if they can prove that safety would not be compromised by keeping current procedures in place."

http://yahoo.reuters.com/stocks/QuoteCompanyNewsArticle.aspx?storyID=urn:newsml:reuters.com:20060325:MTFH15144_2006-03-25_00-29-47_N24349285&symbol=LHAG.DE&rpc=44

 

[watpho]

As is the case in many areas...what sounds great while sitting in an office, doesn't work so well in the field.

 

[CCDiscoB]

Yeah right, could you imagine the back-ups that would create. Atlanta would be more of a nightmare than it already is. The European's would scoff us, they "line up and wait" all the time.

 

[Juvat]

Yeah right, could you imagine the back-ups that would create. Atlanta would be more of a nightmare than it already is. The European's would scoff us, they "line up and wait" all the time.

Like I care about being scoffed by Euros. BFD.

 

[flyin4pennies]

Here we go again! Dumbing Down the industry!!

 

[paulsalem]

Well it’s not going away completely; towers can be granted a waiver.

GENOT RWA 6/14 SVC B
NOTICE: N7210.621

SUBJECT: AMENDMENT TO TIPH OPERATIONS

EFFECTIVE: MARCH 20, 2006
THIS GENOT CANCELS GENOT RWA 5/40, N7210.609, SUBJECT: FAA ORDER 7210.3 AMENDMENT, TIPH OPERATIONS.

BACKGROUND: TIPH OPERATIONAL ERRORS CONTINUE TO OCCUR. WE REVIEWED THESE EVENTS AND DETERMINED THAT CHANGES TO FAAO 7210.3 ARE NEEDED TO MITIGATE SIGNIFICANT RISK FACTORS THAT COMMONLY OCCURRED IN THESE EVENTS.

PLEASE AMEND FAAO 7210.3U AS FOLLOWS:
(ADD) PARAGRAPH 10-3-8, TAXI INTO POSITION AND HOLD (TIPH) OPERATIONS

A. THE AT MANAGER MUST DETERMINE AN OPERATIONAL NEED EXISTS BEFORE CONDUCTING TIPH OPERATIONS, TO INCLUDE SUCH FACTORS AS CAPACITY, EFFICIENCY, USER INPUT, ETC.


B. BEFORE AUTHORIZING TIPH OPERATIONS AS SPECIFIED IN FAA ORDER 7110.65, THE AT MANAGER MUST ENSURE THE FOLLOWING:
1. REVIEW THE IMPACT THAT AIRPORT CONFIGURATION AND LOCAL CONDITIONS MAY HAVE ON THE APPLICATION OF TIPH PROCEDURES.


2. PREPARE A FACILITY DIRECTIVE:
(A) PRESCRIBING LOCAL PROCEDURES FOR CONDUCTING THESE OPERATIONS.

(B) PRESCRIBING METHODS TO ASSIST THE LOCAL CONTROLLER IN MAINTAINING AWARENESS OF AIRCRAFT POSITIONS ON THE AIRPORT. SUCH METHODS MAY INCLUDE, BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO, READING BACK THE PILOT'S STATED POSITION, ANNOTATING FLIGHT PROGRESS STRIPS, POSTING OR ARRANGING FLIGHT PROGRESS STRIPS ACCORDING TO AIRCRAFT'S INTENDED TAKEOFF POSITION, OR MARKING THE LOCATION OF AIRCRAFT WITH COLOR-CODED CHIPS ON A MAGNETIC DIAGRAM OF THE AIRPORT. REFERENCE FAA ORDER 7210.3, PARAGRAPH 10-1-7, USE OF ACTIVE RUNWAYS

(C) PRESCRIBING THE CONSOLIDATION AND STAFFING OF POSITIONS.

(D) PRESCRIBING THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE SAFETY LOGIC SYSTEM TO OPERATE IN FULL CORE ALERT
RUNWAY CONFIGURATION.

3. LOCAL CONTROL POSITION SHALL NOT BE CONSOLIDATED/COMBINED WITH ANY OTHER POSITION. FOR EXAMPLE, LOCAL CONTROL POSITION SHALL NOT BE COMBINED WITH ANOTHER LOCAL POSITION, CIC, LOCAL ASSIST, GROUND CONTROL, CLEARANCE DELIVERY/LFLIGHT DATA, ETC.

4. WHERE THE TOWER ASSOCIATE (LOCAL ASSIST) POSITION OR A LOCAL MONITOR POSITION IS ESTABLISHED, THIS POSITION SHALL BE STAFFED. THIS POSITION IS CONSIDERED ESSENTIAL TO THE OPERATIONAL INTEGRITY AND SAFETY LEVELS REQUIRED TO MINIMIZE THE POTENTIAL FOR SURFACE ERRORS AND LAND- OVER INCIDENTS.

5. SUPERVISOR/CIC POSITION SHALL NOT BE COMINED WITH A CONTROL POSITION.

6. AT THOSE FACILITIES WITH SAFETY LOGIC SYSTEMS, THE SYSTEM SHALL BE OPERATING IN THE FULL CORE ALERT RUNWAY CONFIGURATION.

7. ENSURE WATCH SUPERVISORS/CIC'S REVIEW FAA ORDER 7210.3, PARAGRAPH 2-6-1 A, WATCH SUPERVISION, WITH AN EMPHASIS ON MAINTAINING SITUATIONAL AWARENESS AND MANAGEMENT OF THE OPERATIONAL ENVIRONMENT WITH A GOAL TOWARD ELIMINATING DISTRACTIONS.

C. AT MANAGERS MUST SUBMIT OPERATIONAL NEED FOR TIPH AND FACILITY DIRECTIVE TO THE APPROPRIATE TERMINAL SERVICE UNIT AREA DIRECTOR FOR APPROVAL.

D. TERMINAL SERVICE UNIT AREA DIRECTORS WILL CONDUCT AN ANNUAL REVIEW OF FACILITIES CONDUCTING TIPH OPERATIONS

Sounds like the tower manager must submit a procedure on how they are going to conduct Taxi into position and hold. Local control must not be working any other controller position (i.e. ground, clearance etc.)

It’s past March 20th and it hasn't gone away at CMH.

 

[Falcon Jet 1]

Asked hobby tower about it the other day because they wewre really concerned beforehand and they said that it had been dropped.

 

[Blucher]

Say what?

Yeah right, could you imagine the back-ups that would create. Atlanta would be more of a nightmare than it already is. The European's would scoff us, they "line up and wait" all the time.

How do you figure that? ATL is one of the only places I'm perfectly comfortable going into position and holding. You'll notice that landing aircraft generally use the outboard runways while departing use the inboards. Now, DFW, that's one scary place to be put into position and hold (with one on short final, several crossing downfield and tower in deep conversation with Aeromexico).

-Blucher

 

[aa73]

How do you figure that? ATL is one of the only places I'm perfectly comfortable going into position and holding. You'll notice that landing aircraft generally use the outboard runways while departing use the inboards. Now, DFW, that's one scary place to be put into position and hold (with one on short final, several crossing downfield and tower in deep conversation with Aeromexico).

-Blucher

That's generally exactly what DFW does, too - lands on the outboards, departs on the inboards. How is it different from ATL then? Don't they cross downfield in ATL too?

 

[Blucher]

That's generally exactly what DFW does, too - lands on the outboards, departs on the inboards. How is it different from ATL then? Don't they cross downfield in ATL too?

That hasn't been my experience in DFW. It always appears to me that DFW controllers do everything in their power to make sure every pilot understands that it's "their" whatever, be it a taxiway, runway, departure airspace, arrival, etc... Granted, I've only been into/out of DFW 100 or so times, but out of those times I'd say 80 or so they've switched the runway on us just as we're turning final (or there about), and on the way out they are landing on the runway we're taking off from (once you finally get out of the 'penalty box').
In ATL, they at least have the decency to "postion and hold 26L, slight delay for traffic crossing downfield." Don't get me wrong, ATL has it's share of problems, but they can still move a heck of a lot more airplanes with about one tenth of the concrete DFW uses. By the way, the real money in TX isn't in oil or cattle, it's in selling concrete to the airports!

-Blucher:laugh:

 

[skid]

The next thing will be our clearances to land will be given to us on a 1/4-1/2 mile final like in Canada. What a pain this would be.

 

[Lear70]

That hasn't been my experience in DFW. It always appears to me that DFW controllers do everything in their power to make sure every pilot understands that it's "their" whatever, be it a taxiway, runway, departure airspace, arrival, etc...

That's why DFW has the WORST safety record of any airport in the continental U.S., INCLUDING the most in-flight convergence reports (near mid-air's) of ANYONE. Period. They suck.

If this program went away in MSP, it would grind the airport to an almost standstill. The 30L/R and 12L/R runways are always simultaneous arrivals and departures. We go around at that airport more than any other airport in the country because of this. Controllers routinely put a DC-9 on the runway heavy on a hot day and give them a takeoff clearance with another airplane on a mile and a half final. Often doesn't work out and the airplane on final goes around.

Difference is, MSP is aware of the problem and always keeps the runway controller doing that job and that job only. Never had a problem with a runway incursion, just have to go around and do it again which is irritating, but not a safety problem.

If they stopped doing this, the already 40 minute taxis during big banks would up to 90+ minutes. I don't see that happening any time soon.

Smaller airports, not a problem. Large hub airports, no way.

The next thing will be our clearances to land will be given to us on a 1/4-1/2 mile final like in Canada. What a pain this would be.

Yeah, WTF gives with that anyway? Never did understand that idea. No one operating on the airport surface, no one else in the arrival corridor, yet you go over to tower at the marker but have to wait until you're over the lights to receive the clear to land.

They got mad at us one time because they gave us our landing clearance at 500 AGL and I wouldn't respond until we were on the ground. Critical phase of flight buddy, piss right the fu*k off.

 

[Gorilla]

How do you figure that? ATL is one of the only places I'm perfectly comfortable going into position and holding. You'll notice that landing aircraft generally use the outboard runways while departing use the inboards. Now, DFW, that's one scary place to be put into position and hold (with one on short final, several crossing downfield and tower in deep conversation with Aeromexico).

-Blucher

Blucher, you don't know what you're talking about. Unless it's 0500, EVERYONE lands either on the outboards, or 13/31 R/L. The inboards are used only for departures.

You claim that 80 times out of 100, they've switched runways on you on short final? That's simply a lie. Try again, without exaggerating your numbers to try and appear cool.

 

[Blucher]

Blucher, you don't know what you're talking about. Unless it's 0500, EVERYONE lands either on the outboards, or 13/31 R/L. The inboards are used only for departures.

You claim that 80 times out of 100, they've switched runways on you on short final? That's simply a lie. Try again, without exaggerating your numbers to try and appear cool.

Gorilla,

I'm not trying to "appear cool," I'm merely sharing my experiences with the DFW airport. I've come in there late at night and had them switch the runway on us twice on the way in with only one other airplane coming in at the same time and he was landing on the other side of the airport. That happened every week that month. (By the way, if you re-read my previous post you'll see I never used the term "short final" as you did.) Apparently I'm not alone in this. Seems that Lear70 doesn't dig it out there too much either. I've never actually looked into the safety record out there, but it wouldn't surprise me one bit to find out DFW has a problem of putting airplanes a bit too close to one another from time to time. What I do know is fact is that ATL out performs DFW as far as moving people and airplanes and that's the real reason we're all here in the first place.

-Blucher

 

[Gorilla]

Sorry Blucher, your numbers sounded (and still do sound) bogus. I've tallied perhaps 2000 arrivals at DFW. The number of times I have been ordered to change runways on a visual base leg... maybe twice, due to inbound emergencies. The number of times it has been offered, dozens. All runway assignments for IFR arrivals are made when inbound from the cornerposts at 11,000'. Occasionally, somewhere during that 30+ mile 11,000' drone session, they'll do a runway change. That gives you, worst case, several minutes to set up. I suspect your runway "switch" episodes occured at those times. It's a non-event. Are you expecting a runway assignment made 50+ miles from the field to be inviolable?

Given the volume of traffic, the DFW guys do a very good job.

 

[blzr]

What is that going to do to kDCA? Those controllers really knew how to get the most out of what little space they have to work with. Without Pos. and hold, they will have to have 7 or 8 miles in trail and that will seriously back up an already crowded area.