CLT OPS

clestudentpilot said:
Just because it would be easier for you, and you THINK it would be easier for them, does not mean they can do it. I don't know what their SOP says, and I'm assuming you don't know. There is more than just a ground and local controller here to worry about, there is also a departure controller in the mix. If they go against their SOP, that could be a straw that breaks the camels back. I know a controller at ORD once told me that there used to be only one bridge for aircraft taxiing over the highway leading to the terminal. The flow on the bridge was supposed to always be southbound. He said occasionally a pilot at a gate near this bridge would beg to taxi on it northbound if their assigned runway was on the other side, instead of taxiing all the way around the terminal there. He said the few times a controller would give in and let them taxi northbound over the bridge, without fail, and airplane would be taxiing southbound, you would get two nose-to-nose, and a tug would have to come out to save the day. Do you see my point? Just because people think it is easier all the way around, does not mean it is, and does not mean they can do it. If I had to guess, the ground controller probably did want the aircraft going to 36R, and there is a reason why he couldn't do it.

As far as the controllers knowingly issuing illegal clearance, those are pretty strong accusations. I don't know impaticular what you are refering to, but I would avoid saying things like that unless you are positive, without a doubt, it is true. Do you know what waivers ATC is issued there? I don't know, so I could never comment on whether something is legal or not. Just because it is normally not allowed does not mean it is not allowed there. Almost every major airport gets waivers issued for ATC for certain things
Click to expand...

I visit the forums much less than I used to so just read up on everything. I know lots about their SOP, hence the explanation as to why it was necessary to taxi over to 36C to depart westbound. My "You would think" comment was just that, a comment. As far as the illegal clearance issue, without going into great detail I refused a clearance knowing it wasn't legal. This was something that had been occurring for several days. I called the tower when we returned and informed the supervisor the clearance wasn't legal and was told it was a solution to a problem they had and they were going to continue to issue the clearance until they could figure out a solution to the problem. I called our POI and the illegal clearances stopped that afternoon.

I appreciate the difficult job controllers do and I'm happy we have controllers who post on this forum. It's a shame they ended the ride along program because I think it would help better understand operations. I also was able to visit the ATC facilities in several locations and was almost dizzy watching the controllers do their jobs, thank you for your work!
 
Not to belabor the point, as the original question has been answered, but I’ll throw in my 2¢ anyway.

I used to be a CLT controller. It was a long, long time ago but even back then, the general practice on a north operation was to depart the westbounders off the left (now 36C) and the eastbounders off the right. The idea was to avoid the need to do crossovers in the air. As with any procedure, deviations from it could be done with coordination, and there were times when it could be done fairly easily and other times when it just wasn’t practical.

Then (and I suppose now, as well) that coordination would involve the ground controller, the local controller and the departure controller. Sometimes LC would tell GC that he would take care of it and sometimes they’d insist that GC work it out themselves with departure control before taxiing anyone to the “wrong” runway. It all depended on who was working where and sometimes it involved one of those types of individuals that made it a losing proposition from the outset.

The requests for deviations from the policy were usually at their highest when Piedmont had a third of their fleet parked at Gate 14 three times a day and ALL of them understandably wanted 36R. Sometimes we could do it… more often, though, there was a lot of taxiing going on.

As for the jump seating, I was fortunate to be able to do that a lot. I also did a lot of GA flying whenever it was offered. The interaction with pilots and just having the ability to see what takes place on the other side of the mic lent itself tremendously to my own understanding of my job. Also, I found that pilot/controller rapport was greatly enhanced by getting together occasionally and slamming back a few beers.:D
 
Random... But I departed today off of 36R going to BNA... Zaver with a VXV transition.... They were also departing off of 36C/R at the time.... The Captain and I looked at each other after we de-iced with the "huh" expression on our faces... Read it back and sure enough told to taxi to 36R.... :) Guess it must be because you fly that baby B727 Bandit ;)! Anyways I am sure there was a reason for it, but I did find it sort of ironic none the less....

Thanks ATC_RET_2003 for the inside on the CLT operations... If you dont mind me asking, when were you operating out of CLT? It would be great to get a few more of the ATC guys from some of the busy sectors posting on here!!!! It would just be a great insight for the pilots as well... Keeping in mind at the end of the day, we're all trying to gain more insight on the others job, and in return make things better for the WHOLE....
 
boondr said:
They really need to to get the fam flight program back in effect. Stupid TSA has been the roadblock for that though.
Click to expand...

It's not TSA, it is management. We have the program back, we can jumpseat. You just have to do it within an 8 hour shift and you can only do one per year. TSA has nothing to do with blocking us from the jumpseat.

I am a strong advocate for jumpseating. I believe the jumpseat experience I had before signing on is a valuable resource in my decision making processes(though it pisses others off every once in a while).
 
meyers9163 said:
Guess it must be because you fly that baby B727 Bandit ;)!
Click to expand...

Baby 727 :rotfl:

Polarbear said:
It's not TSA, it is management. We have the program back, we can jumpseat. You just have to do it within an 8 hour shift and you can only do one per year. TSA has nothing to do with blocking us from the jumpseat.

I am a strong advocate for jumpseating. I believe the jumpseat experience I had before signing on is a valuable resource in my decision making processes(though it pisses others off every once in a while).
Click to expand...

If that is the case that program is still pretty weak. Once a year doesn't teach a whole lot. Controllers would need to go out several time at various times during the day to see the work loads and how busy it can be at times especially when you get 2 or 3 runway changes.

On another note, does ATC have cheat sheets for general aircraft performance? Some of the guys that have seen the 727 before know how to handle them. Others seem shocked when we run over a CRJ in the climb or are shocked when we don't climb like a 757.

Just curious
 
Bandit_Driver said:
If that is the case that program is still pretty weak. Once a year doesn't teach a whole lot. Controllers would need to go out several time at various times during the day to see the work loads and how busy it can be at times especially when you get 2 or 3 runway changes.
Click to expand...

Tell us about it. That has been NATCA's position since I joined the agency. Hopefully eventually they will modify it. Thought it would be addressed in contract negotiations, but unfortunately it was not.

Bandit_Driver said:
On another note, does ATC have cheat sheets for general aircraft performance? Some of the guys that have seen the 727 before know how to handle them. Others seem shocked when we run over a CRJ in the climb or are shocked when we don't climb like a 757.

Just curious
Click to expand...

Many are in the glossary of the 7110.65 and we do have a separate manual for them. In the center environment we also have a touch screen system called ERID that we can do a search on the aircraft types. Unfortunately I would not say they are always accurate or understood.

Many controllers in the center environment will not take aircraft type into consideration or just don't pay attention to it. There are ones that do it it just because they don't care to learn, I think are lazy and they annoy me. The others that I know do it because every once in a while you get a pilot that does not fly his airplane like he should be able to(whether its because of mechanical, ops, or just laziness there part. While I do not yet agree or disagree with that theory I do have a story on that.

I know my aircraft types pretty well from my previous experience, but my first day working radar I nearly had deal on my first SDF departure push because of it. We take Departures out of SDF either MYS..BWG(going south) or V4 west(North and east departures are a different area). When they depart north both streams run about the same track until reaching V4. Well I had a UPS 757 going V4 and an ASQ(Acey) CRJ2 going MYS..BWG. The ASQ was about 2-3 mi in trail. The UPS came to me at 10,000 and I climbed him to FL230(the top of the altitudes for the 2 sectors I was working). The ASQ came on leaving 8,000. I expected the UPS to turn it on, climb fast, and the ASQ to stay well below so I climbed the ASQ to FL 230. Next time I saw them the ASQ was leaving 10,300 and the UPS was climbing out of 11,600 as my trainer spoke up and told the ASQ to maintain 11,000. Luckily the ASQ was able to stop in time, but I almost had a deal right there counting on aircraft types. Later the ASQ left FL230 when the UPS only left FL 180. You can call me a liar, but that happened and shocked the hell out of me.

Do I still take types into account? Yes, but I'm much more conservative with it. I'm probably too liberal with it still though as I get yelled at for "not ensuring separation" when I know for a fact neither aircraft will be traffic. Oh well, when I have my own ticket I can do it my way.

Hope that helps.
 
Polarbear,

I understand that completely.

Since you mentioned SDF V4...:wtf?: is up with V4 not being on the SID. It is always assigned V4 PXV.... You think the FEDS or ATC could get that changed.

just my .02 on that.
 
Bandit_Driver said:
Polarbear,

I understand that completely.

Since you mentioned SDF V4...:wtf?: is up with V4 not being on the SID. It is always assigned V4 PXV.... You think the FEDS or ATC could get that changed.

just my .02 on that.
Click to expand...

We can't get anything changed. That all goes to another division of the FAA separate from the ATO. We can only suggest and that takes forever. We just got them to create the GAILL star into CMH so we don't have to spell out CVG..MOAKS..GAILL..CMH to CMH RNAV arrivals everytime. Only took 5 years from what I have heard.

Now if we could just get a star for Chicago satellite arrivals. Its a pain to to issue MACES..BVT.V7.ZORRO..EON..OBK to every biz jet going into PWK and other versions of it going to ARR, LOT, GYY, etc. If they'd just create the Zorro arrival or whatever, it would make it a ton easier. Plus it would let those flight crews know they need that route so if they're coming from the east they don't get rerouted when they get all the way over to my area's sectors causing them to have to go back northeast.

They also need to hurry up and delete the BVT arrival into Midway too. It's notamed ots, but still filed all the time.
 
Polarbear said:
We can't get anything changed. That all goes to another division of the FAA separate from the ATO. We can only suggest and that takes forever. We just got them to create the GAILL star into CMH so we don't have to spell out CVG..MOAKS..GAILL..CMH to CMH RNAV arrivals everytime. Only took 5 years from what I have heard.

Now if we could just get a star for Chicago satellite arrivals. Its a pain to to issue MACES..BVT.V7.ZORRO..EON..OBK to every biz jet going into PWK and other versions of it going to ARR, LOT, GYY, etc. If they'd just create the Zorro arrival or whatever, it would make it a ton easier. Plus it would let those flight crews know they need that route so if they're coming from the east they don't get rerouted when they get all the way over to my area's sectors causing them to have to go back northeast.

They also need to hurry up and delete the BVT arrival into Midway too. It's notamed ots, but still filed all the time.
Click to expand...

Wow, that is pathetic. Then again that is the gov't for ya.

Just start making a few jets hold that file the wrong arrival that will send them a message.
 
there is one thing about ATC thats been true for the last 70 years. ATC is the easyest job in the world untill you have to really do it.
 
queeno said:
there is one thing about ATC thats been true for the last 70 years. ATC is the easyest job in the world untill you have to really do it.
Click to expand...

Yup.

Just remember though. If a controller makes a mistake the farthes he/she falls from from the chair to the floor... J/k
 
meyers9163 said:
Thanks ATC_RET_2003 for the inside on the CLT operations... If you dont mind me asking, when were you operating out of CLT? It would be great to get a few more of the ATC guys from some of the busy sectors posting on here!!!!
Click to expand...

Don't mind at all... '81-'83. Like I said, it was a l-o-n-g time ago. Funny, though, how it seems that even over a long period of time, things are still often very much the same.

It would be great if there were more of the current ATCers posting here, but the ones who are are doing good.
 
Polarbear said:
I know your just kidding, but tell that to the late Peter Nielsen (or should I say, tell that to his family).
Click to expand...

That accident is really hard to call it controller error, IMO. If you look at the accident chain his part was very minor IMHO. I would have felt horrible in his shoes too and he unfortunately was killed by grieving person that was mentally unstable.

The poor guy was set up for failure hours before the accident both by mechanical failures, poor company policies and procedures, plus human error by the techs working on the system that killed just about everything that could have helped him. Then to top it off the Russians disregarded a TCAS command and another controller that could have saved the day didn't because of bureaucracy..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top