Speed increase then vector for spacing

derg

derg

Apparently a "terse" writer
Staff member
Ive been asked twice this week to fly at a higher cruise speed only to have ATC command a HUGE vector for spacing.

It seems a little counter-intuitive,
But am I missing something?
 
Get out of the way of somebody about to cross behind you. Hmm, now that you made it further ahead what do we do with you?
Just guessing though...
 
Doug Taylor said:
Ive been asked twice this week to fly at a higher cruise speed only to have ATC command a HUGE vector for spacing.

It seems a little counter-intuitive,
But am I missing something?
Click to expand...

Some radar "rules of the road" to get you overtaking slower traffic?
 
Doug Taylor said:
Ive been asked twice this week to fly at a higher cruise speed only to have ATC command a HUGE vector for spacing.

It seems a little counter-intuitive,
But am I missing something?
Click to expand...


Word is out you're selling the place.

Seriously though I would agree it seems bass ackwards. Only thing I can think of is the controller had a plan, and the next controller rejected it during coordination.
 
If you're going to be taking a heyuuuge vector, you're going to need that extra speed to get to the next waypoint on-time. The FAAAAh is funded with fuel taxes, yeah? :p
 
Doug Taylor said:
Ive been asked twice this week to fly at a higher cruise speed only to have ATC command a HUGE vector for spacing.

It seems a little counter-intuitive,
But am I missing something?
Click to expand...
sometimes we just get bored... JK.. where did this happen? could be that the next controller shut the door on the one that told you to speed up and then he had to meet a miles in trail restriction.
 
I was talking to a guy who has worked CLE center for over 20 years. While I was waiting for a DH back to EWR he came up and asked what I thought about the new program centers were using for traffic spacing, I can't remember what its called but he explained it as a computer that tells him how much time he has to make an aircraft gain or lose before handing it off to the next controller, essentially so aircraft can be worked to fall into a certain arrival slot when they are half way across the country from their destination. Said he hated the program because the system would tell him he needed to make an aircraft loose an hour, Something that unless he spins the guy isn't possible, so he give some vectors and when center has finally pull 15 minutes off him the computer will change its mind and say he need to pick up an hour. I really wish I remembered what the program is called, some of our ATC guys may know but that is probably what you fell victim to. It can work the other way where you have to pick it up to drop 20 minutes from your ETA, and then boom nvmd lets add that 20 back plus another 20.
 
Was it ERAM? It's been quite a while since I've sat down for a shift with my buddy at ZAB. I should probably check out this new system.

EDIT: Oh or maybe he was talking about URET? Which really isn't all that new...
 
I'm guessing it was ATILA (it may have two Ts or two Ls I never remember). We just started getting RTA times via ACARS which apparently are generated by ATILA and then forwarded to our dispatch and then on to us in the form of a CI number that will get us across the approach gate at the right time.

I just always find it amusing that every controller blames somebody at TMU when we get slowed or vectored the wrong way.
 
Pilotforhire587 said:
I was talking to a guy who has worked CLE center for over 20 years. While I was waiting for a DH back to EWR he came up and asked what I thought about the new program centers were using for traffic spacing, I can't remember what its called but he explained it as a computer that tells him how much time he has to make an aircraft gain or lose before handing it off to the next controller, essentially so aircraft can be worked to fall into a certain arrival slot when they are half way across the country from their destination. Said he hated the program because the system would tell him he needed to make an aircraft loose an hour, Something that unless he spins the guy isn't possible, so he give some vectors and when center has finally pull 15 minutes off him the computer will change its mind and say he need to pick up an hour. I really wish I remembered what the program is called, some of our ATC guys may know but that is probably what you fell victim to. It can work the other way where you have to pick it up to drop 20 minutes from your ETA, and then boom nvmd lets add that 20 back plus another 20.
Click to expand...

What your buddy is referring to is time based metering. It is my understanding that it used to only be able to show a cumulative time for the center, that is, if an aircraft had a 15 on it, it would have to lose 15 minutes in the center. Now it has been changed to where each sector gets their own number, so an aircraft flying from one end of ZME to another going to ATL (we're almost always metering for ATL) may need to be slowed a total time of 15 minutes, but each sector the aircraft flies through may only need to lose 3-4 minutes each depending on the route of flight. If we start getting large numbers on aircraft in a single sector without there being a problem at the airport (ie., holding, disabled aircraft, WX, etc) then usually TMU will reshuffle the sequence so that (hopefully) the numbers will come down to more manageable numbers.

To answer the OP, it could have been almost anything. Every morning we get anywhere from 2-3 BNA-MEM flights that file from anywhere from 16,000 to FL240. If they're below FL230 the guy working high altitude isn't aware of them unless they quick look the low altitude controller's scope. So sometimes they'll speed someone up to put them #1 in THEIR sequence, which ends up running all over the guy that is down low and slow.

Sometimes, the controller just changes their mind. What looked like a good idea at first may not have been such a good idea (or at least not the best idea) at a second glance.
 
Pilotforhire587 said:
Not sure, and I'm at a loss for what URET means
Click to expand...

User Request Evaluation Tool. Predicts conflicts, allows trial planning of route and altitude changes (is letting this aircraft go direct to this fix put them in conflict with another?) and has all but eliminated the use of flight strips at enroute facilities.
 
Barty pretty much covered it, Time Based Metering. When a handoff is taken on an airplane a time pops up, either 0:00 or a + or -... if it's a - time, we are supposed to speed you up or shortcut you. If it is a + time, we are supposed to slow or vector for metering. The whole idea is every airplane has an exact time they are supposed to cross the threshold of their landing runway. To give an example.. at Cleveland center we were doing metering to Detroit for a few months... and it was horrible so we stopped using it. The SW fix of DTW airspace (MIZAR) is worked by a CLE center controller who blends 3 lines into that one fix, one from Indy center and two from Chicago center. I sometimes work a chunk of airspace about 30 NM wide to the south of that sector which means I get the line from Indy center. One day I got 3 airplanes in a row with times of +5:00 or more (less than 70 miles from the arrival fix). I had to battle vector all 3 jets to meet my requirement of within + or - 1:00. If traffic management "shuffles" the order of aircraft... someone else who is working an aircraft with a perfectly reasonable time, and most likely already spaced... just gained or lost minutes and has to react to that.

They say time based metering is the cornerstone to nextgen ATC... the only way it could work is if every aircraft hit their times perfectly... because being within 1 minute is not acceptable when that could be 4-8 miles off. I also have no idea how they expect a system like this to work with thunderstorms... useless.
 
Cheezypoof said:
Barty pretty much covered it, Time Based Metering. When a handoff is taken on an airplane a time pops up, either 0:00 or a + or -... if it's a - time, we are supposed to speed you up or shortcut you. If it is a + time, we are supposed to slow or vector for metering. The whole idea is every airplane has an exact time they are supposed to cross the threshold of their landing runway. To give an example.. at Cleveland center we were doing metering to Detroit for a few months... and it was horrible so we stopped using it. The SW fix of DTW airspace (MIZAR) is worked by a CLE center controller who blends 3 lines into that one fix, one from Indy center and two from Chicago center. I sometimes work a chunk of airspace about 30 NM wide to the south of that sector which means I get the line from Indy center. One day I got 3 airplanes in a row with times of +5:00 or more (less than 70 miles from the arrival fix). I had to battle vector all 3 jets to meet my requirement of within + or - 1:00. If traffic management "shuffles" the order of aircraft... someone else who is working an aircraft with a perfectly reasonable time, and most likely already spaced... just gained or lost minutes and has to react to that.

They say time based metering is the cornerstone to nextgen ATC... the only way it could work is if every aircraft hit their times perfectly... because being within 1 minute is not acceptable when that could be 4-8 miles off. I also have no idea how they expect a system like this to work with thunderstorms... useless.
Click to expand...

You work the sectors around TOL? Low or high?
 
Cheezypoof said:
Barty pretty much covered it, Time Based Metering. When a handoff is taken on an airplane a time pops up, either 0:00 or a + or -... if it's a - time, we are supposed to speed you up or shortcut you. If it is a + time, we are supposed to slow or vector for metering. The whole idea is every airplane has an exact time they are supposed to cross the threshold of their landing runway. To give an example.. at Cleveland center we were doing metering to Detroit for a few months... and it was horrible so we stopped using it. The SW fix of DTW airspace (MIZAR) is worked by a CLE center controller who blends 3 lines into that one fix, one from Indy center and two from Chicago center. I sometimes work a chunk of airspace about 30 NM wide to the south of that sector which means I get the line from Indy center. One day I got 3 airplanes in a row with times of +5:00 or more (less than 70 miles from the arrival fix). I had to battle vector all 3 jets to meet my requirement of within + or - 1:00. If traffic management "shuffles" the order of aircraft... someone else who is working an aircraft with a perfectly reasonable time, and most likely already spaced... just gained or lost minutes and has to react to that.

They say time based metering is the cornerstone to nextgen ATC... the only way it could work is if every aircraft hit their times perfectly... because being within 1 minute is not acceptable when that could be 4-8 miles off. I also have no idea how they expect a system like this to work with thunderstorms... useless.
Click to expand...

That is the one thing gives comfort about a computer taking my place. If it weren't going to be a dangerous thing I would give a weeks pay to see a computer go down the tubes as aircraft are deviating all over the place on the downwind for final.
 
Metering is stupid, anytime we get busy they decide it is too busy for metering and they are reverting back to miles-in-trail. So basically it may work when its a slow traffic flow to keep someone from holding by slowing down the 1 a/c tied with them, but once it gets too busy there is no way to slow everyone down without holding so in trail is the only way to go, until we go into the hold. Happens nearly everyday. hence the reason i turn the numbers off my scope.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top