GTAA: 1st Snow removal + FLOW delays = BEYOND LIVID!

[BLZD1]

Airbus and Embraer have the same run-up procedures as a Boeing. Maybe different numbers, but still require engine runs!

[Married a Canadian]

Worked the days in question on the approach/terminal side of things.

Firstly as much as I will criticise the GTAA....in winter OPs they are way better at it than my UK counterparts and LHR is beyond a joke when it comes to snow. If you think afew flakes shuts Pearson down...then try going into Heathrow..and here them bleating about the wrong type of snow,lack of ploughs, don't need to invest, dosen't happen often etc etc. The brand new spanking terminal 5 had 2 deicing rigs at last count which come to the stands to deice aircraft. Correct me if I am wrong but isn't the deice bay at YYZ the largest in the world? I would love to say the GTAA are bad at this type of thing...but on the whole they do a pretty good job (and that is coming from a terminal controller!).

Cossack pretty much sums up the main side of things (the snow clearing OP) but I can also add that from the terminal perspective on a couple of the days in question we were on the 06s with the lovely YYZ winds that you can get in that configuration. Winds on the ground were something like 110/10....winds at 5000 down to 3000 were something like 230/35. This makes spacing on final rather difficult.

If the tower requires 4 miles at touchdown..we have to run something like 7 mile spacing to achieve that. This means we can't accept as many airplanes into the terminal airspace as we don't have the room on final approach. Couple that to the fact that you have a snow removal operation in place...and voila....holding and being sped back a long way out.
In response to the speeding back over London...when you are coming in over Rokto with those winds...even 190kts will still have you grounding something like 250 plus. The straight ins are like bowling balls so we have to crank you back as much as possible to give ourselves a chance of getting the space we need...and also to be fair...to sometimes give the pilots a chance of configuring for final approach in a very short space of time...in extremely s****ty winds. I lost count of the number of pilots giving me an upper wind check.

Not ideal, not fun for the pilots I am sure.....but something that in response to the title of this thread is out of the GTAAs hands I feel. If you want to get *****ed off at them then wait for them to do a shift/plough handover in the middle of a huge blizzard...take all the trucks back to the shed to change drivers...come back an hour later when everything is covered..and wonder why no planes are landing or departing! That one had us all perplexed!

[I WAS Birddog]

Married a Canadian, thank you for contributing to this thread

With today's Low attention span generation that can only be stimulated by flashing colours of anger coming from their computer/smartphones/TV's I had to amp up the title of this thread to grab everyone's attention for maximum exposure to this thread. Please excuse my abruptness of the words I used. @ nearly 2000 hits, it seemed to have worked. Expect more of the same from me in the future. I'm an old 'dog' @ this forum game

I think we can all agree this has been a productive topic/thread because despite the title, there's been a lot of knowledge and information exchanged that either side (ATC/Pilots) didn't know about. Hopefully more will be voiced where we can improve and better the services if we all work together on this. As far as the snow removal for this year is concerned, we haven't had any snow this season and it's totally understandable for the crews to be a little rusty and not as efficient of being in the groove of things until a few snow falls after.

Thanks for the read...I learned a little more. Happy New Year

[Beefitarian]

take all the trucks back to the shed to change drivers...come back an hour later when everything is covered..and wonder why no planes are landing or departing!

For something this important I think they could stagger start times which would cause a single truck to changeout at a time. If they changed out an hour apart you would only be missing one truck at any given time during a snow storm.

[The Hammer]

take all the trucks back to the shed to change drivers...come back an hour later when everything is covered..and wonder why no planes are landing or departing!

For something this important I think they could stagger start times which would cause a single truck to changeout at a time. If they changed out an hour apart you would only be missing one truck at any given time during a snow storm.

Anyone have any factual feedback on this suggestion? Or is the whole crew of trucks needed to to do the job effectively, we all know in this industry how important one part can be (that's my guess from my experience clearing major freeways, it's an all or none event).

Maybe the trucks need to be fueled anyway? Is a staggered shift with an extra truck an option ie new truck and driver replaces old truck and driver on the job. or maybe just a crew swap vehicle? Lots of labour rules, contract rules, etc to work within. Never mind dealing with fatigue related issues? We've all heard of the aviation accidents involving ground vehicles.

I know airlines would probably be profitable if airplanes didn't need to stop for fuel, change crews, etc

[Beefitarian]

All or none?

I'll have to continue with my rediculas questions here. If one truck breaks do they have to quit trying to clear the runways and close down the airport?

[The Hammer]

All or none?

I'll have to continue with my rediculas questions here. If one truck breaks do they have to quit trying to clear the runways and close down the airport?

No they have spare trucks to replace mechanicals. All or none means that they require a specific # of trucks to run in a "staggered slant \" formation to limit the # of passes required to a reasonable amount. ie How would the 401 or QEW function if you left a 3 ft windrow in the centre lane? Half-a$$ed can be more dangerous than nothing at all. Runways operate the same way.

In a pinch with several unplanned mechanical trucks you have to make more passes but flow rates are going to drop further.

[Beefitarian]

Add in when it doesn't snow for a few months and managers are crying, "Why are we paying for all these snow plough drivers?" winter is wonderful.

[Gino Under]

Gonnabeapilot

Interesting procedure regarding fan blade icing. Is your company aware that FCOM bulletin TBC-51 regarding engine run up in severe icing - on ground, was cancelled? 30 minutes between run ups seems more than adequate to clear fan blade icing without secondary indications.
Just curious to know what was incorporated following its cancellation.

Just a question.

Gino

[gonnabeapilot]

Gino, that's an interesting question and to be honest I don't know. What I quoted in my post was directly out of the old Boeing FCOM that I had at home. I just looked at the latest amendment to the Boeing FCOM that we have... Revised Sept 30, 2011... and in that revision it still requires a 30 second engine run at least every 30 minutes during taxi. It also states that a 30 second engine run should be performed prior to take-off however the wording has now changed to say that it is only "highly recommended" and at the very least stable engine indications at 70% should be confirmed. (Boeing FCOM - Supplemental Procedures - Adverse Weather... Listed as Chapter SP - 16.7/16.9). It still states that these procedures should be used any time the OAT is below 3C and engine anti-ice is to be used... there is nothing that specifically mentions "severe icing - on ground" or defines that term. Are we talking about the same thing or did the bulletin apply to something else? I'd be curious to know if the Boeing FCOM your operator is issued has similar statements in it to ours. From what I can see, our SOP of doing a 30 second engine run at 70% prior to take-off is still following the Boeing recomended procedure for the 738 but I'd be curious to hear your take on the issue because I do know we seem to be one of the few operators with this procedure.

[Gino Under]

Gonnabeapilot

The FCOM I have is for the Boeing 6/7/8/9 and it says the same as yours. I looked at the bulletins and noticed 51 regarding fan blade icing had been cancelled so I couldn't honestly tell you what it said. Usually the engine manufacturer advises the OEM regarding such ice clearing procedures.
Perhaps something was perceived by a legal department to be sticking their neck out too far and it was cancelled. Who can be sure?
For whatever reason the procedure seems to be 'highly recommended' but I'd be curious to know what others are doing in this regard. Especially when it would be also advisable to look for secondary indications. i.e., ITT, fan VIB, ff, etc..

I'll research this a bit more and get back to you.

Gino

[invertedattitude]

Threads like this wouldn't need to exist if TC would finally let controllers fly jump again.

The gap between Controller<->Pilot knowledge widens further every day.