Controlling the Arrivals

Tim Farrell · « **on:** February 20, 2012, 03:07:36 PM »

Gents,

Is it me or does it appear that more and more controllers are not letting pilots fly the arrivals into airports? I realize the majority of newer pilots on Vatsim, haven't a clue on how to fly them or even what they are. But some of us do know how to fly them. I see it happening more often than ever myself by getting pulled off an arrival with little or zero traffic and no reason. Arrivals were created to expedite traffic flow into the terminal area safely alieviating the need for multiple vectors.
Why on earth would a controller want to complicate his/her life by taking a pilot off an arrival for no appearant reason when there is little or no traffic? I for one like to let pilot(s) fly the arrival as much as possible and limit my commands to what is really needed. If the majority of the pilots can't fly the arrivals, then take it up with those pilots. Don't penalize the ones that can. If you pull me off an arrival, at the very least I would expect a reason why.

Wesley Miles · « **Reply #1 on:** February 20, 2012, 05:25:56 PM »

Tim,

So hard to determine the demeanor and tone behind text... but not knowing the whole story here I'll just take a stab and say that I practice the same thing. When traffic and workload is light, I have no problem pulling aircraft off a STAR solely for the purpose of expediting their arrival into the airport. This is not just something I do on VATSIM, but something that occurs in real life at two facilities that I know of.

Now that I said that, are you referring to situations where it would be more expeditious to leave them on?

Dylan Lundberg · « **Reply #2 on:** February 21, 2012, 03:41:53 PM »

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]Gents,

Is it me or does it appear that more and more controllers are not letting pilots fly the arrivals into airports? I realize the majority of newer pilots on Vatsim, haven't a clue on how to fly them or even what they are. But some of us do know how to fly them. I see it happening more often than ever myself by getting pulled off an arrival with little or zero traffic and no reason. Arrivals were created to expedite traffic flow into the terminal area safely alieviating the need for multiple vectors.
Why on earth would a controller want to complicate his/her life by taking a pilot off an arrival for no appearant reason when there is little or no traffic? I for one like to let pilot(s) fly the arrival as much as possible and limit my commands to what is really needed. If the majority of the pilots can't fly the arrivals, then take it up with those pilots. Don't penalize the ones that can. If you pull me off an arrival, at the very least I would expect a reason why.[/quote]

The Only Reason(s) I would take an Aircraft off a STAR would be for Traffic Separation, or if Traffic was light, to make their approach more expeditious.

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]Tim,

So hard to determine the demeanor and tone behind text... but not knowing the whole story here I'll just take a stab and say that I practice the same thing. When traffic and workload is light, I have no problem pulling aircraft off a STAR solely for the purpose of expediting their arrival into the airport. This is not just something I do on VATSIM, but something that occurs in real life at two facilities that I know of.

Now that I said that, are you referring to situations where it would be more expeditious to leave them on?[/quote]

I Agree.

Tim Farrell · « **Reply #3 on:** February 22, 2012, 02:28:30 PM »

I guess my point is. If I file a STAR, let me fly the STAR or give me a reason for pulling me off the STAR when there is little or no traffic.

Gavin Bernard · « **Reply #4 on:** February 22, 2012, 02:32:49 PM »

STARS in ZOB are almost never used to their full extent in either RW or on VATSIM. We pull aircraft off a few fixes early for vectoring purposes and the last few points are rarely used.

Tim Farrell · « **Reply #5 on:** February 22, 2012, 02:58:53 PM »

Gavin, Got no problem with vectors off the last couple of fixes.

We do it too. Controller to pilot: ...Vectors to final. (A valid reason).

It's when I get pulled off way earlier because the controller has no confidence in other pilots ability to fly the STAR. I'll use the BYP5 arrival into DFW for example. It would be similar to like being pulled off at intersection MAMEE on the BYP5.

Gavin Bernard · « **Reply #6 on:** February 22, 2012, 03:20:17 PM »

Quote from: Tim Farrell

Gavin, Got no problem with vectors off the last couple of fixes.

We do it too. Controller to pilot: ...Vectors to final. (A valid reason).

It's when I get pulled off way earlier because the controller has no confidence in other pilots ability to fly the STAR. I'll use the BYP5 arrival into DFW for example. It would be similar to like being pulled off at intersection MAMEE on the BYP5.

Alright, I see haha. That does seem rather ridiculous, as I assume that isn't even in the TRACON yet. Thanks for clearing it up!

Daniel Hawton · « **Reply #7 on:** February 22, 2012, 08:14:18 PM »

Quote from: Tim Farrell

Gavin, Got no problem with vectors off the last couple of fixes.

We do it too. Controller to pilot: ...Vectors to final. (A valid reason).

It's when I get pulled off way earlier because the controller has no confidence in other pilots ability to fly the STAR. I'll use the BYP5 arrival into DFW for example. It would be similar to like being pulled off at intersection MAMEE on the BYP5.

What's wrong with that? If I pull you off and send you direct to the IAP for an instrument approach it's expeditious flow of air traffic. Nothing wrong with it in the least and done rw as well.

Tim Farrell · « **Reply #8 on:** February 22, 2012, 08:32:23 PM »

Daniel,

Appearantly you didn't look at the BYP5 arrival. MAMEE is some 133 nm out from DFW. Gonna vector to an IAP from there? You are missing the point!

Daniel Hawton · « **Reply #9 on:** February 22, 2012, 09:43:33 PM »

Quote from: Tim Farrell

Daniel,

Appearantly you didn't look at the BYP5 arrival. MAMEE is some 133 nm out from DFW. Gonna vector to an IAP from there? You are missing the point!

I've done it from further out... aka, before the aircraft even got onto the arrival.

"Cleared direct SMFIX. Pilots discretion, descend to cross SMFIX at or above 6000, then cleared (approach) runway (runway)." There is technically nothing wrong with it. It's especially useful if you're really busy, they're RNAV equipped, and they are going to a semi-satellite field.

There are more important things to be "upset" about versus a controller's technique of pulling you off a STAR early.

Matthew Bartels · « **Reply #10 on:** February 23, 2012, 11:02:47 AM »

Mid ops RW at KMSP.

NXXXX - Proceed Direct Minneapolis airport, descend at pilots discretion, maintain 10000

Dylan Lundberg · « **Reply #11 on:** February 23, 2012, 02:46:58 PM »

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]I've done it from further out... aka, before the aircraft even got onto the arrival.

"Cleared direct SMFIX. Pilots discretion, descend to cross SMFIX at or above 6000, then cleared (approach) runway (runway)." There is technically nothing wrong with it. It's especially useful if you're really busy, they're RNAV equipped, and they are going to a semi-satellite field.

There are more important things to be "upset" about versus a controller's technique of pulling you off a STAR early.[/quote]

Personally, I wouldn't vector an aircraft off a STAR unless they are within 50 miles of the Arrival Airport.

Just my thought ^^

Regards,

William Lewis · « **Reply #12 on:** February 23, 2012, 03:52:34 PM »

Quote from: Dylan Lundberg

Personally, I wouldn't vector an aircraft off a STAR unless they are within 50 miles of the Arrival Airport.

Just my thought ^^

Regards,

Why though? What makes <50 any different.

Quote

NXXXX - Proceed Direct Minneapolis airport, descend at pilots discretion, maintain 10000

And knowing this there have been plenty of times I have cleared an aircraft direct MSP all the say down by SDF, CRW, or CMH when i worked ZID and you guys were online. Seemed many enjoyed it, both controller and pilot. This was again during the mid with just one or two arrivals heading to MSP.

When I get a chance to get back to working on LOAs with our adjacent facilities I would like to ad a mid shift clause allowing for direct clearances.

Dylan Lundberg · « **Reply #13 on:** February 23, 2012, 04:18:59 PM »

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]Why though? What makes <50 any different.[/quote]

It's just how I was thought. I tried it on a few pilots and they all gave me Attitude after wards D:. So, If I am going to vector an aircraft off of a STAR, it would be <50 miles.

Steven Bartlett · « **Reply #14 on:** February 23, 2012, 05:38:07 PM »

Quote from: Daniel Hawton

I've done it from further out... aka, before the aircraft even got onto the arrival.

"Cleared direct SMFIX. Pilots discretion, descend to cross SMFIX at or above 6000, then cleared (approach) runway (runway)." There is technically nothing wrong with it. It's especially useful if you're really busy, they're RNAV equipped, and they are going to a semi-satellite field.

There are more important things to be "upset" about versus a controller's technique of pulling you off a STAR early.

Apparently you didn't read the whole thing Daniel, he said especially when it is slow and there is no reason for it. Being really busy is understood.