Told You So

In air traffic control, there are essentially two types of instructions that a controller could give to a pilot – executive or conditional instructions.  What’s the difference, you might ask?

For clarity of illustration in this case (because I’m about to relate a real-life experience), I shall limit this to aircraft on ground, taxiing to the holding positions in anticipation for entry into the runways for departure.  You see, on the airfield, aircraft ready for departure need to taxi on the taxiways to the runway (and vice versa for the arrivals).  There could be 10, or even 20 aircraft on the move at the same time, and taxiways are not controlled by traffic lights, like the roads we drive on.  At least not in the day.  Aircraft are not allowed to move at all unless given instructions by ground controllers.  And taxiing instructions could be given in the form of executive or conditional clearances.  For example,

Executive Clearance: ABC123, taxi A1, A2, hold short of A3, runway 03R.

Conditional Clearance: ABC123, taxi A1, A2, and follow behind Qantas 744 passing from your left to right on A3, holding position runway 03R.

As you can see, a conditional clearance is a lot more complicated than an executive clearance, but giving conditional clearances during heavy traffic is very useful as it keeps the frequency free.  And more importantly, the onus is now on the pilots to keep themselves clear of traffic instead of the controller having to watch that aircraft all the time to continue with the instructions once it stopped, or is about to stop.

Here goes my story…

A decade ago, on a busy weekday morning, I was a trainee in ground position with an experienced controller who was monitoring my performance.  It was already my third month on-the-job and I was performing relatively well, hence there was little need for all my trainers to intervene much i.e. they were leaving me to my devices.  There was a short interval during that session (when all traffic was already given instructions and no other aircraft was calling the frequency), and the trainer decided to ask me a question that was eating him up.

Trainer:  Why are you not giving XYZ789 conditional clearance to follow behind ABC123 on A3?  Then you don’t have to keep watching him.

Me:  Because I’m afraid he might not be able to understand the complicated instruction (XYZ789 is an airline from a country that are not native English speakers, and their pilots don’t speak intelligible English at times).

Trainer:  No, you should have more confidence in them.  They can understand you better than you imagine.

I shrugged, and followed his instruction to issue a conditional clearance to the pilots of XYZ789.  I spoke very slowly, and made sure that the pilot of XYZ789 readback my instruction correctly before I got off the frequency.  And then my trainer and I began to watch it closely.

Instead of giving way to ABC123 as instructed, it turned into the main taxiway ahead of ABC123 instead.  We were both speechless.  A lecture was necessary because that was disobeying atc instructions and could have resulted in a serious incident.  My trainer told me to do it.

I was stuck.  A mere trainee with less than 3 months of on-the-job experience had to lecture a pilot on an open frequency?  How do I do it?

In the end, I just repeated the conditional clearance and asked the pilot of XYZ789 why he did not comply with it.  His reply was laughable, because in his halting English, he said that he followed the instruction.  What could I say?

My trainer went on to apologise to the pilots of ABC123 (I think he recognised that this would not have happened if he had not insisted that I issue a conditional clearance to XYZ789).  The pilots of ABC123 were very nice and told us not to worry about it.  Point is, we were actually not at fault.  If an incident had occurred and the tape was played back, the pilot of XYZ789 would get into trouble, not us.  But still, it was a judgement error on our part to issue a conditional clearance to him.

I felt like turning to my trainer and say ‘I told you so’ but I decided that I shouldn’t since I was just a mere trainee.

There are a couple other  hilarious incidents that took place in my 6 years, and I cannot remember all of them because most of the incidents did not happen to me but my ex-colleagues.  I learnt a very good lesson with XYZ789 and always remembered to trust my judgement – that non-native English-speaking pilots need special attention.  In other words, they cannot be trusted to fully understand your instructions even if they repeated them, word-for-word.

Now, maybe it’s easier to understand why I swear never to take some airlines, no matter how cheap their tickets can be.

15/250

My Favourite Airline

… is most definitely Singapore Airlines.  No surprises there.

I was brought up by my post-war-generation parents to support the Singapore brand, and without a doubt, the Singapore Girl is single-handedly one of the most successful brands Singapore has ever seen, and will ever see.  Granted, many experts and laymen alike have criticised about how outdated and sexist the Singapore Girl marketing strategy is – in particular the stereotypical portrayal of Asian women as being subservient.  The chatter on the ground was heard, and heeded by the airline, which went on a marketing campaign to place less emphasis on the Singapore Girl.

That particular campaign failed miserably, and the Singapore Girl marketing strategy was brought back again, in a heartbeat.

Honestly, without reading too much into the whole debate about sexism, I as a woman actually find the strategy quite cool and not offensive at all.  It started out as a marketing strategy to engender ‘Asian values and hospitality’, but over the years, the Singapore Girl has evolved to be the very epitome of a modern woman and the very image of the airline.  So why rock the boat?

The criticisms towards the Singapore Girl does not end there.  I have heard too many complaints about how they tend to ignore local travellers but give all their attention to the Caucasians, in particular.  Thing is, human interaction works exactly like a mirror.  If you spit out your request with a sullen face, expect a mirror image.  Well… maybe I exaggerated that part, but for certain, do not expect the stewardess to smile at you pleasantly like how she smiled at the Caucasian (who smiled at her pleasantly, to start with).

I have not had major issues with the service I received.  A couple of unhappy encounters, yes, but not major enough to mar my overall impression.  In any case, SIA is my favourite not because of the stewards and stewardesses, I look beyond that because the truth is, the service I’ve received on the Japanese airlines and Thai Airways far surpassed what I’ve received travelling with SIA.  It’s the overall safety record, the average age of their aircraft, the fact that I don’t need to transit (unlike if I opt for Emirates to Europe) and the customer service.  The hubby and I have, combined between us, over 15 years of experience in the aviation industry, so at the back of our hands, we do know which airlines to avoid, based on our interactions with their pilots.  Granted, SIA’s pilots can be quite difficult on home ground (and I can understand their frustrations because they get bullied in every other airport, yet when they return to Singapore, they do not get preferential treatment like how some other airports treat their national carriers – Singapore ATC operates based on a first-come-first-served basis and absolutely no favouritism practised), but they received very sound training prior to flying, and continue to be disciplined in maintaining safety standards years after that.

I think safety is really the crux of the matter here.

But recently, their customer service has won me over.  For some reason or another, I had the impression that each passenger is alloted two 20-kg baggage allowance.  The hubby thought otherwise and asked me to double-confirm.  This conversation came about on our last night in Tokyo when we were packing (or rather he was packing and I was watching) – he travelled from the States on ANA so his allowance was 40 kg.  To my horror, I realised that the baggage allowance on SIA was indeed 20-kg per traveller for destinations other than the States and Brazil.

So, being the bitchy person I can morph into, I wrote a rather nasty email to the Customer Service requesting clarification.  Ya, like I needed their confirmation.  Of course, the reply didn’t tell me anything that I didn’t know, but I just couldn’t let it up.  How can the baggage allowance be 20 kg if I am travelling to Europe for 24 days in winter?  It is plainly absurd! And I replied exactly that.

To my surprise, I received a call from them informing me that they have put in a request, on my behalf, to increase the baggage allowance by 5 kg, per person, both ways.  He also asked me to call them back in a week’s time, for the decision.

I called them this morning, and was pleasantly surprised that the request has been granted.  Combined, that’s 10 kg more of baggage allowance, each way.  That is really helpful because I don’t pack light and it can only get worse if it is a winter trip.

I think what got to me was that… they didn’t have to increase my baggage allowance (I didn’t know there was such a request option and was just trying my luck), but they did it in good spirit anyway.

Before I end off, I just want to applaud the person who conceived the idea of producing the convenient scale for weighing luggage.  The hubby and I bought this at Tokyu Hands in Tokyo, and let me tell you, this is the best S$30 investment.  Ever.  Takes the guesswork out of the luggage weight, and I wonder how come it took us so long to invest in one.

I’m going to advise all my friends into investing in one, although I’m not sure if they could find such pretty ones in Singapore.

Occupational Hazard

On the night when I passed my aerodrome validation on 14 Feb 2001 (incidentally, my first Valentine’s Day with the hubby was spent working hard to get my licence), one of my validators gave me a very wise advice after congratulating me.  He told me, ‘Many of the older controllers do not realise this, but air traffic control entails a greater risk than directing aircraft towards one another – they become short-tempered.  Extremely short-tempered.  But there’s nothing you can do about it.  Just be aware that this may happen to you and you may bring this outside of work.  Self-awareness is very important.’

Till this day, I thank this validator for his wonderful advice.  He is now the #2 man in the organisation, and I can see that he too, always remembered this advice, by the way he worked.

Since I no longer work as a controller, this advice is not so important for me.  But I get affected by someone who isn’t aware of this occupational hazard.

I live with a very impatient man.  Just the other day, he told me to call the groomer to check on the time when the two furkids would be returned to home because he found them too irritating to talk to.  Truth is, he often finds me irritating too.  I decided enough was enough.  So I told him, ‘Do you realise that you find almost every other person on earth irritating?  Maybe the problem is not with them, but with you.’

He thought about it and then answered, ‘Maybe’.

I can understand why controllers become such short-fused creatures.  Instructions they bark at pilots or the people manning the apron while at work have to be adhered to within matter of seconds, otherwise something serious might occur.  They get so used to this immediate attention they forget to de-sanitise themselves once off work.  Everybody moves too slowly for them.  As a result they get mad at everyone outside of work.

And I have been at the receiving end of this treatment for years.  I also have to clear the mess he creates whenever he loses his temper at people we deal with in our daily lives for example, the technicians who service our air-conditioners, the groomers for our furkids, the cleaners at our estate, salespersons, telco customer service officers etc.

I’m becoming such a damage control expert.

POB

And what the hell is ‘POB’?  POB in air traffic control refers to Persons on Board.  Where I used to work at, it is important to note down the persons on board every flight for obvious reasons.  Should any accident occur, the emergency personnel would want to know the scale of the rescue operation and allocate their resources accordingly.

Most aircraft accidents occur during the take-off or landing phase of the flight.  According to FAA, approximately 65% of all general aviation accidents occur during takeoffs, landings or low altitude manoeuvring and virtually all are pilot-related.  So go figure.

And if you have always wondered why the shades should be pulled up during take-off and landing – that’s because of safety.  When younger, I used to think that the airlines were being ‘nice’, and wanted to passengers seated by the windows to ‘share’ the view with passengers who are not.

Not true.  It’s for safety, and nothing to do with ‘sharing’.  In very generic terms, lifting the shades up during the most crucial stages of a flight i.e. take-off and landing allow passengers in the aircraft to be able to see what is going on outside, and more importantly, for the emergency personnel to see what is going on in the aircraft in case of an emergency.

[Photograph from Singapore Airlines website]

Some airlines are a little more anal with the window shades and some, not so.  I always feel safer flying with airlines who insist on passengers complying with that regulation because it then tells me that the airline takes safety very seriously.  Either that or they just have over-zealous flight attendants.  But it works for me.  I don’t always choose the cheapest-priced flights when it comes to travelling or the one purported to provide the best service; safety record, reputation of airline fleet maintenance and professionalism of pilots are equally, if not more, important to me.

What’s Crossing Again?

In my previous post, I promised to share a hilarious story about pilots. But before that, I ought to give you some background first. Controllers, apart from the obvious responsibility of controlling aircraft, are also responsible for disseminating pertinent information to the pilots especially in unusual circumstances for example traffic to them or changing meteorological situation warranting their attention.

I worked in a rather unusual aerodrome where the sea channel directly to the north of the runways is an extremely busy one. Sometimes the ships crossing the channel become cases of concern due to their heights. And in times like this, controllers would need to pass on the information to the pilots.

Me: ABC123, ship-crossing information. Ready to copy?

ABC123: Erm… standby.

There was a long silence from ABC123 while I went on to control the other aircraft on my frequency.

ABC123: Ground, ABC123. What information did you say you have for us?

Me: Ship-crossing information. Ship crossing to the north.

Another long pause.

ABC123: Ma’am, did you mean sheep as in mehhh-mehhh-mehhh?

I was shocked that the pilot actually mimicked the bleating of a sheep on the frequency. Another long pause because I was too busy laughing. I suspected every other pilot on the frequency was also laughing. Oh, the poor pilot. It must have been his first time flying into our aerodrome. And then I looked at the airline again. Ah… maybe the controllers from his home country do sometimes pass him information on sheep crossing after all.

Me: ABC123, I meant ship as in sierra-hotel-india-papa. Ship-crossing to the north.

ABC123: Oh, ship. Yes, we are ready to copy.

I went ahead and gave him the information, which he tried jotting down really quickly to get off the air. Then I had to pass on the information to another aircraft, hoping that they were listening in and copied the information. I didn’t want to repeat myself.

Me: DEF456, did you copy the ship-crossing information as well?

DEF456: Oh yes Ground, we sure did.

And something about the laughing tone of DEF456 told me he was implying that he caught the entire conversation and the confusion between.

After the incident, I reflected on the incident because it was not my intention to embarrass the pilot nor in my interests to do so. Rule #1 in air traffic control is, never hog up the airtime on the frequency you are manning unless necessary. I spent more than necessary time on ABC123 and it could have taken my concentration off other traffic on my frequency.

I concluded that I was blameless in the situation. My diction is fine and I know the difference between the pronunciation of “ship” and “sheep”.

But the poor pilot… it’s been years since that incident happened yet I could never forget it. I doubt he could, too.

Air Traffic Control, Demystified

This used to be the place where I called home, apart from my real home, for some years.  Pulled this off the official website and I recognised all the old-timers in the picture. Ah, nostalgia…

Air traffic controllers do not wear uniforms to work, at least where I come from, the civil ones don’t.  The military controllers of course do.  Training to become one is a long and arduous journey, that part is all true.  And the fatality is extremely high – many do not make it after months of training.

Is it stressful being an air traffic controller?  This is another question I get very often.

No, if you know what you are doing.  That’s my short answer.  I relished in the adrenalin rush when traffic picked up during the peak period.  I don’t do extreme sports, so I guess this adrenalin junkie of sorts derived her ‘high’ from controlling high volumes of traffic.

I left the job not because of stress from the work, but for different reasons.

There are mainly three types of air traffic controllers:

1. Aerodrome controller – the primary method of controlling for these controllers is via visual observation from a control tower.  Succinctly put, aerodrome controllers are responsible for the separation and efficient movement of aircraft and vehicles operating on the taxiways and runways of the airport itself, and aircraft in the air near the airport, depending on the local procedures.
2. Approach controller – After departures have taken off from the runways and reach a certain altitude and clear of conflicting traffic, they are handed over to the approach controllers.  Approach controllers de-conflict aircraft typically within 30-50 nautical miles of the aerodrome, depending on the local procedures.  They work in a very fast-paced environment handling voluminous traffic.
3. Area controller – Area controllers are responsible for climbing departures to their cruising levels.  They are also the ones who hand off the flights to the adjacent Area Control Centres, for example Singapore Control to Kuala Lumpur Control to the north.

A typical departure encounters aerodrome to approach to area controllers in the order.  The reverse is true for arrivals.

In some way, you could say that air traffic controllers wield a lot of power over pilots.  I have heard stories of how nasty pilots or pilots who did not do their homework before landing in an aerodrome new to them (i.e. reading up on the layout of the aerodrome so that they don’t miss a turn on the taxiway) get penalised by controllers in busy airports in the States (by delaying them and not allowing them to move till traffic behind has cleared), but we are a lot more accommodating.  Before I left, it was all about service so we don’t penalise uncooperative pilots.  The last I checked, it’s still the same culture they are practicing.  So you could imagine how much nonsense controllers sometimes have to put up with.

I have my fair share of stories to share – some hilarious and some not so.  In the next post, I shall share a very hilarious story.

How Do Aircraft Fly in the Sky Part II?

How do so many aircraft fly in the sky without flying into each other?

This is a continuation (from the last post) of the million-dollar question.  Now that we’ve established how the groundwork is done before aircraft are airborne, the question remains: how do they know which way to fly to get to their destinations without getting into each others’ ways?

Good question, if you have ever asked yourself that.

Logically speaking, since there are no obstacles in the air unlike on the roads where there are buildings abound, should an aircraft bound from Tokyo to say, Los Angeles, fly directly towards the destination without any detours?  The short answer is no.  The slightly longer answer is, there are also stipulated “airways” in the air, like roads on land and sea routes at sea.  These airways are demarcated by means of waypoints with navigation aids (beacons of sorts like those on lighthouses) – some of which give readings of distance, some give direction, and some give both.

In summary, aircraft cannot fly from Point A to Point B in a straight line for various reasons:.

1. There are high restrictions to flying over certain areas and there are also certain areas which flying over is prohibited unless in cases of emergencies.  Think: flying over the Himalayas or over an erupting volcano.
2. In times of hostile situation or war, airspace above certain countries are closed.  Think: war in Afghanistan.
3. There is no control should all aircraft do that.

I mentioned in the previous post that commercial aircraft have to file a flight plan, but what is a flight plan?  It comprises a Standard Instrument Departure (SID) procedure established to simplify departure routes and put simply, tells the aircraft the waypoints (5-letter designators) it has to fly over for e.g. AAAAA to BBBBB to CCCCC.  Of course in reality actual SIDs are not so simple.  There are oftentimes limitations over waypoints like crossing a waypoint above certain altitude, or if more complicated, crossing a distance from a waypoint above a certain altitude.  The fortunate thing is, in such instrument departures, all these instructions are already keyed into the system so the pilots need not react only on the spot.

The arrival equivalent of SIDs are Standard Terminal Arrival Routes (STARs) but in congested terminal areas, approach air traffic controllers tend to cancel STARs and take over i.e. do radar control to accommodate more arrivals in the airspace.

How Do Aircraft Fly in the Sky Part I?

How do so many aircraft fly in the sky without flying into each other?

I get asked this million-dollar question very often whenever someone learns that I once worked as an air traffic controller.  Today I shall attempt to explain how this is achieved in a busy aerodrome where I worked, using layman terms.  I can’t remember the details anyway…

1. All flights have to file flight plans some hours prior to the intended departure of the flight.  Usually for commercial aircraft, the airline would have a department which takes care of it.  In the flight plan, they would have to, amongst other information, indicate the requested flight level a flight would prefer to fly at – known as the optimum flight level where the flight utilises the least amount of fuel and reaches the destination at the shortest time possible.  This is calculated scientifically based on the predicted load, amount of fuel it’s carrying etc.
2. About half an hour prior to departure, the pilots of a flight would contact air traffic control (atc) requesting for a certain flight level on the flight plan route.  This flight level could be different from what was filed for various reasons for example, an extra heavy or light load for that flight or other factors like predicted weather at the altitude they wish to fly at.  We don’t question the pilots for the rationale because it is assumed they know best.  However, they may not get the level they request for.  A very simple but real scenario – there are 20 flights wanting to fly towards Europe about midnight every day, and every flight wants to fly at FL310 (31,000 feet).  So what does atc do?  Either do separation control via time or space.
3. Time control means atc controls the airborne time of the flights, on a first-ready-first-served basis.  For example, if flight #1 takes off at 1500UTC, flight #2 has to take off at 1510UTC or later if flying at the same speed as #1.  The time separation becomes longer if the succeeding flight would like to fly at a faster speed (in terms of Mach number).  If your flight is #20, then tough luck because you get to depart only 200 minutes later, minimally.
4. Space control means atc controls the cruising altitude of the aircraft.  Pilots are not stupid, for sure.  If his flight is #20 on FL310 (assuming that are already 18 stupid pilots ahead), he would choose to fly at a higher or lower altitude and burn more fuel instead of a 200-minute time delay.  My guess is, pilots make the decision based on company policies which I am of course not privvy to.

That’s it for today.  I’ve explained, in very simple terms, how mid-air collisions are avoided whilst the aircraft are still on ground.  In the next post, I shall explain why aircraft would find it difficult to fly into one another.  Unless you really do want me to explain how aircraft fly in the sky i.e. aerodynamics.  Technically speaking, I should be able to explain that as well i.e. Bernoulli’s Theorem and the likes.