N9373M

SWA first. Pizza pays forward.

jmcmanna

If you're talking about EDCT times from Traffic Management, the answer is complicated. Normally, the earlier proposed times gets earlier EDCTs. But, I have seen situations where an airline has called TMU and swapped EDCT times between a mainline flight at one airport and a regional flight at another nearby airport, essentially giving a shorter delay to one aircraft and a longer delay to another. But that is always the airlines doing it to themselves.

The only time I have done it as a controller is when two regional airlines where both going to ORD on a bad wx day (I was at a smaller airport at the time). Regional A boarded up and parked on the edge ramp for an hour, regional B stayed at the gate and didn't board.

Conditions improved, and TMU gave the regional B a new departure window 20 minutes away (they originally had a slightly earlier proposed departure time than regional A). They couldn't make the new time, so I worked out a swap so Regional A could go instead, and regional B got regional A's slot.

The crew that tried to make the pax for comfy by not making them sit in a regional jet for an hour on the ramp lost out on the deal, but I could put the other airplane in there or no airplane in there. Fair? Maybe not, but that's how the system works.


If you're talking about approach control, I can only speak for Chicago: No priority based on airline or international/domestic. At ORD approach, everyone is already in line from Chicago Center, and for the most part, they'll stay in that line until they land. Sometimes an attempt is made to keep heavy jets/B757's lumped together, but that is because a 747 following a 747 needs 4 miles, whereas a CRJ or 737 following a 747 needs 5 miles.

When there are more arrivals than runways or airspace allow, at least one of the 4 major arrival streams may go into the hold -- then they'll come out and someone else will go into the hold. Traffic management tries to keep the holding balanced so the pain is spread out equally (4-5 arrival streams to 3 runways -- sometimes it just doesn't work).

Approach actually doesn't know where you departed from or how long you've been flying or how delayed you are, so it would be impossible to give preferential treatment to an already delayed flight, or to one that took off 6 hours ago vs. one that took off 1 hour ago.

For anyone that was told to expect 28 or 27L at ORD, but then was re-assigned to 27R, it may seem that we're giving preferential treatment to someone else and screwing your flight, but that's not the case. Sometimes a heavy will state that 28 is an operational necessity, or it would just be more advantageous to the entire operation to move you to 27R.

You don't notice it as much, but sometimes you do see someone who was originally assigned 27R get a last-minute change to 27L or 28, so it does go both ways.

Captain Tony

My thought on this is that it's a lot easier for me to manage my fuel when I get assigned a hold with a firm EFC time. Especially when on min fuel. The zig zag vectors are indefinite in duration, and make it very difficult to formulate a bingo fuel plan as for when to divert.

Of all the times I've landed with "uncomfortable" fuel levels, it's been with surprise vectors, never a hold. When I hold, I compute my bingo, then head to the alternate when I hit it.

outofwork

thanks for the post! Also, why the 250 restriction for departures southbound on the ORD5?

jmcmanna

Ya got me on that one -- I have no idea. Chicago Center will sometimes call and tell us to go normal speed, so it probably has something to do with their operation.

Ajax

We don't really have a priority list other than the standart emergencies, lifeguard flights, VIP movement, Military and law enforcement flights. We do try get the internationals in without holding if we can avoid it, since usually they've been airborne the longest, and may have fuel issues if delayed, but its not something set on stone.

Normally is the "first come, first served" routine.

saxman66

The other day we were coming in on the VOR to 13L and JFK and we had to go around due to weather and low ceiling. At least 6 or 8 other aircraft had to do this. Instead of tower telling us to fly the published missed we're all told to fly something different. It seems to me it would cut down on radio transmissions. I was all prepared to climb to 4000 and fly a heading but instead were told to fly to 3000 and fly a totally different heading. I totally missed the different altitude and was about to blow right through 3000 before my CA stopped me. I can see other aircraft doing this as well as doing a missed approach in IMC is a very busy time in the cockpit.

Obviously we all couldn't hold at the same altitude but it's it still nice to have an initial altitude to climb to without having to ask. I had pretty much engrained in my head 4000 instead of 3000.

jmcmanna

Replace "JFK" with "ORD" or "MDW" and the answer would be that it's done to keep the traffic moving and separated -- once you go missed, the tower treats you like a departure and will put everyone on different headings/altitudes to get as many airplanes out as possible.

I don't know the operation at JFK, so I can't say the above is the reason there -- but usually, the published missed approach is really inefficient when you're dealing with several airplanes because only one airplane can use it at a time. Using altitude and radar separation can allow 6 airplanes to all go missed in a row, keep them all separated, and potentially keep the departures going, too.

gearcrankr

jmcmanna

What about landing without a clearance? Land and stay in sequence? Go missed and take a tour? What is the consensus of the ORD tracon?

jmcmanna

This is a tower function, so someone from there would be better to answer.

TRACON perspective -- go arounds mean more work for us, and we don't like them. Personally, I say do whatever you think is prudent in the situation. If I'm working and you come back to me, I will attempt to put you as close to the front of the sequence as possible (I think most controllers here will). I can't speak for everyone, though.

Bottom line -- if you land without a clearance and nothing happens, it's probably no big deal. If you land without a clearance and something bad happens, you and I both are in trouble (you might be dead, my life might be changed forever because of your death).

If you're on final, the tower knows about you whether they talk to you or not. Most controllers will assume you're just going to land if they don't talk to you -- maybe your radio broke: in that case, it's probably safer for you to be on the ground than flying around Chicago airspace not talking to anyone, even if you didn't hear the magic words "cleared to land".

Let's say it is 200' overcast and 1sm visibility, you check in at TAFFS and no one answers and you don't hear another transmission to anyone all the way to the runway. Do you go missed, follow the published missed, hoping ATC cleared a path for you, then try to go shoot an approach somewhere on your own, or do you land and hope ATC ensures the runway is clear? As a controller, I'm going to assume you are landing and do everything humanly possible to make sure the runway is clear.

But, you're ultimately the pilot in command, and we will accommodate you to the best of our ability whether your land or go around.