Position and Hold no more?

[Stone Cold]

Well, KORL is using the policy now...the lady was pretty adamant about us not using P&H terminology. Nice of them to let everybody know.

[Ralgha]

It goes into effect on March 20. It is a blanket rule that bans TIPH (taxi into position and hold) at all airports unless certain criteria are met. The list of criteria that must be met is huge, and most < class B airports probably won't be able to meet them, except for the larger class C airports (like PDX perhaps). Even the large airports will have problems, it is expected that even ORD will not be able to do TIPH all around the clock.

I heard it all from a controller buddy of mine.

[FlyOrDie]

Originally Posted by txpilot

KORL is not allowing P&H...got chewed by the controller tonight for saying those words...we were cleared to taxi onto the runway and let them know when we had visual on preceding traffic (a helo). The sad part is, our company never mentioned it to us at all. The only way I knew it was supposed to happen was of this thread, and I didn't think it had already started. Go figure.

TX

So you can be cleared to taxi onto a runway? Well it looks like there's a loophole after all...

[Stone Cold]

Well, that's what we were given. Not sure if it was okay due to the fact it's before the 20th, or not, but she made sure we knew we were cleared onto the runway to obtain visual on previous traffic. But, it wasn't a position and hold . Just for reference, the tower controller the previous night gave us P&H...who knows what the real deal is. There were no notes or anything in the FBO about it that I saw, either.

[aloft]

Originally Posted by NuevaLuna

But the FAA, reacting to related safety issues and concerns about flight delays ballooning, told the airlines, the air-traffic controllers and pilots unions on Tuesday that it would grant at least temporary waivers from the new rules, starting with the nation's 35 busiest airports.

Let me get this straight: the only airports where this is really necessary are all gonna get waivers so they don't have to comply???

[ALOC]

Do you ever wonder if controllers get bored and change procedure for fun?

[n57flyguy]

Originally Posted by meritflyer

Do you personally fly out of JFK? Why wouldnt they be ticked if you didnt read back position and hold instructions?? It could be a major major safety concern if you didnt.

www.liveatc.net

[TXaviator]

hmm, at the metropolitan KGFK i touched down yesterday behind a departing seminole that was obviously in position, and holding. guess my screaming p28a WITH EQUIPMENT GOLF (ha!) wasnt a threat to him.

[Mr_Creepy]

About no P&H -

I was told today (by a controller at KORL) that this decisionwas made by NATCO (NATCA?) and not by the FAA - due to the liability resulting from a frivolous lawsuit.

Anyone else hear anything?

[EatSleepFly]

Originally Posted by Mr_Creepy

Anyone else hear anything?

Yeah, "....position and hold." Twice today (all all this week for that matter). So is it in effect yet, or what?

[ROFCIBC]

This issue goes back many years. I think it was LAX one night when a 737 was cleared to land with a turbo prop in position and holding. The 737 landed and hit the other plane.

Looks like they finally settled the issue, more or less.

I doubt if the military will buy into this one for operational reasons. Don't know how that would affect joint use airfields like CHS and ABQ.

[flyover]

Originally Posted by Mr_Creepy

About no P&H -

I was told today (by a controller at KORL) that this decisionwas made by NATCO (NATCA?) and not by the FAA - due to the liability resulting from a frivolous lawsuit.

Anyone else hear anything?

That's a big deal if true. Like the days of PATCO. We were having big problems at MKC because of early descents (30 years ago). We finally got a meeting together between the operators and what we thought were the ATC supervisors. Turns out we were meeting with PATCO reps. And they were just there to tell us the way it was going to be.

Unilateral action by NATCO means the employer (us) is out of the loop.

[SteveC]

I couldn't find a lot of coroborating evidence, but I think that this has been in the works for quite a while. Here is a link from last year outlining some background: Aero-News.net

NATCA: New FAA Restriction Will Lengthen Flight Delays

Wed, 10 Aug '05
Controllers' Union Says Dulles Would See Capacity Cut By At Least 30-Percent

Just days after the head of the Federal Aviation Administration told reporters that bad weather, crowded flights and a lack of pavement at critical airports caused record delays in July, the agency has announced it will implement a new restriction that will greatly exacerbate flight delays. The restriction will end the practice of allowing aircraft to hold on the runway, awaiting takeoff clearance and, in the process, the FAA is unnecessarily forcing its tower personnel to scramble to meet a September 30 deadline to show why their tower should continue using the longstanding practice that maximizes runway efficiency.

The practice, known as taxi into position and hold (TIPH), enables controllers to safely and efficiently move aircraft by instructing pilots to assume takeoff position on the runway. The restriction will force aircraft to wait unnecessarily on the taxiway and the result will be a backup of planes and a dramatic decrease in airport capacity.
Rather than examine the specifics at each airport to see if changes are needed, the FAA will suspend the practice at all airports unless the tower manager can demonstrate that it is needed. Air traffic controllers are deeply concerned about both the adverse effect it will have on efficiency and the wasteful expenditure of resources by the FAA to force facilities into compliance or to seek waivers.

"These towers now have to jump through hoops to do on October 1st what they've done quite successfully for the last 50-plus years," National Air Traffic Controllers Association President John Carr said. "While the FAA asserts this is to improve runway safety, the likely outcome is that busy airports will eventually get waivers, leaving the real safety concerns unaddressed, while other airports will operate under unnecessary restrictions. Pilots will have no effective way of knowing where this rule is in effect and where it has been waived, and the FAA will have expended untold resources to create the appearance of safety management without doing anything that actually enhances the safety of the system."
Ending TIPH at busy airports is likely to have severe consequences, according to Carr. At Washington Dulles, capacity would fall by at least 30 percent, resulting in major delays. At Oakland, CA, more than 50-percent of departures would experience delays.

(Note that NATCA was the source for this article. There is a note at the end of the article to see NATCA.org for more info.)

I found some more information on another website that I frequent. This particular bit was posted by a NATCA member, but there was no link to allow substantiation, so take it with a grain of salt:

Date: 08/01/2005 13:51

To: KRBNYAYX

From: KRWAYAYX

Subject: KRWA NOUS2 011233 GENOT RWA 5/40 SVC B FF ALRGNS 1/500/530
AMC-1 AMA-500 ACT-1

---------------------------------------------------------------------

FF KRBNYAYX
011233 KRWAYAYX
KRWA NOUS2 011233
GENOT RWA 5/40 SVC B
FF ALRGNS 1/500/530 AMC-1 AMA-500 ACT-1 ALATFO XVM


///PART 1 OF 4///

NOTICE: N7210.609
SUBJECT: FAA ORDER 7210.3 AMENDMENT, TIPH OPERATIONS
EFFECTIVE: SEPTEMBER 30, 2005

RECENTLY, THERE HAS BEEN INCREASED CONCERN ABOUT OPERATIONAL ERRORS INVOLVING TIPH. ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS ARE BEING IMPLEMENTED TO ADDRESS THESE CONCERNS. IT IS ESSENTIAL THAT AT MANAGERS GIVE PRIORITY TO THE MANAGEMENT OF TIPH. THESE PROCEDURES MUST BE IMPLEMENTED BY SEPTEMBER 30, 2005.
ADD) 10-3-8 TAXI INTO POSITION AND HOLD (TIPH) OPERATIONS


A. THE AT MANAGER MUST DETERMINE AN OPERATIONAL NEED EXISTS BEFORE CONDUCTING TIPH OPERATIONS. SUCH FACTORS AS CAPACITY, EFFICIENCY, USER INPUT, ETC., SHOULD BE CONSIDERED IN MAKING THIS DETERMINATION.

///END PART 1///

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

///PART 2 OF 4///

B. BEFORE AUTHORIZING TIPH OPERATIONS AS SPECIFIED IN FAA ORDER 7110.65: 1. REVIEW THE IMPACT THAT THE AIRPORT CONFIGURATION AND LOCAL CONDITIONS MAY HAVE ON THE APPLICATION OF TIPH PROCEDURES. 2. PREPARE A FACILITY DIRECTIVE:
(A) PRESCRIBING LOCAL PROCEDURES FOR CONDUCTING THESE OPERATIONS.
(B) PRESCRIBING METHODS TO ASSIST THE LOCAL CONTROLLER IN MAINTAINING AWARENESS OF AIRCRAFT POSITIONS ON THE AIRPORT. SUCH PROCEDURES MAY INCLUDE, BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO, READING BACK THE PILOT'S STATED POSTION, ANNOTATING FLIGHT PROGRESS STRIPS, POSTING OR ARRANGING FLIGHT PROGRESS STRIPS ACCORDING TO AIRCRAFT'S INTENDED TAKEOFF POSTION, OR MARKING THE LOCATION OF AIRCRAFT WITH COLOR-CODED CHIPS ON A MAGNETIC DIAGRAM OF THE AIRPORT. REFERENCE FAA ORDER 7210.3, PARAGRAPH 10-1-7 (B).

///END PART 2///

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

///PART 3 OF 4///

3. REVIEW FAA ORDER 7210.3, PARAGRAPH 2-6-5 (B), TO THE EXTENT STAFFING RESOURCES PREMIT, AND WHERE THE POSTION IS ESTABLISHED, THE TOWER ASSOCIATE (LOCAL ASSIST) POSITION SHALL BE STAFFED. THIS POSTION IS CONSIDERED ESSENTIAL TO THE OPERATIONAL INTEGRITY AND SAFETY LEVELS REQUIRED TO MINIMIZE THE POTENTIAL FOR SURFACE ERRORS AND LAND-OVER INCIDENTS. NONLOCAL CONTROL FUNCTIONS SHALL NOT BE CONSOLIDATED/COMBINED AT THE LOCAL CONTROL POSITION EXCEPT DURING PERIODS OF SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCED TRAFFIC LEVELS;
4. ENSURE WATCH SUPERVISORS/CIC'S REVIEW FAA ORDER 7210.3, PARAGRAPH 2-6-1(A), WATCH SUPERVISION, WITH AN EMPHASIS ON MAINTAINING SITUATIONAL AWARENESS AND MANAGEMENT OF THE OPERATIONAL ENVIRONMENT WITH A GOAL TOWARD

///END PART 3///

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

///PART 4 OF 4///

ELIMINATING DISTRACTIONS.
C. AT MANAGERS MUST SUBMIT OPERATIONAL NEED FOR TIPH AND FACILITY DIRECTIVE TO THE APPROPRIATE TERMINAL SERVICE UNIT OPERATIONS MANAGER FOR REVIEW. D. TERMINAL SERVICE UNIT OPERATIONS MANAGERS WILL CONDUCT AN ANNUAL REVIEW OF FACILITIES TIPH OPREATIONS.

CIRILLO/ATO-R
///END PART 4///

From the looking and digging that I am doing it sounds like there was an aborted attempt (or at least they ran the idea up the flagpole) to eliminate TIPH unless the facility could jump through some hoops. I think it started last summer/fall, but was apparently not implemented at that time. Rumblings are that it has been implemented now, but it sure seems to be spotty on where it is banned and the dates seem flaky too. I see some references that indicated it started the first of March, others say it will be the first of April.


All the confusion makes me think that it was an idea that the FAA floated, and decided not to implement (at least not fully), but the controllers may have jumped on the bandwagon as part of their ongoing *disagreements* with the FAA on staffing levels, privatization issues, and other topics. I hope it isn't true, but Mr_Creepy and flyovers' discussion about NATCO's involvement in putting this in place may have some basis in fact. Unfortunately.

[Mr_Creepy]

Good research there, Steve. Thank you.

I hope that whatever authority is responsible rescinds it soon. It's a stupid rule. Unfortunately stupid rules don't always get rescinded!

[RynoB]

I've noticed that position and hold ops have stopped at PWA