I was working Local Control for RWY 36L last week, when I noticed a string of FDX aircraft coming down Taxiway NOVEMBER. The aircraft were in the following order: Airbus, B727, MD10, B727, Airbus and B727. I told the Ground Controller to tell all of the B727's to "make a right turn and join Taxiway MIKE, monitor Tower on 128.42." ALL of the B727's were able to taxi past the Heavy jets, and were airborne and out of the way by the time the first Airbus made the right turn to hold short of RWY 36L.

Later that night I asked one of the Supervisors if we could tinker with some of the taxi routes on the next departure push to try and expedite traffic... something along the lines of taxing all of the Large/Small aircraft to the Center runway using CHARLIE, ECHO and JULIET, and/or LARGE/SMALL aircraft to RWY 36L via Taxiway MIKE.

The answer I received was "NO", due to the fact that FDX does not want us to change the relative order that the aircraft are leaving the ramp area. If ATC allows an aircraft to leave too early or too late, then that would screw-up operations at the destination airport. Huh?

Is there any truth to this statement at all? Does someone at FDX really care if I launch the three B727's in front of the Heavy Jets? Someone besides the Heavy Jet drivers?

If we were able to pull all of the Caravans, ATR's and B727's out of the normal taxi flow and get these aircraft in the air without having to wait for a Wake Turbulence delay -- I'd think that the savings would be HUGE.

Aircraft sitting and burning fuel waiting for Wake Turbulence costs $$$.

Aircraft taxiing non-stop and receiving a departure clearance as they approach the runway would save money.

Anyone have any insight as to what is actually wanted or desired from the higher skill set of bean counters at FDX?

Thanks,

MEM_ATC

 

I believe that we have a number of flights that are scheduled to arrive immediately after a tower opens. We have procedures for non-tower ops, but prefer the towered ops if the difference isn't too great.

 

I think all Bankair planes should go out first. we have like 5 checklist items and we are fuel critical the second we start up but I might be bias. when I used to be a showme we basically did formation take offs to bwg or bna. they were slow so we did our best to stay out of the way. You all at MEM I by far the best I have ever run across. Keep up the good work.

 

Personally, I think you have a great idea. I flew for a regional airline out of DFW for 7 years and that is exactly what we did (with the concurence of DFW ATC).

Many times when taxiing behind an AA Heavy, we would either ask or be asked to transition to the "outer" or "inner" and blow by them.

Additionally, many times after we would land we would report to tower that we "were at taxi speed" while still on the active to aid them in crossing aircraft way downfield.

I agree with you, it seems like the FDX/ATC mentality is one similar to when you would ask you parents for the car to go out as a teenager and they would reply "no". When you asked why, they said "because I said so". No valid reason, just a stuck in the mud mentality.

IMHO the biggest ways to save gas, protect customer reliability is:

1. Expedite departures of narrowbodies that don't require wake avoidance
2. Expedite speeds on the evening inbounds. Any time you have a jet slowing down to come down it means more time in the air and has a domino effect. We should all hit 30 out at 10/250 landing straight in, or 20 out at 10/250 when requiring a downwind leg. Aside from that we should all be doing 330-340 downhill. I am not buying into the "290kt" saves gas thing. I have seen NOTHING that proves this. A flight in a simulator with ZERO traffic is not a representation of the savings. We fly 290kts then end up flying 25-30 miles out from the airport at 210kts. Go fast, till you need to slow.
3. Routinely practice engine out taxi's.

The statement about "non tower ops" is ridiculous. If you can't land a jet at an airport with the tower closed, you need to go back to aviation 101. We make the biggest deal of this and it's almost embarrasing. So the tower is closed, so what. It's not like you are landing at 12 o'clock noon at a non-tower ops airport with 9 GA aircraft in the pattern. We land or take-off at hours when NOBODY is flying but us. Big deal.

Just my thoughts on some things, but ATC...I like your thinking. Too bad the powers that be won't listen.

 

FedEx has a lot of time critical launches to the big cities. I read somewhere that if the first flight to EWR is late by more than 10 minutes, the trucks get stuck in the tunnels and the early priority freight is late costing $$$'s. A lot more than a couple of extra minutes of jet fuel every night. The ramp tower sequences us with our beacons and pushbacks so that we can be in a certain order. I would clear anything through them for this sequencing.

The other problem is the -11s and -10s cruise at .83 while the 727s "cruise" at .80. You might be doing the 727s a favor in the short term but I don't think the departure and center controllers will like the idea that all the slower airplanes get launched first.

I've been on both sides of the coin--727 and -11. I've sat their in a 727 and said "why don't they launch all of us first since it goes so much faster". But now that I'm on the other side, I realize that might not be as practical as once thought.

 

MEM_ATC,
What you did sounds like a great idea and seems to be win-win to me. The way I read it, the Boeings all got airborne quicker, Airbus #1 took off at exactly the same time he would have anyway, and the MD-10 and second AB were also early because they didn't have to wait for the Boeings between them and the other heavies.
Also, don't worry about us taking off "too early." On north departures we're RARELY early.
I think it's at least worth a discussion with the FDX ATC liaison.

Z

 

Silly people...just kidding; what you fail to realize is that the senior VP of the HUB is in charge and there lays your problem. Not to dis this particular vp, just the absurdity of the hub having so much say in flight and thus atc's lives. I learned this two Christmas eves ago during that ice storm. JL admitted in the crew room that the HUB rules everything and anything they proposed was overruled by the HUB.

Now what you say makes sense to those who use the common sense side of their brain, but then comes middle management that creates all these reasons why that won't work. This is to justify their jobs and MBO dollars. One condecending little prick who works with ATC alot is a prime example of this. Try and suggest something to him and he'll quickly make you feel like a moron and commence to do the superior dance even though his explanation makes no sense at all.

So until they put me in charge you're dealing with corporate politics, money and rice bowls. Good luck running with that pack of dogs.

 

If there is a more efficient way, then put together a team to figure it out. Might be able to come up with some ideas. It has to include Fedex people, because for us, it isn't a matter of getting the most planes off the quickest- there are always flights that have priority (as said above.) Not only would they be critical for $$ and the operation, crew duty time is also a factor (like when we do wave launches for wx.)

DFW has runways dedicated to props. They do quick turn outs, different SIDs (and STARs) and stay at different altitudes than the jets. I don't know if MEM has enough pavement for that. We do our ops based on first fix/direction of flight.

 

Yes! A late plane to some markets (ie, NYC, BOS, DC, etc) can costs much more in service failures than a few more mins of gas, though, we are always looking for ways to save gas. FedEx for the most part tries to get the planes to push back and taxi in some sort of priority, but sometimes delays such can change that order. I always thought ATC was in constant contact with FedEx working to get aircraft order shifted in necessary!