Sky News : you 'avin a larf ? [Archive]

Airbus Girl

21st Dec 2006, 19:44

Almost as good as David Learmount's explanation for the cancellations at LHR on the bbc news website:-

When visibility is good an airport like Heathrow will always operate at about 98% capacity. It assumes you have a certain minimum amount of visibility, which is about five miles," he said.

"In good visibility the aeroplanes on their approach can be put close together because if anything goes wrong ahead the pilot can say 'I don't like this' and take action.

"The pilot can make the decision very easily if the visibility is very good ahead. He doesn't have to wait to be told by traffic control."

"People tend to think aviation is all technology, but no. Pilots rely far more than most people realise on their eyes. If you can't see the aeroplane ahead you can't slow down so you have to rely on traffic control so the decision time is slower."

Eh? Right, so I can only slow down if I can see the aircraft ahead. And er, let me get this straight, anything below 5000m vis is bad and I would have to wait for the control tower to tell me to go-around. Crikey, and I've been flying approaches in 75m visibility! Scary!!!!

ironbutt57

21st Dec 2006, 19:50

It was before the computer age or i'd post it...but years back we had in my home town a 15-seat cessna 150 piper cub crash at the local airport seriously killing all onboard (it was in fact a beech-99) and they were seriously killed....makes it worse of course....this was from the "aviation correspondent" some things never change:ugh: :ugh:

Doug E Style

21st Dec 2006, 20:23

Eastern Wiseguy; yes I heard JV today and like you, thought alot less of him as a result. As far as gerneral journalism goes, a long time ago I had personal experience of an incident (non-aviation related) which appeared in a local newspaper. Although the piece only filled half of one column, there were five factual errors. Hooray for the press!

PaulW

21st Dec 2006, 20:37

I heard Joch Lowe (please excuse my spelling if I am incorrect) on bbc radio five live last night. His description of ILS, autolands, cat3 requirements and explanation of flow rates was very good, simple in lamens terms yet comprehensive and pretty much silenced the presenter. He answered everything in one go without the need of further questions.. So she moved on to the associated traffic problems with Heathrow and another commentator. So there are still some good commentators out there. Hats off to Joch Lowe.:D

Earthmover

21st Dec 2006, 23:40

In a Surrey newspaper many years ago was a reference to the possibility of constructing a tarmac runway at Fairoaks (for those not over 'ere - a GA field not far from LHR)

"It will be another Heathrow ... at the moment, the largest plane (:mad: ) to land at Fairoaks is the British Island Normander (:ugh: ) - a twin-engined passenger carrying jet........."

wiccan

21st Dec 2006, 23:50

Rolls On Floor Laughing My Ar*e Off...I think

Best bit was London Heathrow, "the Worlds Busiest Airprt"
bb

Bishop of Baku

22nd Dec 2006, 00:32

My local radio station today interviewing an ‘aviation expert’.

“Jets always take off automatically so the pilot doesn’t need to look out, however for landing the pilot has to guide it in by hand”.

Give me strength, were really up against it.

Loose rivets

22nd Dec 2006, 01:02

"As the planes approach the airport they fire out all these beams, sort of like lasers, which guide the plane down. .

But...But, everyone that was educated by the Beno and Dandy, knows full well that dotted lines come out of your eyes when you look at something. It's perfectly reasonable to think that planes do this as well. :hmm:

Oceanz

22nd Dec 2006, 03:45

I guess us TV control room people are partly to blame - we tell the journo's so much bullsh*t about how TV works and they believe us.

But there is NO excuse for a lot of their aviation reporting - almost every network I have worked for has had a fair share of PPL and even a few GA around, so they could always ask and run their ideas past us ... but they never do.

I can remember babysitting one parliamentary Question Time broadcast (here in Oz) when a question was raised about a 4 engine freighter (DC8? was around 1990) enroute to SYD that declared a fuel emergency and had to divert to Williamtown and then flamed out on rollout. I asked the main reporter if he had heard that, but he didn't consider it a story. :ugh:

And then they turn around and consider dicky gear landing on a light aircraft as something major :ugh: - believe me, frustration ( & worse emotions) about journos is not confined to here!

Krystal n chips

22nd Dec 2006, 05:33

Watched La Kaplinsky make a rare excursion from the studio on last nights BBC News----Sheperds Bush to LHR not being too difficult even for her to find--and watched with amusement as the NATS guy patiently tried to explain the difference between NATS and the BAA / Airlines with regard to Operational responsibilities. It took a looooooong time before La K suddenly realised that her questions were being answered factually-- but that they were not actually relevant to the person answering them in terms of responsibility---- :ugh:

Amusing to watch though :E

Wizofoz

22nd Dec 2006, 06:42

I can remember babysitting one parliamentary Question Time broadcast (here in Oz) when a question was raised about a 4 engine freighter (DC8? was around 1990) enroute to SYD that declared a fuel emergency and had to divert to Williamtown and then flamed out on rollout.

'Scuse the thread drift, it was a 707 from "A small African Nation" (Kenya I think)

Oceanz

22nd Dec 2006, 06:47

Yep. was african - check PM

Wizofoz

22nd Dec 2006, 06:56

And yet more rubbish journalism!!

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=173817

Pow-wow

22nd Dec 2006, 07:06

The laser beam theory seems to have expanded and taken on more dimensions now....

An EXPERT explained that its actually the airport runway that has the main laser beam shooting out at the planes and that all the planes have a beam of their own that locks on to this beam....aha:confused: ....then, if one plane is too close to the other, you can imagine the interference of three beams !

Now imagine the scene with three, four, even hundreds of beams around....scenes from one of star wars epic battles spring to mind....definetly not safe !!!:=

So....the solution is to space planes far enough apart to avoid clashing beams....my Schwarz is bigger than yours....!:O

All makes perfect sense now....thank god noone has mentioned NDB's or VOR's to them.:ok:

lexxity

22nd Dec 2006, 07:55

Did anyone see Sky at about 10ish last night? They had ex-BA Captain Eric Moody speaking sense and they also had the ever relevant Transport 2000.:hmm:

Just WTF has that got to do with the weather at LHR? Nothing, but it's a good excuse to say you should use your bike (yes really) instead of flying.

Georgeablelovehowindia

22nd Dec 2006, 08:34

Dr W D (Jock) Lowe could be relied upon to give a precis of CAT 3 and all that, being that he's the former Flight Ops Director of BA and sometime Concorde supremo too. (Just don't ask what his PhD is in, because when he tells you the title of his thesis, it'll make your head spin! It's something to do with chemistry IIRC.)

Amusing to watch poor 'Spangles' Kaplinsky's cogs turning in the freezing fog as she slowly worked out that she was getting the right answers to the wrong questions from a person who did a completely different job from what she thought he did! "... and now back to George in the studio." :)

On a serious note, this highlights the lack of investment in the operational facilities at our No 1 gateway. It's well-named 'Heath-Robinson Airport' and after this escapade I can forecast tens of thousands of passengers vowing to avoid the place in future, with long-term consequences. I'm old enough to remember the rapid demise of London Docks.

It seems that while I was typing this, Simon Calder of the Independent has been on Sky, pointing out that the events at LHR are being broadcast around the world. For 'tens of thousands' therefore substitute 'millions.'

Algy

22nd Dec 2006, 08:55

Airbus Girl, not quite sure what you think is wrong with David's explanation. The (proximate) reason why Heathrow is in the state it is in right now is the impact of fog on visual contact with other aircraft. As he says.

(Lots of wider issues of course - insufficient runways / too many aircraft; EVS not deployed and not likely to be anytime soon; ADS-B ditto; HUDs underutilised; no mixed-mode; etc...)

Bandit650

22nd Dec 2006, 09:22

issi noho

22nd Dec 2006, 09:35

After all thats been written here aren't we all worried about the news reports on subjects that we are not expert about?

Do spies p1ss themseleves when the Polonium 210 stuff comes on, there must be so much like this we don't notice. 24 hour TV news - great.

eden47

22nd Dec 2006, 09:39

Just WTF has that got to do with the weather at LHR? Nothing, but it's a good excuse to say you should use your bike (yes really) instead of flying.

What's the problem? Just strap E.T. to the front and away you go........

the dean

22nd Dec 2006, 09:47

funny how the public still want to operate at the same pace despite adverse weather conditions....:confused: ...but you mention safety to them and that brings some feeling of reasoning to them ??!!.

yet i met a taxi driver last night who could not '' understand in this day and age why , when we have gps in cars, ... planes cannot get something that tells them on the ground....TURN RIGHT...TURN LEFT....??

makes it sound simple...does'nt it ..!!???:confused: ..of course i should have been able to see that all along..( and of course all ramp vehicles would also have to be fitted with TECAS too!!!)

how silly of me..

right lads ...get on with it and get those thingamees fitted in your planes right away and stop f***ing around in the fog...so my taxi driver can travel on time..

funny when i asked him if he could deliver me to****** in the same time as it normally takes...he could'nt say he would...

perhaps he should get one of those thingamees fitted to his car as well ( if your planes have any left over )...:}

of course nobody likes hanging around an airport feeling tired and dirty for hours or days on end and they are entitled to feel frustrated and i sympathise with anyone caught in that situation especially at this time of year... (look at the usa and denver...its a mess too as well as the knock on effect it has on other non affected parts of the world due to disrupted schedules )...but look...it happens..

just hope all affected get home for christmas..( remember john candy in ''boats,trains ,and planes..'')...still a few days to go for a little gradient ( though the charts not too encouraging in that regard )...but look its christmas...the time for miracles..:D

maybe...just maybe...:ok:

the dean.

Frankfurt_Cowboy

22nd Dec 2006, 09:54

I was watching the BBC News yesterday evening and they had a very alarming representation of the ILS system on. It showed a "beam" (maybe a laser, I don't know) emanating from the far end of the runway, with aircraft flying down the beams path until they approached the runway at which point they nosedived towards ground at an alarming angle. My wife saw this and commented that they should put the beam at the other end of the runway because it didn't look too safe to her!!

AUTOGLIDE

22nd Dec 2006, 10:09

You're all living under a false presumption. The sooner you realise that TV is just "soma for the masses" (as described once by someone clever), and that the masses are thick as hell along with the journalists, then the world makes more sense.
You expect too much you know...

Doors to Automatic

22nd Dec 2006, 10:40

The BBC should get that taxi driver in again - I'm sure he would do a better job! :p

anotherthing

22nd Dec 2006, 11:11

Bandit650

.......although must admit I was surprised to hear the bit about a/c on the ground interfering with the ILS..

Best you learn about protected areas then if you are going for you ATPL!

Jay Doubleyou

22nd Dec 2006, 11:14

The piece I saw on Sky News last night around 5pm (and it sound likes the same one referred to in the original post) was done by Retd. BA Capt. Eric Moody (1982 Jakarta Volcanic Ash 747 fame) . I thought he explained the ILS and general loviz ops in layman terms quite well.......although must admit I was surprised to hear the bit about a/c on the ground interfering with the ILS..
I'm surprised that you haven't noticed the different holding points for ILS categories, large lumps of metal can cause some awful bends as they pass by!
I remember, many years ago, reading an AAIB report on a G/A crash in Kent caused by fuel contamination, sadly, fatal, but not unusual. AAIB said that the pilot and passengers were killed instantly; the aircraft came down, out of sight, in an inaccessible marsh which even the Local Authority Fire Brigade found difficulty in navigating, so the AFS would have been wrong to try and ATC were correct in preventing them.
Months later, a large circulation Sunday Newspaper, obviously on a slow news day, "reported" the Report as "desperate fire officer who wanted lead his gallant band to the rescue, watched as pilot and three passengers were burnt to death in screaming agony, but callous Controller refused to let them off the airfield!"
Every main "fact" reported was exactly the opposite of the AAIB findings!
They even published an editorial screaming for the Controllers head, (he was under orders not to allow an off-airfield deployment because the fire-tenders were not registered or insured for the road as a management economy measure!)
I have (Expressly) not let that bumwipe of a paper in the house in 20+ years, but I remember thinking at the time, if they get it so wrong, and I know it because of professional knowledge, how often have they lied to me about subjects on which I know nothing?

Airways B

22nd Dec 2006, 11:51

Wait until the A380 starts operating CAT3C rumours abound of 12 mile spacing!!

24 Hour Clock

22nd Dec 2006, 12:09

Airbus Girl- so you have been flying approaches down to 75m vis!!. Willing to be corrected, thought the absolute min for a Cat3b App was No DA/DH 100M 100M 75M. !!!

Farty Flaps

22nd Dec 2006, 12:25

Look children the terms are ils critical and sensitive areas.so the first guy was ignorant of the fact and the second partially right.
The lowest minima are o dh/75. lets stick to slagging the journos off instead of the usual bunfight on here between people with partial knowledge

ElNino

22nd Dec 2006, 12:43

Willing to be corrected, thought the absolute min for a Cat3b App was No DA/DH 100M 100M 75M. !!!

Consider yourself corrected! The min cat3b requirements (in the A320 anyway) are 75/75/75 with no DH.

GK430

22nd Dec 2006, 12:44

Bandit 650 - why do you think more work needs to be done on CAT III holds for CAT F aircraft?

clicker

22nd Dec 2006, 12:49

Even the passengers are getting confused. To quote from the BBC this afternoon.

"There were no warnings about it before. We were just told it was cloudy. I've had no information, just that it's cancelled."

Wonder who told her that.

Golf Charlie Charlie

22nd Dec 2006, 13:44

Well, OK, if we're into ridiculing the media mode, I did quite like this one. It seems some pilots are now spotters as well. From AP, quoted in the New York Times : ""Planes can land using electronics, but reduced visibility means that pilots have difficulty spotting other airplanes -- increasing the risk of collision. The need for increased spacing between planes means lowered capacity for both incoming and outgoing flights.""

ETOPS

22nd Dec 2006, 14:02

CAT IIIB limits are type specific;

Airbus 75m touchdown
Boeing 777 75m touchdown
Boeing 747 100m touchdown

Etc etc

PS loved the bit about the "frickin lasers" ...:)

cedd

22nd Dec 2006, 15:54

As far as i can see (as a humble Tels Engineer) the major problem is the landed aircraft turning off the centreline and hence off-axis to the localiser beam. The tail in particular is going to pull the beam something chronic. Not sure what the spacing is at LHR but assuming it's a couple of miles, it's a nasty time to be kicked off of the ILS. We have an overide button to switch off our farfield monitors when an aircraft is parked on the threshold for any length of time (clearly not an issue at LHR) so it doesn't see the deflection and shut the ILS down.

Out of interest, are they using the MLS there yet and how's it holding up?

PaperTiger

22nd Dec 2006, 15:56

... at the moment, the largest plane to land at Fairoaks is the British Island Normander .........Flown by Captain Spooner no doubt.

Gonzo

22nd Dec 2006, 16:41

MLS is not being used at LHR, we're still developing the procedures for its use with the CAA. Trials are ongoing.

Jump Complete

22nd Dec 2006, 17:08

I watched BBC news last night having got back to England as a pax for Christmas myself just 15 hours late. I think the explanation I saw was the Eric Moody Sky piece by the sound of it. It was simple, and accurate, explaining how extra spacing is needed to protect the ILS and that extra spacing is needed on the ground to avoid problems.
Interestingly when I tried to get out on tuesday (Londonderry-Stansted) we had thick fog (only one flight got in and out all day, apparently, but by wednesday morning we had a beautiful day in NI but the whole of the UK seemed to be covered. Seems I was lucky to get back so quickly, overall.

DUB-GREG

22nd Dec 2006, 17:35

Apart from the "Lazers" that guide us in....

Im ment to be flying from EGLL - EIDW on sunday, with Aerlingus....

Place your bets now, will i make it home for xmas? :(

Earthmover

22nd Dec 2006, 18:53

Flown by Captain Spooner no doubt.

Absolutely! And the person responsible was dealt a blushing crow. ;)

h73kr

22nd Dec 2006, 19:06

Gosh, you'd think with all this fog we've been having, we'd actually be able to see all lasers firing off in all directions! :hmm:

Oooohhhhhh, ....pretty! :ugh:

fox niner

22nd Dec 2006, 19:27

Heathrow certainly must be the coolest houseparty ever....Green laserbeams beaming over the huge crowd of hardcore passengers.:}

Sven Sixtoo

22nd Dec 2006, 19:32

As a humble SARBoy, whos solution to fog would be an internal radar letdown in the bay followed by a hover-taxi to the beach, I was going to ask what exactly is the problem. I'm perfectly aware that fog slows things up, but armed with Cat III autoland and ground positioning radar and all the other expensive toys in an airliner and a proper airport, where is the choke point?(and that's not rhetorical - I just don't know which bit(s) of the process it is that delay you guys). Having read the whole thread, I suspect the Eric Moody and Jock Lowe pieces would answer the question. Can anyone post a link?
BTW, if a professional in another branch of aviation with 26 yrs experience can't figure out exactly why fog screws things up (even though my own operation became an ops-only one-shot deal), what chance do the journos have?
Sven

Gonzo

22nd Dec 2006, 20:22

Cat I ops at LHR = 42-45 landings an hour (3 mile spacing, or vortex).
Cat III ops at LHR = 24-26 landings an hour (six mile spacing).

Normally when we go into LVPs it's only for the morning, and the fog clears by midday, allowing us to recover in the afternoon, and perhaps running on into the early hours.

When it's been constant LVPs for days on end, the effects get felt.

issi noho

22nd Dec 2006, 20:24

Nobody has blamed Ops, crewing, de-icers, caterers, handlers, fuellers, bog service or the bus from the car park.

I think that if the staff wore more religious symbology we would never have got this fog to start with.

Mo91

22nd Dec 2006, 20:24

What...There aren't any lasers??? Haha!!! Amazing...Keep them coming!!! Next you'll be saying santa doesn't deliver christmas presents.

Sven Sixtoo

22nd Dec 2006, 20:32

h73kr

22nd Dec 2006, 20:49

Gonzo

Thanks for that, but

what is it that causes the cat to change, and why is it different for different cats? And is it the cat limits that actually slows the airport up, or is it something else, like ground movements?

Sven

OK, I'm not Avionics Eng., but I'll have a go. CATS onboard are dependent I believe on the standard of accuracy/back up of the ILS following/autoland capability of the aircraft, the better the 'kit' the lower the decision height (right down to total blind landing and auto-taxi for CAT 3C, the highest standard. The trouble is the aircraft could be , say CAT 3C, but if the airport guidance eqpt. isn't to the same high standard it's all in vain, and vice versa, airport could have the worlds best most accurate ILS/Autoland guidance, but not much good if the aircraft doesn't. Also of course there are other limiting factors, LVP's etc involved. I may be wrong but it's my non-Avionics understanding of the situation. About time they started using lasers I would say! :oh:

Gonzo

22nd Dec 2006, 20:51

When the vis gets below 600m we go into LVPs. The Localiser Sensitve Area (CAT III holding points) needs to be clear of the preceeding aircraft (as opposed to just the runway being clear in CAT I ops) by the time the next inbound gets to one mile from touchdown, otherwise ATC send it around. We aim to have the LSA clear when the next inbound hits 2 miles. That's why we need extra spacing, to ensure that occurs.

If anything is within the LSA, be it vehicle, a/c or anything else, the ILS Localiser signals might be compromised and the a/c receives fluctuations. Not A Good Thing when visibility is poor and it's an autoland!

Ref: Different CATs, yes it can get confusing, especially to us ATC types! That's why we've narrowed our procedures down to:
A) Low Visibility Procedures (Viz below 600m) - LSA is protected, 6 mile spacing, CAT III holdings points used.
B) All other times - LSA not protected, whatever spacing we can get away with (!), CAT I holding points (much nearer the runway) used.

PaulW

22nd Dec 2006, 20:56

What is important to state in addition to the previous poster. From the airport side to assure the quality of the radio signal to meet the reduced tolerance required of Cat111. Flow rate is decreased so that aircraft are not only clear of the runway but a distance away. To limit interference holding points are moved further away, in other words the exclusion zone around the glide and localiser transmitters is increased. Which also impacts aircraft ground movement as there are less holding points available for use, so aircraft have to remain on stand until space available. Giving yet further airfield delays.

oops someone has posted before me

Sven Sixtoo

22nd Dec 2006, 21:03

Gonzo and Paul W

Thank you. Learning has taken place.

Gonzo, if you are ever explaining this to an outsider (like me), start by saying what LVP stands for! Then you can go on to why.

May we never meet professionally

Sven
SARboy

Gonzo

22nd Dec 2006, 21:12

I'm very sorry, I did consider it, but you mentioned 'Cat III autoland' and I assumed a level of knowledge about the subject. My error. :ok:

May we never meet professionally

I'll take that to mean you hope you're never tasked to pick me up, not that you don't like me! :}

Given that one of two escape routes to evacuate our new control tower is to climb through a hatch onto the roof and await SAR pick up, you never know!!!!

Jox

22nd Dec 2006, 21:29

I personally have no issue with the news reporting channels doing what they are paid for, but do we tell them how to report alleged stories, no, please do not tell us how to operate aircraft when the nearest you have ever come to it is is flightsim and wikipedia when you did not know how to wrok them correctly. :* :=

PS The spelling error is intentional..............

5711N0205W

22nd Dec 2006, 21:35

As Autoglide said - soma for the masses
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Soma is a fictional, happiness-inducing drug in Aldous Huxley's novel Brave New World (1932). In the novel, soma is an "opiate of the masses" that replaces religion and alcohol in a peaceful, but morally controversial, high-tech society far in the future. Soma, a narcotic tranquilizer in tablet form, is regularly taken by all members of society in order to produce feelings of euphoric happiness. The name satirically refers to the revived interest in ancient Aryan culture at the time. Huxley's society is caste based, like that of Brahminical India.
The name of the drug in the story is based on Soma, the stimulant drink used in ancient Aryan (Indo-Iranian) rituals, in particular those of Vedic India.
It's amazing that Huxley in 1932 predicted Trendy Blur's Britain and the demise of the BBC reporting standards....

jonesthepilot

22nd Dec 2006, 21:35

The reason for reduced capacity in LVPs is due to the bit when pilots take control of their aircraft, rather than monitor the performance of the automatics. In particular, we are talking about clearing the runway. In good vis the crew can modulate their braking to achieve a sensible, but earliest turn off. These points are called High Speed Turnoffs(HSTs). In poor vis, the pilots cannot see the HSTs from afar so they have to get the aircraft down to a sensible taxy speed and then 'hunt' for the turnoff. It's just like driving in fog and looking for a road junction. So there you go then, approach spacing has to be increased to allow the human element to clear the runway. BTW, a year ago, I came into LHR as a passenger, mid afternoon and went round the hold 5 times. 1 hour later, departed, on a domestic flight. Blocks off to airbourne was 50 mins. At one point 'Captain Speaking' came on the PA to point out the new terminal 5. I thought 'this place can't handle the traffic it has, how will it cope with T5? Add some fog and it all goes horribly wrong. The bottom line is 'Mr Walsh, the airport won't take it' Best of luck to anyone who flies out of LHR in the future. It will, to be sure, go even more horribly wrong. Merry Christmas everybody, and the best of luck to those stuck at LHR!!

Sven Sixtoo

22nd Dec 2006, 21:39

Gonzo

In all seriousness, has somebody told the boys at Wattisham that??

Sven

Gonzo

22nd Dec 2006, 21:45

No idea. It was always an escape route in our existing tower. I asked about it once, and they said that the Coastguard down in Lee-on-Solent were the nearest.

I just hope that if we ever have to bundle out on to the roof, the cloud base is over 300ft!!!!:}

747-436

22nd Dec 2006, 23:41

Wouldn't be much fun trying to get out of the new towers roof in this weather! Lets hope it never happens!

Sitting at work at the moment and the amount of R/T that is going on from the tower it seems like it should be 1230 and not 0030z! Lots of late running flights.

It will be a long night at Heathrow for some! Lets hope the weather clears, I bet most people have forgotten what LHR looks like!

24 Hour Clock

23rd Dec 2006, 08:47

Thanks guys & sorry Airbus Girl. I am now corrected.

Georgeablelovehowindia

23rd Dec 2006, 08:48

Hurrah! Heathrow 09:20 actual shows 4900 metres and overcast at 1800 feet. Also, the temperature and dewpoint have split 03/02. A quick look at the other main UK civil airports shows that with the exception of Luton, which looks still to be on LVPs, but 'workable', and Aberdeen which has freezing fog, we're back in business!

Fingers crossed all those poor people now get to where they want to be. :ok:

Xeque

23rd Dec 2006, 12:28

I really enjoyed reading through this thread. I loved the references to "Spangles Kaplinski" and poor David Learmont's usual hammering. I thought you were a bit unfair to the lady pilot (EZ or Ryan?) but there was a gallant apology later on.
Then, news that the clag is lifting and things can begin getting back to normal.
It's not only fog that can screw things up. I recall many years ago flying into EGLL in the old Brymon Herald out of Newquay. It was a Christmas flight too (Hark the Herald rings a bell) It started snowing a blizzard on short final and at (I guess) 300 feet the captain aborted and we went to Bournemouth instead thereafter to be bussed up to Heathrow.
Bournemouth was the only airfield with a reasonable length runway open from the south coast to the midlands and it was manic there. Everything was diverting there - even Laker DC10's (very impressive to watch screeching to a halt - even more impressive whilst they tried to find steps high enough to unload the passengers)
We got to Heathrow and in the space of around 4 hours (the time it took to get us from Bournemouth) the departure area was just one big queue. That's the trouble with airports. They are built on the assumption that from taxi/bus/train to boarding your aircraft is a steady progression that takes around 2 hours. When there is a hitch you suddenly have a tailback of passengers with no-where to go. They can't simply leave and go home because they may loose their tickets. There is nowhere to sit, the catering facilities are not designed to deal with a huge, static group of people and the result is chaos and misery all round.
My heartfelt sympathy goes out to all those poor souls caught in such situations, who don't understand the mechanics of airline transportation (why should they?) and who rely on whatever information is given them through an (often) unintelligable public address system.
On that occasion I was lucky. I took one look at the queue and grabbed the first taxi I could find and scooted back into London first to book a hotel and second to cross the road to the West London Air Terminal where I was lucky enough to exchange my British Airways ticket for a seat on a MEA to Beirut and a connection to Bahrain the following morning.
We took off down a corridor of banked up snow. Back in Terminal 3 the situation was really bad and monitoring the news from Bahrain after I got home, that situation did not improve for another 4-5 days.
Good luck to all of you stranded at Heathrow. I know how you feel.

cedd

23rd Dec 2006, 15:09

In reply to the wuestions about what makes a cat status, the kit on the ground also has to be of a certain standard. Hot standby localiser and Glidepath transmitters, Monitoring of the farfield using a chart recorder and i believe (though may be wrong) that the localiser is a 24 element array.

generally the monitoring and level of testing is higher.

We operate the same equipment in both directions, yet one is cat 3, the other is 1 (thanks to a ruddy big hill)

What ILS are LHR operating? Normark 7000 is my guess.

throw a dyce

23rd Dec 2006, 22:31

Some years ago I was returning from Gatwick to Aberdeen,but ended up diverting to Glasgow because of Sea Fog,which is very common in NE Scotland.On leaving the terminal at Glasgow for the BA provided coach I passed a very angry passenger ranting away at the poor ground girl screaming ''I am going to complain to the highest level about this''!!
Just couldn't resist so I said to this eejit '' So you'll be complaining to God about the fog then''.
**** happens when you travel sometimes.Fog,snow,wind is no-ones fault.The procedures that are put in place are for peoples safety.:cool:

flaps to 60

24th Dec 2006, 17:53

lets stick to slagging the journos off instead of the usual bunfight on here between people with partial knowledge:) :) :) :cool: :)
From one set of flaps to another that comment had me rolling around in my hotel room for ages.......sad i know but its Christmas eve and im along way from home.
The other day i watched one of those seconds from disaster (I know I know but i was in another hotel room somewhere and was bored).
The subjuect was the JAL 123 B747 incident and for once i was impressed at the bit higher than usual level of accuracy until they said that the crew couldnt put the gear down because all the hydraulic lines were severed (true)and trying to put them down with "electric" motors also failed. At that point i turned over.

Ps Farty your right lets stick to slagging off journos as they more than deserve it,