Concorde using 09L/27R for LHR departures

[fast cruiser]

Could anyone in the tower at LHR please tell me why
Concorde is using 09L/27R for take off at LHR when the
southern runway is in use for departures.

Is it because of the resurfacing of the southern runway and
the unlikely possibility of debris being left on the runway or
is there another reason.

Just curious as today advised by director that concorde was due
to depart in the gap on the approach to 27R and yesterday we landed on 09L and 2 minutes later it departed 09L when both days the southern runway in use for departures

cheers guys

fc

[Yellow Snow]

Completely due to the resurfacing work.
Not debris but more to do with 'ramps'? (I'm sure someone will correct me if wrong) between new runway surface and old on 27L/09R.

[spekesoftly]

Where's WOK?

Sounds like another case of "no special handling" ;)

(I'm only teasing - no doubt there are very good reasons for giving the old lady a smooth ride !!)

[skippyscage]

and long may this continue

i like to hear and see this beast depart in the morning from my house (harlington) on the north side

great sound

reminds me of the vc10 days!

*more noise - more smoke - real planes*

[spekesoftly]

Do we have a word for the opposite of a 'Nimby' ??!! ;)

[Pie Man]

How about 'Dimby', D = definitely ;) :) ;)

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

Yes, it IS due to the re-surfacing "ramps".

[BLK 33]

I'd say it's more to do with it being Concorde than the ramps as every other 'plane will be able to handle them; and on 27L/09R they will be less steep (1:500) than those done on the northern last year ( 1:250).

Apparantly they don't want to stress the old thing too much.

[NW1]

Actually it is all due to the ramps which will be left on the S runway during the day. Up to 42mm the notice says - I don't know why they need to leave ramps of over 1.5 inches, but there you are. No aircraft likes ruddy big ramps left in the runway but Airbus would need to deduct mucho life cycles per departure off the S runway so we're looking after her - she's worth it.

The 09L departure is designed to get us onto the 09R path as quickly as possible, and ATC have been excellent at accomodating us into the non-conforming runway with little distruption to others - thanks (again) guys. Personal note - I rekon its time for LHR to use both runways for takeoff & depature like most other airports with parallel runways.

Believe me we have no desire to land on 27R and take all evening to struggle down to T4 (it snatched defeat from the jaws of victory in bterms of schedule arrival time last night) - roll on a proper flat runway....

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

NW1. The ATC problems associated with "mixed mode" operations are very significant. The idea has been mooted on and off for at least 40 years (I still have a magazine article which I wrote in the early 60s about the subject) but it would take a great deal to make it workable to the extent that it would beat existing landing rates.

1. Heathrow is so congested that GMC, a nightmare at the best of times, would be made almost unworkable.
2. In the approach phase (my bit) except under very good weather conditions we would have to provide minimum radar separation between consecutive landers. We can do that on one runway so why use two? Only during the day and in good VMC can we use visual separation, and that doesn't happen too often in our climate.

Major problems arise when an inbound from the north for the south runway is followed by one from the south for the northerly runway. Increasing noise restraints mean we have to try for CDAs every time (and pilots will shortly be reminded of this). CDAs present major problems to us in achieving vortex spacing between landers on different runways.

ATC staff would have to be increased as the approach phase requires the use of two final directors, one for each runway.

The idea of Mixed Mode always sounds very clever but under present circumstances it's probable not workable.

[NW1]

Hello Director (perhaps I should use my callsign only!!),

Thanks for explaining about mixed ops. at LHR - I guessed there must be a good reason for the way things are and your explanation makes good sense. On that score, thanks are due for looking after us (and particularly my fleet) whilst the south runway is re-laid. We had a very sparky approach the other day, and we were very impressed with the way you or your colleague fed us through to 27R with traffic landing on the left. Helped by the most flexible airliner in the sky when it comes to energy management on the approach!

On the subject of CDA - Occasionally when cleared (for example) "descend to 2500' then with the ILS" if you're already below the 3 degree profile and descend slowly it can generate a comment to the effect that you were expected to descend normally and *then* follow the glide rather than regaining the 3 degree profile with a low descent rate. Perhaps an addition to your clearance like "descent rate at your discretion" would help?

Cheers for now.
Speedbird Concorde Two.

[Gonzo]

NW1,

As well as HD's post, there's also the issue of who departs of which runway. If you go for outbounds from T4 and the southern half of the central area off 27L, and northern half off 27R, what happens when you've got a slow CPT just rotating from 27L, and a 757 on a southbound SID that needs to roll now, or the one at 3 miles is going around? Okay, maybe visually one could work something out, but in less than perfect weather?

If you go for all northbounds off 27R, and all southbounds off 27L, then I can say now that I'll never Ground again!

Gonzo.

[surfingatco]

I'd have to agree with Heathrow Director (and it's not just because I work with him) in that CDAs would go out the window if we went to mixed mode - and for that reason I don't see it happening politically. Having said that, politically, someone is going to have to wake up soon and realise that the quart going into the pint pot is only just working (but safely) and with almost constant delays, and what we need is CONCRETE!

NW1 - Usually I drop you to 2500ft (at 11 track miles from touchdown) to stop you (you in the plural sense meaning all of my "customers") levelling off (or to avoid a request for descent when I need to turn the next one base leg!) How you organise the vertical profile is down to you - it's obviously better to stick to the glide path though :)

P.S. My best fam flight was with "Stack" Butterley (sp?) a few years ago to KIAD/KMIA - memorable! ;)

[120.4]

The advantage of mixed mode is that with the interlacing of ins and outs there is much less need for wake vortex spacing, both on approach and departure, and that is where the capacity increase is gained. (Gatwick can do 55 an hour and we can't.)

The problem of separating conflicting departures would boil down to outbound radar using diverging tracks to establish vertical separation before turning onto the desired tracks but the noise penalty would be significant and makes it unlikely.

Even if these problems could be solved, just a 10% increase in traffic would add significantly to the problems should we ever lose one of those runways, even for a short period. We need redundancy in the concrete itself, not higher loadings on what we already have.

Point 4
:)

[MarkD]

As SLF, I find this interesting, because while waiting for my EI connection at gate 88 or so in T1 on the 6th, I was delighted to see a Concorde going full belt [with sound and shudder within the pier!] down a runway [09L/27R I now know?] which everyone else was using for arrivals.

If the change of runway does nothing else, it certainly makes outbound Irish pax pleased to see the old girl streak down the tarmac!

unfortunately, that's probably as close as I'll come to the great bird but it was a damn fine three seconds.

all the best [with much envy] to those who fly her.

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

Just another bit on VORTEX in mixed mode. It's fabulous if all the traffic from the north lands on 27R and that from the south on 27L; then we could really pack 'em in. Unfortunately, as has been proved many times, traffic into Heathrow comes in chunks (!) - sometimes offering from the north, later from the south. That means that we would often be faced with a "crossover" situation - north traffic landing 27L and vice versa. That's where VORTEX problems arise in IMC, which is usually the case in the UK. In IMC the traffic crossing behind has to be at least min VORTEX horizontal separation from the one ahead unless it's 1000 ft higher. If you go for vertical and #1 doesn't descend fast enough (the guy waiting for the glideslope when he's been told "descend altitude 3000 ft") somebody driving a 744 after a 13 hour flights gets popped on at 10nm at 5000 ft. In VMC we can use visual separation and go down to 500 ft vertical for VORTEX, but that doesn't happen every day.

Under certain holding conditions we can land on the departure runway to reduce delay but many is the time the Tower has complained that we have not achieved any benefit simply because traffic has been slow to descend so the one behind for the other runway could not be descended quickly enough to meet the glideslope.

If Mixed Mode is ever trialled at Heathrow both ATCOs and pilots will require a degree of education.

[PhilD]

Are the bumps on 09R still there? Mrs PhilD and I went to JFK on BA1 last Thursday (13 Feb) and we departed on 09L when everyone else was using 09R.

As an aside we were in row 5, which is not far from the nosegear and during our extended tour from T4 to 09L I was wondering if the regular(ish) bumps were caused by the tyres hitting the taxiway lights. If so, it was some pretty accurate taxying!

[BN2A]

All part of the service :cool:

;)

[055166k]

Next time fly on a Trident, the nosewheel is offset to one side and it retracts sideways. Gosh, must stop living in the past! Good idea though. Nice to share a line with someone who can afford to fly on needlenose.

[ex-EGLL]

OK, now that the HS121 has made its way into this thread with is off set nose wheel, can any one explain why this beast coud take a stronger crosswind from one side of the aircraft than it could from the other. There were many times at EGAA where, in a cross wind situation a shuttle would need to land on the opposite end due to cross wind limitations.

ex-egll (and egaa)

[Trident Sim]

ex-EGLL

Both the Trident 1 & 2 had a crosswind limit of 30 kts, for landing on a dry runway, regardless of which side the crosswind was from, so, if the crosswind limit varied depending on side, it can only have been on the Trident 3.

I flew the Trident 3 into EGAA several times, but can't remember the limits after all these years, nor can I check them, as my copy of the Trident 3 Check List and Drills (ATP960) has been donated to the owner of the simulator.

Next time I'm in the simulator, I'll check, and see if I can provide you with more information.

Trident Sim

[PPRuNe Radar]

Mentioning the 'T' word ??? Isn't that an automatic £5 fine in BA ??? :)

[Max Angle]

I get the impression from the above posts that the "ramps" on the 27L end of the runway are there to stay. Surely not, it feels like a shoddy piece of great British road works at the moment, please tell me that it is going to be finished sometime. The taxi ways at LHR (esp blocks 22-30 outer) are the worst we ever use, it would be nice if at least the runways could be smooth.

[IThink]

I think the BAA project ran out of time last summer, so it has paused for the winter and will be started again in the spring. The workers are away laying dodgy drives in Surrey at the moment - last seen on BBC rogue traders :D

Then with a bit of luck closely followed by the third runway! Or we can all de-camp to Amsterdam

[Max Angle]

That explains why the guy who did my drive had an orange flashing light on his truck!.

[Brilliant Disguise]

They're up in Manchester digging up most of the taxiways, with another section supposed to start this week.
As the signs on the motorways say "Expect delays" on the ground especially at night or in, god forbid, more fog!

[Trident Sim]

ex-EGLL

You were correct, the Trident 3 had different crosswind limits, depending on which side the wind was from.

30 kts from the right, but only 25 kts from the left.

No one seems to know why, but several did comment that it was more difficult to handle with a crosswind from the left.

General opinion is that it was a restriction that came out of the flight test program.

Trident Sim