Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Misc. Forums > Spectators Balcony (Spotters Corner)
Reload this Page >

Advert in to-day's Torygraph.

Wikiposts
Search
Spectators Balcony (Spotters Corner) If you're not a professional pilot but want to discuss issues about the job, this is the best place to loiter. You won't be moved on by 'security' and there'll be plenty of experts to answer any questions.

Advert in to-day's Torygraph.

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 23rd Nov 2014, 11:36
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Southwater
Age: 73
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Advert in to-day's Torygraph.

There's a two page spread in to-day's Torygraph which is along the lines of, never mind about a third runway at Heathrow, just extend.
Basically the proposal is to extend one runway and use it in two sections with a 380 metre space as safety zone.
Erm, forgive my ignorance about this - no really - but am I to understand that one aircraft will be landing at one end of this enormously long runway whilst another is taking off from the other end. What happens if the landing one suddenly has to overshoot and go around again? What position does that put the taking off one in?
RedhillPhil is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2014, 12:00
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Wildest Surrey
Age: 75
Posts: 10,826
Received 98 Likes on 71 Posts
Obviously proposed by someone who has no knowledge of iap and map design.
chevvron is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2014, 13:10
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,826
Received 206 Likes on 94 Posts
Heathrow Hub, the originators of the proposal, stated last year that the safety case had been published on their website.

However there is no sign of it there as far as I can see, and a recent announcement from them said that it was only submitted last month to the Airports Commission and the CAA for assessment.

Not that it really matters as the scheme is only shortlisted as a makeweight. It would probably have never have been included at all had the only member of the Airports Commission with actual experience of running an airport not been forced to resign because of a perceived conflict of interest.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2014, 14:10
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
<<but am I to understand that one aircraft will be landing at one end of this enormously long runway whilst another is taking off from the other end. What happens if the landing one suddenly has to overshoot and go around again? What position does that put the taking off one in?>>

No real problem and ATC is well-equipped to deal with such things. Think of a single runway operation where a lander goes around just as the last departure has lifted.
HEATHROW DIRECTOR is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2014, 17:23
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: EGNX
Posts: 1,211
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
On top of which there would be a lot of distance and height between the two aircraft at any one point and the go-around procedure already calls for a turn as soon as possible if it is still the same as before.
Doors to Automatic is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2014, 18:01
  #6 (permalink)  
Está servira para distraerle.
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: In a perambulator.
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Perhaps Cat IIIC equipped aircraft and certified crew will become mandatory for approaches into Heathrow? That would reduce the likelihood of go arounds.
Sooner or later though, someone departing will have an EFATO while someone coming in will have had a Cat IIIC 'failure' and will have to go around. That should play a little havoc with noise abatement procedures.
cavortingcheetah is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2014, 18:44
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
<<Perhaps Cat IIIC equipped aircraft and certified crew will become mandatory for approaches into Heathrow? That would reduce the likelihood of go arounds.>>

I'd love to know how......?
HEATHROW DIRECTOR is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2014, 19:38
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: world
Posts: 3,424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
......only by increasing the spacing. Oh, wait a minute, their might be something fundamentally wrong with that concept!
Hotel Tango is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2014, 20:28
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,826
Received 206 Likes on 94 Posts
I suspect the CAA will be interested in the landing overrun case, too.

But, as I said earlier, it's all a bit academic.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 28th Nov 2014, 20:25
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: London
Posts: 581
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Hope that runway alternation has been abolished by the time that extended runway is opened.
Peter47 is offline  
Old 29th Nov 2014, 06:37
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: LHR/EGLL
Age: 45
Posts: 4,392
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Why would the runway overrun issue be any different to any other airport, including today's LHR?
Gonzo is offline  
Old 29th Nov 2014, 14:25
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,826
Received 206 Likes on 94 Posts
Why would the runway overrun issue be any different to any other airport, including today's LHR?
I suspect the fact that the proposed runway configuration has never been done before at any airport in the world might have grabbed the attention of the CAA.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 29th Nov 2014, 16:12
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: LHR/EGLL
Age: 45
Posts: 4,392
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I suspect the fact that the proposed runway configuration has never been done before at any airport in the world might have grabbed the attention of the CAA.
Ah, but that's a different issue, though, and I'm sure it has.
Gonzo is offline  
Old 29th Nov 2014, 17:33
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: The foot of Mt. Belzoni.
Posts: 2,001
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Surely the 27R overrun area would also need the carry the 900-odd metres of approach lighting for the westerly half of the runway. Could they be inset into the surface or do they have to be on frangible supports?
ZOOKER is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.