The trial went surprisingly well. It was a good opportunity to try out one or two new things, including taking advantage of the fact Liverpool will have SSR by the autumn, but by the end, both the Liverpool and Hawarden guys went away happy.
From our point of view, the biggest concern was the airspace between the LPL and WHI/Nanti. There's simply too much aluminium there at the moment, made worse if EGCC is on the 06s. The days of turning onto base for 27 at WHI have long been numbered, so we tried to address the problem of where to send EGGP traffic without vectoring you round the sky.
The EGGP guys agreed that the simplest and most expeditious option was to take traffic over the top then downwind right hand. There's a gap between EGGP and MIRSI where there is currently little traffic. We worked out it added about 3 minutes to the flying time for traffic coming through WHI, so I don't think many will moan. Of course, the left base option will still be there if it's quiet.
The other problem was to create EGGP specific holds, as holding at the LPL is currently restricted to not above 3500ft.
Therefore, traffic from the south and SE will route to Eaton on A25 (from the SE, routing TNT direct to Eaton).
Traffic from the West,North and East will all route to BANKS, which is 6 miles west of WAL. Whilst extending the route for traffic from the east, it was the only place where traffic could be held without having an effect on Manchester traffic or Liverpool outbounds. There will also be the option of routing traffic from the east Denby-Mirsi-Eaton.
Whilst some might moan that traffic from the east will have to go past the field to get to Banks, remember, it's exactly the same for traffic inbound to Manchester which routes from the east and has to go to Rosun before turning back downwind for 24R.
Therefore, having simulated Liverpool with a projected future movement rate of 32 IFR an hour, Liverpool came away from the trials with proposals for 2 new holds, 2 RMAs and alot more airspace to play with.
When the procedures are introduced, there are bound to be those who complain that it's all a backward step. However, we've proven the system can cope for even the most optimistic of forecasts for Liverpool traffic, and as such, the trial should be considered a great success.
[This message has been edited by 160to4DME (edited 10 May 2001).]