I'd be interested in how you think we can perhaps improve the service
Gonzo
I was mainly referring to STAR's elsewhere (ie Oz) where the STAR both slows an aircraft down and requires a descent well below the normal profile. This results in application of thrust at low altitudes creating noise and additional fuel burn. The introduction of Continuous Descent Approaches into LHR has made it a lot easier for us to minimise fuel burn and keep the noise down. My recent experiences landing on 09 at LHR have been great in that ATC cancelled the requirement to slow down at the SLP 12NM prior to LAM and kept us higher (crossed LAM at FL130 320 kts) and were still doing 250 knots as we turned onto base for 09L (company requirements are max 250kts below 5000' and max 210kts below 3000'). The thrust levers did not move from idle until we were in landing configuration approx 1200'AGL. We saved a lot of fuel and Heathrows neighbours (incl those at Windsor) would not have been unhappy with the noise emitted.
In SYD arriving aircraft have to descend early to 9000' because of the airspace structure and there is a 250kt requirement below 10,000'. If the speed reduction was delayed until 8,500' then this would allow the "energy" to be dissipated during a near level stage of the flight resulting in less thrust being used (eg Boree STAR for Rwy 34L/R where there is approx 25NM to travel with only a 3,000' altitude loss). The slight difference in timing caused by slowing down at 8,500' in lieu of 10,000' could easily be adjusted into the flow sequencing and no structural changes to the airspace would be required.
Cheers GB