True enough Mr Director.
A very senior NATS manager once told me that using the argument of safety as a lever to obtain additional runway capacity would be to admit that we have already taken things too far. If we have gone too far, would we be able to admit it? An inability to acknowledge error in our game is dangerous and I am sure it is something that the crews work on in CRM.
If 4 miles is the spacing that we ought to be using then using less is to allow commercial pressure to back us into a corner that jeopardises safety. Now, if that has happened we need to be big enough to admit that we have got it wrong and act accordingly.
All the TC sectors have a target sector flow which is 80% of the sector capacity, so I am told, supposedly giving some contingency. Except Heathrow, where traffic is flowed usually 2 per hour OVER the runway capacity thereby DELIBERATELY inducing pressure on the final director to pack the traffic in. Does that not indicate that we have allowed an imbalance between capacity and demand to develop?
If the airlines are to be allowed to operate a financially competent (as well as safety conscious) fuel policy, which is essential, then SPARE runway capacity must be provided to cater for the unforseen. The government's policy therefore must be questionable.
Have a good afternoon, see you tomorrow.
Pount 4
