Taking the above post one step further;
With regard to the JAR-OPS requirements for operating with no alternate, I often wonder about the adviseability of ever doing it at Heathrow or similar airports because;
a) Why would the arrival runway suddenly become unavailable in good weather........answer most likely a landing incident/accident.
b) With the fire services attending an incident/accident, what category is available to cover operations on the other runway......and if this is 0, how long will it take for the crews to regain the required category?
c) Even with the normal 5 or 6 min delay in dual runway ops, what would the delay escalate to if the airport went to single runway ops......even allowing for departures being stopped, Captain A has ditched the alternate under JAR-OPS, chances are that Captains B,C,D,E.....Z have done likewise and thus everyone is in a hurry to get onto the ground.
Thus personally I would prefer to retain the alternate regardless of the situation at Heathrow.
As for fuel "plans", I have found that not only do they operate as per PPrune Towers described, they usually don't allow for unfavourbale enroute levels. Typical of this is using the T9 with a bad level into Gatwick when the planned alternate is Luton with as was said, a direct line track. Not good!!!!
Thus one can find that departing with the offical dispatch fuel figure which will include the 20 minutes for London, a poor level enroute and taking a more reasonable approach to diversion can get rid of the 20 minutes before arrival in the TMA.
Regards,
DFC
Last edited by DFC; 20th Jun 2003 at 00:43.