EDINBURGH
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Second star to the right, and straight on 'til morning
Age: 63
Posts: 513
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
12/30 isn't of great benefit to EDI for a variety of reasons including the lack of ILS, poor alignment to prevailing winds, noise issues and potential conflict with any traffic using 06/24 and nearby taxiways.
Aircraft cannot land on runway 12/30 or take-off from runway 30 if there is any potential conflict with aircraft using 06/24 or adjacent taxiways e.g. in the event of a missed approach, go-around, over-run or simply the fact that the traffic using the two runways cross each other's paths. Departures from 12 don't cause such conflicts so these used to occur quite frequently up until at least the 90s, especially turboprop aircraft which had less of a noise footprint.
If I understand the NATS data correctly NATS | AIS - Home , the decision height for the non-precision approach to runway 30 is about 1,900ft, which is about 5 or 6 miles from the threshold and 5 miles from the EDN NDB, due to the proximity of high ground at Hillend.
Decision height for the non-precision approach to runway 12 is 790ft (about 2 miles from threshold) due to towers / masts, presumably including the Forth Road Bridge.
On 13th October this year, 06/24 was supposed to close at 23:00 (BST) for overnight maintenance works. Nine passenger flights were inbound and expected to arrive between 23:00 and 23:55. Cloud-base was broken at 700ft and overcast at 1400ft with 12km visibility and a 10kt crosswind (040 degrees) on runway 12. I doubt whether many of the inbounds (which included a BA B763) would have attempted a non-precision approach to runway 12 in these conditions and, even if they had, I suspect that the chances of a missed approach would have been very high unless they got lucky with a break in the clouds. I suspect that airlines have policies that would discourage or prohibit a non-precision approach in such conditions but I'm not an expert on this matter. Maybe if any professional pilots are reading this they might be able to comment on whether these conditions would be below their airline's minimums for a non-precision approach or whether they would fly an approach in the hope of sighting the runway before reaching decision height.
Whether due to weather or for other reasons (I'm not sure which) 06/24 remained open to accept all of the inbounds.
In the early hours of 13th October, the Thomson B738 from Sharm landed on runway 12 at about 03:45 (BST). If 12/30 is closed permanently as a result of the new stands at Block 33, I wonder whether that was perhaps the final fixed wing aircraft ever to use 12/30?
Aircraft cannot land on runway 12/30 or take-off from runway 30 if there is any potential conflict with aircraft using 06/24 or adjacent taxiways e.g. in the event of a missed approach, go-around, over-run or simply the fact that the traffic using the two runways cross each other's paths. Departures from 12 don't cause such conflicts so these used to occur quite frequently up until at least the 90s, especially turboprop aircraft which had less of a noise footprint.
If I understand the NATS data correctly NATS | AIS - Home , the decision height for the non-precision approach to runway 30 is about 1,900ft, which is about 5 or 6 miles from the threshold and 5 miles from the EDN NDB, due to the proximity of high ground at Hillend.
Decision height for the non-precision approach to runway 12 is 790ft (about 2 miles from threshold) due to towers / masts, presumably including the Forth Road Bridge.
On 13th October this year, 06/24 was supposed to close at 23:00 (BST) for overnight maintenance works. Nine passenger flights were inbound and expected to arrive between 23:00 and 23:55. Cloud-base was broken at 700ft and overcast at 1400ft with 12km visibility and a 10kt crosswind (040 degrees) on runway 12. I doubt whether many of the inbounds (which included a BA B763) would have attempted a non-precision approach to runway 12 in these conditions and, even if they had, I suspect that the chances of a missed approach would have been very high unless they got lucky with a break in the clouds. I suspect that airlines have policies that would discourage or prohibit a non-precision approach in such conditions but I'm not an expert on this matter. Maybe if any professional pilots are reading this they might be able to comment on whether these conditions would be below their airline's minimums for a non-precision approach or whether they would fly an approach in the hope of sighting the runway before reaching decision height.
Whether due to weather or for other reasons (I'm not sure which) 06/24 remained open to accept all of the inbounds.
In the early hours of 13th October, the Thomson B738 from Sharm landed on runway 12 at about 03:45 (BST). If 12/30 is closed permanently as a result of the new stands at Block 33, I wonder whether that was perhaps the final fixed wing aircraft ever to use 12/30?
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Second star to the right, and straight on 'til morning
Age: 63
Posts: 513
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Other shortcomings for runway 12/30 include the fact that there are no parallel taxiways for much of its length and it has relatively weak PCNs (31/F/C/X/T).
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The only thing that precludes you from attempting an approach is an Approach Ban, this means the RVR needs to be above the required minima before passing through 1000ft above airfield elevation. On 12/30 RVR data isn't available and so Converted Met Visibility (CMV) becomes the limiting factor. This requires you to multiple the reported met visibility by a certain factor depending upon the approach lighting system and whether it's day or night. The required visibility for a CAT C/D aircraft (737/A320/767) for the Non Precision Approach to 12 is 3200m and for 30 it's 5000m. All this is based on Jeppesen Plates.
Decision Altitude is 790ft while the Decision Height is 691ft. The cloud base was at a height of 700ft, meaning that the cloud base was actually 9ft above the minimums.
In the case of October 13th both visibility and cloud base were within the limits...just. Even if the cloud base was below limits I don't know of an airline that would discourage pilots attempting an approach. Most crew I know of would 'give it a go' when the cloud base is below the required minimums, especially if it was Broken as you could get a gap in the clouds. But from a commercial/customers perspective, it makes sense for the airport to delay the works if they can seeing as the cloud base was right on the limit.
Decision height for the non-precision approach to runway 12 is 790ft
In the case of October 13th both visibility and cloud base were within the limits...just. Even if the cloud base was below limits I don't know of an airline that would discourage pilots attempting an approach. Most crew I know of would 'give it a go' when the cloud base is below the required minimums, especially if it was Broken as you could get a gap in the clouds. But from a commercial/customers perspective, it makes sense for the airport to delay the works if they can seeing as the cloud base was right on the limit.
Last edited by Boeing 77W; 1st Nov 2013 at 11:30.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Livingston and Edinburgh
Age: 86
Posts: 844
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Another record month for EDI
Busiest October ever sees Edinburgh Airport top most successful six months on record
Busiest October ever sees Edinburgh Airport top most successful six months on record
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: London
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
US Airways EDI-PHL direct?
US Airways website seems to be showing a direct EDI-PHL 757 service for next summer.
US784 Dep PHL 20:50, Arr EDI 08:40 + 1
US785 Dep EDI 10:50, Arr PHL 13:35
No official announcement as yet, though.
US784 Dep PHL 20:50, Arr EDI 08:40 + 1
US785 Dep EDI 10:50, Arr PHL 13:35
No official announcement as yet, though.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Awesome news for EDI, seems to be an addtion and not at the expense of GLA. Shame it will be for one summer only 
.....WHEN THEY BOTH come back it will be as American Airlines.
I hope!
.....WHEN THEY BOTH come back it will be as American Airlines.
I hope!
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: My views - Not my employer!
Posts: 1,031
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All EDI need to do to get better approach capability is pay some wonga and get an RNAV approach designed for 12/30.
Most arriving aircraft I suspect could use it...
Most arriving aircraft I suspect could use it...
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Scotland
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
US Airways PHL/EDI
From http://airlineroute.net
US Airways from 23MAY14 to 30SEP14 (US departure) is launching Philadelphia – Edinburgh service, on board Boeing 757 aircraft. Service to operate mainly on daily basis.
US784 PHL2050 – 0840+1EDI 752 D
US785 EDI1050 – 1335PHL 752 D
Service operates Day x2 from PHL, Day x3 from EDI from 23MAY14 to 08JUN14, and from 08SEP14 to 22SEP14
US Airways from 23MAY14 to 30SEP14 (US departure) is launching Philadelphia – Edinburgh service, on board Boeing 757 aircraft. Service to operate mainly on daily basis.
US784 PHL2050 – 0840+1EDI 752 D
US785 EDI1050 – 1335PHL 752 D
Service operates Day x2 from PHL, Day x3 from EDI from 23MAY14 to 08JUN14, and from 08SEP14 to 22SEP14
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Edinburgh
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ryanair recently announced that the DUB-EDI route will increase 4 to 8 Daily. What I ask is, is that 8 return sectors or 4 single trips in each direction? Nothing in the booking system for April yet.
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Scotland
Age: 64
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
US Airways to PHL
I am confused - the top line says 'daily' but from what's posted below this it would appear to leave PHL on a Tuesday (x2), arrive EDI on the Wednesday (x3) and depart back to PHL. This would make it weekly? And it would appear, within two fortnightly slots, making a total of four flights? Have I got this right after a long day??
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: London
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The way I read it was 6 x weekly from 23rd May to 8th June inclusive, where there is no Tuesday night departure from PHL and no Wednesday morning departure from EDI .... then it runs 7 x weekly through June, July, and August until 8th September, whereafter it reverts to 6 x weekly until the end of the season .... sound right?
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Cloud Cookoo Land
Posts: 1,270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RNAV doesn't suffer the limitations of a SRA or NDB. It will allow the 'UW' and the 'EDN' to be removed, which are significant costs. In terms of the limited times that 12/30 is used, RNAV will make it easier for the pilots and controllers alike. There's a lot of verbal in an SRA.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Second star to the right, and straight on 'til morning
Age: 63
Posts: 513
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Callsign Kilo said;
Does anyone know whether the five new stands that are being created at Block 33 (the turning area at the SE end of 12/30) are temporary or permanent? Do they have / will they have permanent floodlighting or will the floodlighting be temporary and portable? Permanent floodlighting would presumably prevent any future use of runway 12/30, unless it is designed to fold flat or otherwise be removed when necessary.
Perhaps an arrangement like the movable palm trees in the Thunderbird 2 launch sequence might work.
(I jest, of course )
RNAV doesn't suffer the limitations of a SRA or NDB. It will allow the 'UW' and the 'EDN' to be removed, which are significant costs. In terms of the limited times that 12/30 is used, RNAV will make it easier for the pilots and controllers alike. There's a lot of verbal in an SRA.
Perhaps an arrangement like the movable palm trees in the Thunderbird 2 launch sequence might work.
(I jest, of course )
Last edited by Porrohman; 19th Nov 2013 at 16:58. Reason: typo