HEATHROW
It does acknowledge, though, that this could only be achieved for narrow bodies, being currently too much of a safety risk for wide bodies
a) No aircraft larger than the A318 has been certificated for a 5.5 degree approach
b) The A318 itself could only be certificated following mods to the flight control system and spoiler deployment, and specific training for crews in using the technique
c) ICAO permits steeper descents only for obstacle clearance reasons, not for noise abatement.
Steep approaches at Heathrow are a non-starter.
Last edited by DaveReidUK; 12th May 2013 at 20:11. Reason: typo
It all depends what you mean by 'steep' though, doesn't it?
"We anticipate that by the time the new Heathrow airport opens it would be possible to have a standard descent approach for narrow bodied planes of 5.5 degrees."
Join Date: May 2013
Location: uk
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
5.5 degrees? An A318 can be modified to get into LCY so any 'narrow' body can do it too? What an egghead conclusion.
Out of their way, they know what they're doing.
Let them try that with a 737-800 (if they can get a crew).
I'll be outside to watch, never seen a crash.
Out of their way, they know what they're doing.
Let them try that with a 737-800 (if they can get a crew).
I'll be outside to watch, never seen a crash.
It would appear that no qualifications or experience are considered necessary by those dreaming up crackpot schemes like this.
But the annoying part is that all those assorted Commissions and Committees looking at the expansion issue seem to be singularly devoid of any individuals possessing even a modicum of aeronautical knowledge, who could ensure that a minimum of taxpayers' money is wasted on considering the more lunatic proposals.
But the annoying part is that all those assorted Commissions and Committees looking at the expansion issue seem to be singularly devoid of any individuals possessing even a modicum of aeronautical knowledge, who could ensure that a minimum of taxpayers' money is wasted on considering the more lunatic proposals.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I just have this feeling that a lot of money would suddenly become available to allow 5.5 degree on a bundle of aircraft if it was the cost to expand LHR
Arthur C Clarke always said that engineers will tell you something is impossible - tell them it has to be done and they come up with a better solution in less time than you thought was possible
Arthur C Clarke always said that engineers will tell you something is impossible - tell them it has to be done and they come up with a better solution in less time than you thought was possible
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Hertfordshire
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agree with Heathrow Harry, especially when you consider that this would not come into effect for another 10 years so plenty of time to design and test any solution.
Consider as well, that there will only be a few airlines who this will actually affect (BA, Virgin, Aer Lingus...) as most operate widebodies into LHR anyway.
Not saying I agree with it, just that the hurdles aren't insurmountable
Consider as well, that there will only be a few airlines who this will actually affect (BA, Virgin, Aer Lingus...) as most operate widebodies into LHR anyway.
Not saying I agree with it, just that the hurdles aren't insurmountable
I just have this feeling that a lot of money would suddenly become available to allow 5.5 degree on a bundle of aircraft if it was the cost to expand LHR
Arthur C Clarke always said that engineers will tell you something is impossible - tell them it has to be done and they come up with a better solution in less time than you thought was possible
Arthur C Clarke always said that engineers will tell you something is impossible - tell them it has to be done and they come up with a better solution in less time than you thought was possible
Last edited by WHBM; 14th May 2013 at 16:22.
I suspect the recertification of all the types of aircraft using LHR to permit autoland and Cat 3 operations from a 5.5 degree glideslope would involve more than a little expenditure , to put it mildly.
I suspect the recertification of all the types of aircraft using LHR to permit autoland and Cat 3 operations from a 5.5 degree glideslope would involve more than a little expenditure, to put it mildly.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: London
Age: 64
Posts: 238
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Third Runway; residents vote against it.
This is news, but I don't know whether or not it should be in the airport section?
I would like to hear the views of Aviation People, rather than people who move into the area, then complain about aircraft noise. Knowing full well they were moving near a flight path.
BBC News - Hounslow, Richmond and Hillingdon residents against Heathrow expansion
I would like to hear the views of Aviation People, rather than people who move into the area, then complain about aircraft noise. Knowing full well they were moving near a flight path.
BBC News - Hounslow, Richmond and Hillingdon residents against Heathrow expansion
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 2,584
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its about as meaningful as a headline stating that turkeys have voted against Christmas.
What would anyone expect them to do?
The economic need for more capacity has become critical, it has to happen somewhere. Seagulls will probably vote against one on the Thames estuary but we still have to have one.
Preferably in the Thames estuary, not a half-baked fudge to allow Heathrow to hobble along ever further behind like a three legged dog.
What would anyone expect them to do?
The economic need for more capacity has become critical, it has to happen somewhere. Seagulls will probably vote against one on the Thames estuary but we still have to have one.
Preferably in the Thames estuary, not a half-baked fudge to allow Heathrow to hobble along ever further behind like a three legged dog.
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Hertfordshire
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They should include a question in the questionnaire that asks how long you have lived in the Borough, and if it is any less than 15 years then your opinion is null and void as you knew full well what you were getting into!
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
no - because people are planning to INCREASE the size of the airport - that's what everyone is against
it's been a botched job pretty much since the early 60's - everyone knows it - grotty layout, central terminals, poor connections to public transport for generations, criminally crowded at times - and you want to EXPAND it?
it's been a botched job pretty much since the early 60's - everyone knows it - grotty layout, central terminals, poor connections to public transport for generations, criminally crowded at times - and you want to EXPAND it?
Hmmm, something doesn't quite add up.
Heathrow Airport (statement today to BBC):
Heathrow Airport (evidence submitted last week to the Davies Commission):
Heathrow Airport (statement today to BBC):
"The council has carried out a consultation on an out-dated runway proposal which is not being promoted by Heathrow."
"Only a hub airport with at least three runways can deliver the economic growth we need to compete globally."
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: London
Age: 64
Posts: 238
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Terminal 5 has been operational since 2008.
The new Terminal Two is almost finished.
The two runways are operating at 90+%.
AIRLINES WANT HEATHROW.
I have lived in the Borough of Richmond and Twickenham, all my life.
I can imagine Mick Jagger saying when he moved to Richmond Hill -
"Oi, move that airport, I'm Mick Jagger !"
Lots of influential people live in Richmond. Yet, they never complain about Heathrow when they want to fly somewhere. Double standards.
It was never really properly thought out. This is UK.
When LAP was first built, it was in the countryside, literally. There were no jets, Just piston engined aeroplanes that made a lovely noise.
There was also another runway in the original plans, just about where they want the Third one now.
Unless one is thinking Milton Keynes. You are stuck with it. Forget about 'Boris Island'. Maplin was rejected in the 1960's.
Boris is a Cambridge academic who rides a push bike. He understands little about transport, except pedaling his bike and cracking pretty good one-liners.
If a solution is not soon found, jobs will be lost and so will the economy.
Mind you, when has anybody taken notice of the public, right or wrong.
My guess is that there WILL be a third runway, and possibly a fourth !
Terminals 6 & 7 are already planned. The steel and concrete was ordered years ago.
The new Terminal Two is almost finished.
The two runways are operating at 90+%.
AIRLINES WANT HEATHROW.
I have lived in the Borough of Richmond and Twickenham, all my life.
I can imagine Mick Jagger saying when he moved to Richmond Hill -
"Oi, move that airport, I'm Mick Jagger !"
Lots of influential people live in Richmond. Yet, they never complain about Heathrow when they want to fly somewhere. Double standards.
It was never really properly thought out. This is UK.
When LAP was first built, it was in the countryside, literally. There were no jets, Just piston engined aeroplanes that made a lovely noise.
There was also another runway in the original plans, just about where they want the Third one now.
Unless one is thinking Milton Keynes. You are stuck with it. Forget about 'Boris Island'. Maplin was rejected in the 1960's.
Boris is a Cambridge academic who rides a push bike. He understands little about transport, except pedaling his bike and cracking pretty good one-liners.
If a solution is not soon found, jobs will be lost and so will the economy.
Mind you, when has anybody taken notice of the public, right or wrong.
My guess is that there WILL be a third runway, and possibly a fourth !
Terminals 6 & 7 are already planned. The steel and concrete was ordered years ago.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Southampton, U.K
Posts: 1,263
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Boris tweeting about his 'survey' currently,
'1/2 - Hillingdon & Richmond residents referendum rejects Heathrow expansion - Hillingdon 66% & Richmond 80% against'
'2/2 A 3rd runway at LHR means a 4th which is lunacy & will blight the lives of Londoners - the case for a new hub airport is overwhelming'
The irony of course being that, in the same survey 62% of respondents did not support closing Heathrow in favour of Boris Island! (Which also says something about the respondents double standards!).
'1/2 - Hillingdon & Richmond residents referendum rejects Heathrow expansion - Hillingdon 66% & Richmond 80% against'
'2/2 A 3rd runway at LHR means a 4th which is lunacy & will blight the lives of Londoners - the case for a new hub airport is overwhelming'
The irony of course being that, in the same survey 62% of respondents did not support closing Heathrow in favour of Boris Island! (Which also says something about the respondents double standards!).
The irony of course being that, in the same survey 62% of respondents did not support closing Heathrow in favour of Boris Island!
If so, please explain how - it seems a perfectly valid point of view to me.