SOUTHEND - 2
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: southern spain
Posts: 1,987
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Come on Tommy - do you honestly think an airline - your are probably thinking of Norwegian Shuttle - moving its operations from Gatwick with all its worldwide connections and superb rail and road connections move to Southend - I don't think so. I really do think all this Southend so-called expansion and expected airlines and passengers is getting - as Captain Mainwaring said - getting into the realms of fantasy! Only time will tell.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Kent
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
c3b - I'm not saying they will move in and I'm definately not a fantasist, but of all the airlines serving all the London airports would you not agree they have good potential and it is certainly a possibility? Not convinced onward connections from those destinations are particularly important?
Afterall, from an operational perspective:
Shorter flight times (slightly less than STN, more so than LGW though hold times would be eradicated)
Shorter turnarounds
Lower fuel costs
Possible cheaper airport/handling costs
From an inbound (majority of the pax) perspective:
1. Majority heading to London so couldn't care less where they arrive so long as it is convenient.
2. Train to London (with probable lower ticket prices than Gat/Stans Express)
3. Overall transit times via rail probably similar to LGW and shorter than STN
4. Not too far from M25
From an outbound pax perspective:
1. Rail travellers are used to departing from Liverpool St (or intermediate tube stop) so getting to SEN no different to getting to STN.
Also worth noting that Ford is likely to be a major business user of CGN flights, and the Ford shuttle operated from SEN anyway pre-railway station.
Afterall, from an operational perspective:
Shorter flight times (slightly less than STN, more so than LGW though hold times would be eradicated)
Shorter turnarounds
Lower fuel costs
Possible cheaper airport/handling costs
From an inbound (majority of the pax) perspective:
1. Majority heading to London so couldn't care less where they arrive so long as it is convenient.
2. Train to London (with probable lower ticket prices than Gat/Stans Express)
3. Overall transit times via rail probably similar to LGW and shorter than STN
4. Not too far from M25
From an outbound pax perspective:
1. Rail travellers are used to departing from Liverpool St (or intermediate tube stop) so getting to SEN no different to getting to STN.
Also worth noting that Ford is likely to be a major business user of CGN flights, and the Ford shuttle operated from SEN anyway pre-railway station.
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Regrettably far from 50°N
Posts: 917
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Europe
Posts: 2,175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is mentioning Germanwings as a possible operator from SEN speculation or are they reliably known to be interested?
What Aer Arann of course could do is establish some sort of mini-hub at SEN if they operate to place like ORK, WAT and GWY from the west and some Benelux / Western German destinations from the east.
However, I remanin sceptical until I see RE planes in SEN. IIRC, a couple of years ago RE announced a base at LGG in Belgium - which never materialized.
What Aer Arann of course could do is establish some sort of mini-hub at SEN if they operate to place like ORK, WAT and GWY from the west and some Benelux / Western German destinations from the east.
However, I remanin sceptical until I see RE planes in SEN. IIRC, a couple of years ago RE announced a base at LGG in Belgium - which never materialized.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Europe
Posts: 2,175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think "silver with a little yellow and purple" refers to Germanwings, hence my asking.
For Air Berlin, things have changed since last year because of them joining oneworld. If they move, it will be from STN to LGW.
For Air Berlin, things have changed since last year because of them joining oneworld. If they move, it will be from STN to LGW.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: uk
Posts: 894
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Essex Police helicopter moving to Southend?
Essex Police helicopter could move to Southend Airport (From Echo)
Essex Police helicopter could move to Southend Airport (From Echo)
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Essex
Age: 53
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Essex
Age: 54
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Help required from people who know
Ok - I'm not a pilot, but would really appreciate some advice, and thanks in advance.
Does anyone know about Southend Airport and the intended expansion? My question is (as someone under the runway centre line, 2 miles out from the start of the runway to the South West (i.e. in Leigh-on-sea)) - is it REALLY the case that short-to-medium-range aircraft approaching the runway on a glide path will be at a height of only 600-650 feet when they pass overhead? I understand that at present there's a 3 degree angle of approach and if the expansion goes ahead this will be 3.5 degrees with ILS - however given the south westerly direction of expansion there won't be much in it. I'm just struggling with the image of A319s and ATR-72s etc flying this low overhead. I'm not convinced airport personnel will give a fully objective view.
Any views on this?
Does anyone know about Southend Airport and the intended expansion? My question is (as someone under the runway centre line, 2 miles out from the start of the runway to the South West (i.e. in Leigh-on-sea)) - is it REALLY the case that short-to-medium-range aircraft approaching the runway on a glide path will be at a height of only 600-650 feet when they pass overhead? I understand that at present there's a 3 degree angle of approach and if the expansion goes ahead this will be 3.5 degrees with ILS - however given the south westerly direction of expansion there won't be much in it. I'm just struggling with the image of A319s and ATR-72s etc flying this low overhead. I'm not convinced airport personnel will give a fully objective view.
Any views on this?
Erm, it's an airport, the aircraft will have to get a lot lower than 600 odd feet if they want to use the facilities.........
As far as the expansion goes, my understanding is that the runway will be extended about as far as it physically can be (which isn't much at 300m) so basically the glide slope moves out by the same amount. Therefore if you are under the glideslope just now once the new extension is in use, whaterver is over head will be AT MOST 15m or 50ft lower. You will not be able to determine the difference with the naked eye unless you are much, much closer to the threshold. the difference in the size of the aircraft being only about around 10%.
Think of a full moon - it looks huge near the horizon but it looks tiny when vertically overhead, but it's still the same size & subtends the same visual angle.
As far as the expansion goes, my understanding is that the runway will be extended about as far as it physically can be (which isn't much at 300m) so basically the glide slope moves out by the same amount. Therefore if you are under the glideslope just now once the new extension is in use, whaterver is over head will be AT MOST 15m or 50ft lower. You will not be able to determine the difference with the naked eye unless you are much, much closer to the threshold. the difference in the size of the aircraft being only about around 10%.
Think of a full moon - it looks huge near the horizon but it looks tiny when vertically overhead, but it's still the same size & subtends the same visual angle.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Essex
Age: 54
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok - the concern is that Southend is apparently going from occasional larger aircraft movements for maintenance (admittedly including the occasional older and much noiser type of plane) to a much more scheduled, frequent scenario which might well have more of a nuisance impact.
is it REALLY the case that short-to-medium-range aircraft approaching the runway on a glide path will be at a height of only 600-650 feet when they pass overhead
Noise of course is subjective, but if you're living in an urban area then the noise of 319's and ATR's probably won't be too intrusive, over background levels. If you're concerned about approach noise then its worth contacting the airport authority through your local politicians/consultative comittee and request that they endeavour to do CDA approaches where/when practical. These are continuous descent profiles which means fewer power/trim setting changes which can have an beneficial effect on the noise, and its more environmentally friendly in terms of fuel useage.
A 3 degree Glide Path equates to roughly 300 feet per nautical mile from touchdown, so aircraft at 2nm will be about 600 feet high. If you live 2 statute miles from the runway threshold, then aircraft are presently passing overhead at slightly less than 600 feet. If the runway threshold moves slightly nearer, but with a slightly steeper (3.5%) glide path, then the height of aircraft passing overhead on final will be much the same as now.
One important point that hasn't yet been mentioned is that runway 06 currently doesn't have an ILS, so at present aircraft fly a surveillance radar approach to 2 miles from touchdown, the aircraft being given radar headings as it descends to align it with the runway, after which it continues on its last given heading, while not descending below the safety height of 611ft above the airfield, until the crew either see the approach lights and continue visually to a landing or break off the approach and climb away if not.
This means that, at present, the aircraft is almost directly overhead your location at the point the approach finishes and the Obstacle Clearance Height is reached. This is likely to result in engine power setting changes which you may notice as the aircraft stops descending.
The extended runway will have an ILS system and the descent path to the runway will be along a 3.5° glideslope with no major power setting changes required as the aircraft's position is indicated in the cockpit to the crew at all times and it flies a stable approach. This also ensures that each aircraft passes over you at the prescribed height, this being by my calculations 612ft and virtually the same as now. It seems that aircraft using the extended runway will not be lower over you than they are at present and are, indeed, likely to sound rather quieter than now as a result of the ILS being installed.
With regard to noise nuisance from the ATR, EMB 170/190, Q400 types which would be likely to form the vast majority of movements in future, I actually did a survey at Jersey to judge for myself the likely noise impact. At a point where aircraft on approach were at 600 feet above my observation position I recorded all aircraft from B737-300 to light jets. The quietest airliner was the Q400 with the EMB195 and the ATR being nearly equal and just noticeably noisier but both being way quieter than the 737-300 (an old generation aircraft).
I hope this is helpful and I apologise if I have simplified things overmuch but I'm not sure of your technical knowledge of procedures. Please PM me if I can help further.
EXF
This means that, at present, the aircraft is almost directly overhead your location at the point the approach finishes and the Obstacle Clearance Height is reached. This is likely to result in engine power setting changes which you may notice as the aircraft stops descending.
The extended runway will have an ILS system and the descent path to the runway will be along a 3.5° glideslope with no major power setting changes required as the aircraft's position is indicated in the cockpit to the crew at all times and it flies a stable approach. This also ensures that each aircraft passes over you at the prescribed height, this being by my calculations 612ft and virtually the same as now. It seems that aircraft using the extended runway will not be lower over you than they are at present and are, indeed, likely to sound rather quieter than now as a result of the ILS being installed.
With regard to noise nuisance from the ATR, EMB 170/190, Q400 types which would be likely to form the vast majority of movements in future, I actually did a survey at Jersey to judge for myself the likely noise impact. At a point where aircraft on approach were at 600 feet above my observation position I recorded all aircraft from B737-300 to light jets. The quietest airliner was the Q400 with the EMB195 and the ATR being nearly equal and just noticeably noisier but both being way quieter than the 737-300 (an old generation aircraft).
I hope this is helpful and I apologise if I have simplified things overmuch but I'm not sure of your technical knowledge of procedures. Please PM me if I can help further.
EXF
Last edited by Expressflight; 29th Oct 2010 at 07:35. Reason: Spelling
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Dundee, Scotland
Age: 61
Posts: 1,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aircraft on approach are surprisingly quiet, 600 feet is about right. But I have to ask - if you are that bothered about aircraft flying over your house why do you live near an airport?