LUTON - 6
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: UK Home Counties
Posts: 338
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...by doing nothing the airport would loose business to other airports
The one thing that corporate flights require is the flexibility to arrive and depart to suit business meetings, etc., which frequently overrun or are changed at relatively short notice. For example, being unable to depart after XXX because the airport will be closed and is not permitted to open because of planning restrictions doesn't offer the flexibility required by the 'captains of industry' who charter these aircraft.
Airports such as Luton (and Stansted) do.
As far as the comments made by the LLAO 'Airport Manager' he/she is merely stating a fact that has been apprent for several months.
The idiots in LBC (councillors and their advisors/officials) clearly believed that ACDL/LLAO would blink first. Not for the first time in the history of local government (and not simply at Luton's Town Hall) they completely misjudged the situation and so have in effect, begun what could ultimately prove to be a slow decline for LTN.
LBC ought now to begin planning what it's going to do in about six years time when ACDL walks away causing the 'unearned income' generated by this ill-conceived Concession experiment to dry up and the Airport in effect, once again becomes a cost on the council's budget sheet.
The town's coucil tax payers may come to regret the day that LBC's politically-motivated decision not to sell LTN outright was taken...
Have to agree regarding the Corporate Traffic.....
LTN (and to an extent STN) will continue to attract the bulk of the blue chip Exec jets (particularly from across the Atlantic) No top Exec in his Gulfstream is going to flight plan into Farnboro' etc when tailwinds may mean he arrives early before opening time!
The growth at Biggin and Farnboro' in particular is primarily being fuelled by the boom in based aircraft and visitors from Europe which are obviously bulking the movements considerably.
LTN (and to an extent STN) will continue to attract the bulk of the blue chip Exec jets (particularly from across the Atlantic) No top Exec in his Gulfstream is going to flight plan into Farnboro' etc when tailwinds may mean he arrives early before opening time!
The growth at Biggin and Farnboro' in particular is primarily being fuelled by the boom in based aircraft and visitors from Europe which are obviously bulking the movements considerably.
Last edited by boeing_eng; 9th Mar 2008 at 17:13.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: London Whipsnade Wildlife Park
Posts: 5,038
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Last edited by Buster the Bear; 11th Mar 2008 at 21:45.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Milton Keynes
Posts: 1,070
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The world is moving against Premjet as we move into Recession I think. But I wish them luck
Complete change of subject and may be in the wrong place.
Why do A320s of Wizz and Monarch never (so far as I have seen) accept Alpha intersection departures RNWY 26? EZY B737s, FR 738s and EZY 319s do it. A Wizzair 320 was offered it today and it would have saved time while a Silverjet 767 backtrackecd but declined. Yet in today's 260/29G39 its T/O run was around 1000m, much less than the 1700m available. So is there "something in the book" that prevents it?
Can't belive the 320 is so less capable than the 738 if the weights are right.
Complete change of subject and may be in the wrong place.
Why do A320s of Wizz and Monarch never (so far as I have seen) accept Alpha intersection departures RNWY 26? EZY B737s, FR 738s and EZY 319s do it. A Wizzair 320 was offered it today and it would have saved time while a Silverjet 767 backtrackecd but declined. Yet in today's 260/29G39 its T/O run was around 1000m, much less than the 1700m available. So is there "something in the book" that prevents it?
Can't belive the 320 is so less capable than the 738 if the weights are right.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: On the road
Posts: 914
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My God, will this Premjet nonsense ever stop!!!
The economics just don't stack up. I was widely pilloried for decrying NOW when it put it's plans out and seriously telling people not to jack in careers to chase ridiculous dreams now the same thing is happening again but in an even more ridiculous format!!
If this airline ever operates a flight I will eat my trousers.
Tartinton (fully trousered)
p.s. the website still looks like it's designed and built by a retarded 8 year old with text being overlaid by images. Give me strength!!!
The economics just don't stack up. I was widely pilloried for decrying NOW when it put it's plans out and seriously telling people not to jack in careers to chase ridiculous dreams now the same thing is happening again but in an even more ridiculous format!!
If this airline ever operates a flight I will eat my trousers.
Tartinton (fully trousered)
p.s. the website still looks like it's designed and built by a retarded 8 year old with text being overlaid by images. Give me strength!!!
The Wizz A320s do occassionally go from the intersection, both B1 and A1, but certainly less than they used to.
I have never known Monarch go from them, even an empty A300 to Gatwick.
I have never known Monarch go from them, even an empty A300 to Gatwick.
"Why do A320s of Wizz and Monarch never (so far as I have seen) accept Alpha intersection departures RNWY 26? EZY B737s, FR 738s and EZY 319s do it. A Wizzair 320 was offered it today and it would have saved time while a Silverjet 767 backtrackecd but declined. Yet in today's 260/29G39 its T/O run was around 1000m, much less than the 1700m available. So is there "something in the book" that prevents it?"
One of the most useless things in aviation is runway you didn't use when you are trying to stop and you can see Vauxhall's factory coming up awfully fast!!
One of the most useless things in aviation is runway you didn't use when you are trying to stop and you can see Vauxhall's factory coming up awfully fast!!
Two Old Adages
One of the first things I was told in aviation was about "Fuel in the Bowser" and "Runway behind You".
When it isn't me that's paying for the fuel and if I was being paid to be there .. there is no reason why I should ignore those 2 pieces of truth.
(indeed I cannot think of any other time to ignore them !!!)
When it isn't me that's paying for the fuel and if I was being paid to be there .. there is no reason why I should ignore those 2 pieces of truth.
(indeed I cannot think of any other time to ignore them !!!)
Last edited by Dave Gittins; 13th Mar 2008 at 11:28. Reason: Carp spelling
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Bournemouth UK
Age: 49
Posts: 862
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Two Old Adages
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One of the first things I was told in aviation was about "Fuel in the Bowser" and "Runway behind You".
When it isn't me that's paying for the fuel and if I was being paid to be there .. there is no reason why I should ignore those 2 pieces of truth.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One of the first things I was told in aviation was about "Fuel in the Bowser" and "Runway behind You".
When it isn't me that's paying for the fuel and if I was being paid to be there .. there is no reason why I should ignore those 2 pieces of truth.
Taking the intersection allows aircraft to depart between smaller gaps in approaching aircraft and can sometimes allow aircraft to depart in front of another aircraft that requires the full length. This eases congestion, saves fuel, allows slots to be met, reduces flight times and increases runway capacity. When the weather is ok and the aircraft is fully serviceable there is no reason not to accept an intersection departure. However if the wind was 260 29G39 then there is a strong possibility of a predictive windsheer warning. Windsheer is one of the things that you will stop for right up to V1 and therefore it's sensible to use full thrust and the full runway length.
I can say that most operators were using the full length yesterday morning when it was very windy. I can't speak for Wizz and I can't recall if I've ever seen them depart from the intersection but it's possible that their SOP's don't allow it or perhaps they are not given performance figures for Alpha & Bravo?
SW
Airbus(Airbi?) performance is always optimised.This means increasing the speed on the ground to get a better initial climb and allowing more weight to be lifted off a runway.When a pilot decides which point to use for departure I would guarantee the last thing he is thinking about is an airport's flow rate.It is not part of his safety equation.He will normally use the maximum amount of pavement available.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: North of 50N
Posts: 254
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
He will normally use the maximum amount of pavement available.
Neither is it religiously applied by Aer Lingus, BMI, BA, etc., etc., short-haul pilots at Heathrow.
Ditto many pilots/operators at Gatwick, Manchester, Stansted, etc.
I always thought it was something called a "Balanced field take-off" and - provided the figures and Ops Manual permit it, then it's both legal and safe.
And before someone points out that the runway length at Luton is rather less than at these other airports, this is not the issue if the aircraft commander is applying his/her company procedures and has determined that the 'figures' will permit it.
Anyway, in days gone by I've seen many a long-haul 747-200 struggling to make it out of Heathrow and Gatwick on a summer's day, even with 3000 metres.
Paxing All Over The World
Last time I went out (29th Feb) the operator of the large twin turbo-prop did turn left and went to end of the road so as to get the full length. The flight was only 75% full and the machine has good performance. I had expected that they would turn right, hold and go but was not upset that they decided to get the extra tarmac in front of the machine.
Also, I shall continue to repeat that PremJet was the wrong idea at the wrong time of the cycle.
Also, I shall continue to repeat that PremJet was the wrong idea at the wrong time of the cycle.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Bournemouth UK
Age: 49
Posts: 862
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would guarantee the last thing he is thinking about is an airport's flow rate
We will nearly always calculate performance for an intersection departure. Exceptions are during LVP's, if windsheer has been reported, a contaminated runway, anti skid inop, thrust reverser inop etc. If the weight is close to the limits for an intersection departure we'd probably plan on the full length, but have the figures ready for an intersection in case the tower ask us if we are able to accept the intersection for a quicker departure. There are often occasions when the tower can comfortably get you away from the intersection but do not have the time to allow you to back track. There are also occasions when the aircraft No 1 at the hold is on a Compton departure and the tower is unable to get a release from London due to a Northholt departure. In these cases the CPT departure can back track and await the release and Olney, Dover or Clacton departures can go from the intersection. This can save you a lot of delay.
When we taxy out we tell ground if we can accept the intersection and it helps the tower with their planning. On some SID's you need 2 minutes behind the proceeding aircraft so there is no advantage in taking the intersection, in these cases 99% of pilots will back track and take the full length. When the tower instructs you to line up they will either say "line up at the intersection" or they will say "line up runway 26, back track available". PAXboy, I suspect your crew were told that there would be a short delay for their departure so they sensibly chose to back track.
By the way I saw a Wizzair take the intersection yesterday so clearly they are allowed to do it.
SW
PS. I've never used the full runway length at CDG
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: London Whipsnade Wildlife Park
Posts: 5,038
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well with the GRAND ACDL development plans inc a parallel taxiway should be available by 2012! Taxiways to both ends and a new relocated fire station. Silly me........they once were the plans!
I wonder if our Spanish friends have regretted their TBI purchase?
Oh well, soon you will be able to drive rapidly from north London straight into the traffic carnage leading into the tinminal!
I understand the new signage leading into the airport will state;
Welcome to London Luton Airport now operated under a Care & Maintenance programme on behalf of Luton Town Hall, we apologise for the current & future lack of investment!
I wonder if our Spanish friends have regretted their TBI purchase?
Oh well, soon you will be able to drive rapidly from north London straight into the traffic carnage leading into the tinminal!
I understand the new signage leading into the airport will state;
Welcome to London Luton Airport now operated under a Care & Maintenance programme on behalf of Luton Town Hall, we apologise for the current & future lack of investment!
Skywave.
Agree with you. When I flew out of Luton (in a PA-28) most of my departs were from Charlie.
The point (as I am sure you know better than I) is just to never wish you had used more runway or carried more fuel .... it's part of the safety "calculation"
The old adages I used must have a cut-off somewhere. The point is perhaps not to have too little runway ahead or to have left too much fuel behind.
You are right about Full Lengths and Full Tanks
DGG
Agree with you. When I flew out of Luton (in a PA-28) most of my departs were from Charlie.
The point (as I am sure you know better than I) is just to never wish you had used more runway or carried more fuel .... it's part of the safety "calculation"
The old adages I used must have a cut-off somewhere. The point is perhaps not to have too little runway ahead or to have left too much fuel behind.
You are right about Full Lengths and Full Tanks
DGG
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Northampton, England
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sky Wave, a really neat summary of the whole back track/ line up issue 
. To add to your info...
We can, most of the time, replace the 2 mins by 5nm, slightly reducing the 120 second seperation.
Even better:-
ON 26, a "BPK" following a CPT or OLY can be reduced to 1 min or 3nm. (On 08 a CPT or BPK following an OLY, an OLY following a BPK, or a CPT following a BPK
) -multiple line ups or intersection departures are useful here.
A multiple line up can work really well even with the 2 minute/ 5nm split depending on the position of the inbound (If inbound is around 10-12nm). Even if the backtracker has to sit on the threshold for a good minute or so waiting for the intersection to roll, get airborne, etc, the crucial time saved by having an aircraft lining up whilst one is backtracking gets 2 away instead of 1.
I will always try and ask crew if they can accept an intersection departure if I spot such an opportunity.
. To add to your info... We can, most of the time, replace the 2 mins by 5nm, slightly reducing the 120 second seperation.
Even better:-
ON 26, a "BPK" following a CPT or OLY can be reduced to 1 min or 3nm. (On 08 a CPT or BPK following an OLY, an OLY following a BPK, or a CPT following a BPK
) -multiple line ups or intersection departures are useful here. A multiple line up can work really well even with the 2 minute/ 5nm split depending on the position of the inbound (If inbound is around 10-12nm). Even if the backtracker has to sit on the threshold for a good minute or so waiting for the intersection to roll, get airborne, etc, the crucial time saved by having an aircraft lining up whilst one is backtracking gets 2 away instead of 1.
I will always try and ask crew if they can accept an intersection departure if I spot such an opportunity.
