BRISTOL - 4
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Bristol uk
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is the 787 to big ? just found this on NATS airport info.
B787 available taxi routes:
Departure Runway 09:
Taxiway Z to Taxiway G, enter Runway at GX.
Runway 27: Taxiway Z to Taxiway A, enter Runway at AX.
Arrival
Runway 09: Runway to vacate either BX (Taxiway B) or AX (Taxiway A) to Taxiway Z to allocated stand.
Runway 27: Runway to vacate GX, Taxiways G and Z to allocated stand.
(h) B787 aircraft will not be able to backtrack.
B787 available taxi routes:
Departure Runway 09:
Taxiway Z to Taxiway G, enter Runway at GX.
Runway 27: Taxiway Z to Taxiway A, enter Runway at AX.
Arrival
Runway 09: Runway to vacate either BX (Taxiway B) or AX (Taxiway A) to Taxiway Z to allocated stand.
Runway 27: Runway to vacate GX, Taxiways G and Z to allocated stand.
(h) B787 aircraft will not be able to backtrack.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: SOUTH WEST
Posts: 257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jono557,
Correct, the 787 received EASA Certification for operation out of Bristol last year, so lets wait and see, The business is here and it would be good to see the holiday long haul services back again.
Correct, the 787 received EASA Certification for operation out of Bristol last year, so lets wait and see, The business is here and it would be good to see the holiday long haul services back again.
Brunel to Concorde
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Virtute et Industria, et Sumorsaete Ealle
Posts: 2,283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Boeing 767s can and do operate out of BRS. When TOM last had summer transatlantic charters from BRS to Florida and Mexico they used the former First Choice B 767s that were configured with fewer seats (270 from memory) than the original Thomson aircraft. This enabled Sanford to be reached non-stop in the last two years of operation. Previously they had an en route fuel stop which remained in place for Cancun and was at MAN.
Now that the former First Choice 767s have left the fleet I assume that those 767s that are left would require a fuel stop even for Sanford.
However, if TOM is to reinstate these routes it seems rather odd that they would not have gone into the question of the viability of the 787. Bristol Airport in a recent communication told me that the 787 can operate from their airport on long haul but the reply went into no detail and the question was left in the air as to whether this would be non stop to the Middle East and to NYC which were the specific routes I asked about.
In 2010 the Thomson MD said that BRS would be in the first group of airports to operate the 787. When this didn’t happen some people conjectured that the incident later that year when a B 767 suffered a hard landing at BRS causing considerable damage to the aircraft played a part in the subsequent non-appearance of the 787. The AAIB report highlighted, amongst other matters, that runway 09 had seen a disproportionate number of hard landings with B 767s and as a consequence some people wondered whether Thomson would operate 787s into BRS.
Given that there is an airport across the Severn Estuary with a runway that can operate larger aircraft on long haul Thomson must be confident that, despite its physical limitations, BRS will give them a better commercial return, or why would they bother even to contemplate using Lulsgate if it was so beset with unresolvable difficulties?
Now that the former First Choice 767s have left the fleet I assume that those 767s that are left would require a fuel stop even for Sanford.
However, if TOM is to reinstate these routes it seems rather odd that they would not have gone into the question of the viability of the 787. Bristol Airport in a recent communication told me that the 787 can operate from their airport on long haul but the reply went into no detail and the question was left in the air as to whether this would be non stop to the Middle East and to NYC which were the specific routes I asked about.
In 2010 the Thomson MD said that BRS would be in the first group of airports to operate the 787. When this didn’t happen some people conjectured that the incident later that year when a B 767 suffered a hard landing at BRS causing considerable damage to the aircraft played a part in the subsequent non-appearance of the 787. The AAIB report highlighted, amongst other matters, that runway 09 had seen a disproportionate number of hard landings with B 767s and as a consequence some people wondered whether Thomson would operate 787s into BRS.
Given that there is an airport across the Severn Estuary with a runway that can operate larger aircraft on long haul Thomson must be confident that, despite its physical limitations, BRS will give them a better commercial return, or why would they bother even to contemplate using Lulsgate if it was so beset with unresolvable difficulties?
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: uk
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Boeing 767s can and do operate out of BRS. When TOM last had summer transatlantic charters from BRS to Florida and Mexico they used the former First Choice B 767s that were configured with fewer seats (270 from memory) than the original Thomson aircraft. This enabled Sanford to be reached non-stop in the last two years of operation. Previously they had an en route fuel stop which remained in place for Cancun and was at MAN.
. When this didn’t happen some people conjectured that the incident later that year when a B 767 suffered a hard landing at BRS causing considerable damage to the aircraft played a part in the subsequent non-appearance of the 787. The AAIB report highlighted, amongst other matters, that runway 09 had seen a disproportionate number of hard landings with B 767s and as a consequence some people wondered whether Thomson would operate 787s into BRS.
. When this didn’t happen some people conjectured that the incident later that year when a B 767 suffered a hard landing at BRS causing considerable damage to the aircraft played a part in the subsequent non-appearance of the 787. The AAIB report highlighted, amongst other matters, that runway 09 had seen a disproportionate number of hard landings with B 767s and as a consequence some people wondered whether Thomson would operate 787s into BRS.
Last edited by heading 125; 29th Mar 2016 at 17:39. Reason: Error
Brunel to Concorde
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Virtute et Industria, et Sumorsaete Ealle
Posts: 2,283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thomson long haul
The incident with Boeing 767-324, G-OOBK occurred on 3 October 2010. Thomson continued to operate this type of aircraft at BRS for the following three summers on weekly charter flights to Florida and Mexico, ceasing at the end of summer 2013. The former First Choice B 767s that operated the route were to be withdrawn from the fleet in summer 2014.
The AAIB report can be accessed via the below link.
https://assets.digital.cabinet-offic...OOBK_05-12.pdf
The report's conclusion was as follows:
Damage to the fuselage occurred as a result of rapid de-rotation of the aircraft following a hard landing on the main landing gear. The runway profile, nuisance GPWS alerts and the meteorological conditions may have influenced the landing.
I'm in no way qualified to pass any judgement on the type of aircraft that should or should not land at any airport. You may be in which case you have the advantage over me.
However, I can find nothing in the AAIB report that recommends that this type of aircraft should not use BRS and, as a member of the public, I can only rely on the result of investigation by qualified people who had first hand knowledge of all the evidence in this particular case.
Given that UK airlines are regulated by the CAA, and airlines like Thomson Airways have highly qualified technical staff in their employment, I find it hard to believe that such an airline would operate its aircraft at places it didn't think was safe to do so.
The AAIB report can be accessed via the below link.
https://assets.digital.cabinet-offic...OOBK_05-12.pdf
The report's conclusion was as follows:
Damage to the fuselage occurred as a result of rapid de-rotation of the aircraft following a hard landing on the main landing gear. The runway profile, nuisance GPWS alerts and the meteorological conditions may have influenced the landing.
I'm in no way qualified to pass any judgement on the type of aircraft that should or should not land at any airport. You may be in which case you have the advantage over me.
However, I can find nothing in the AAIB report that recommends that this type of aircraft should not use BRS and, as a member of the public, I can only rely on the result of investigation by qualified people who had first hand knowledge of all the evidence in this particular case.
Given that UK airlines are regulated by the CAA, and airlines like Thomson Airways have highly qualified technical staff in their employment, I find it hard to believe that such an airline would operate its aircraft at places it didn't think was safe to do so.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: LEEDS
Posts: 449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In aviation it's very rarely about 'safe' or 'not safe' it's about degrees of safe. Makes me laugh when I here people say that the A330 200 is ideal for LBA. On a sunny day with a North Westerly maybe.
Brunel to Concorde
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Virtute et Industria, et Sumorsaete Ealle
Posts: 2,283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for that, Wurzel.
CAA stats for the calendar year of 2015 have now been published and below are the ten busiest routes:
Amsterdam 384,000 + 10%
Dublin 378,000 + 14%
Edinburgh 352,000 + 9%
Malaga 300,00 + 7%
Palma 289,000 + 6%
Faro 273,000 + 1%
Alicante 271,000 no change
Glasgow 267,000 + 9%
Belfast Int 246,000 + 7%
Geneva 206,000 + 9%
BRS again carried more passengers to/from GVA than any other non-London UK airport. This has occurred over the past several years.
CAA stats for the calendar year of 2015 have now been published and below are the ten busiest routes:
Amsterdam 384,000 + 10%
Dublin 378,000 + 14%
Edinburgh 352,000 + 9%
Malaga 300,00 + 7%
Palma 289,000 + 6%
Faro 273,000 + 1%
Alicante 271,000 no change
Glasgow 267,000 + 9%
Belfast Int 246,000 + 7%
Geneva 206,000 + 9%
BRS again carried more passengers to/from GVA than any other non-London UK airport. This has occurred over the past several years.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Still looking
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Was there ever scope or plan to extend the 27 end. Landing distance is not so much the issue in BRS but departure certainly is. Glide slope could stay the same but would allow bigger AC and also allow more fixed and assumed de-rates off both end thereby reducing noise signatures. Recess 27 approach lights into surface like BUD for example. Not sure of jet wash issues for road? Apologies if once upon a time discussed.
Last edited by skyloone; 3rd Apr 2016 at 21:59. Reason: Spelling
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: The Nether Region
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Brunel to Concorde
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Virtute et Industria, et Sumorsaete Ealle
Posts: 2,283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BRS runway extension
skyloone,
The airport’s master plan deals with the issue in some detail and suggests five options (apart from the first the others would all involve an extension at the eastern end of the airfield) that have been considered which, in summary, are:
1. Do nothing and reassess in the light of experience if thought necessary.
2. Extend by 140 metres - the maximum that can be accomplished within existing airport land without any need for airport control of Felton Common. The A 38 would still need to use a 150-metre long tunnel and ILS for 09 would need to be relocated just inside airport land.
3. Extend by 389 metres - the maximum that can be accommodated within existing airport land but the ILS localiser and possibly approach lighting would need to sited on the Common, with a 240 metre by 150 metre area of the Common coming into airport control.
4. Extend by 239 metres with a 150 metre starter strip. This option would add 389m to the runway 27 take off run, but only about 150m to the runway 09 take off run. This therefore means that runway 09 has performance penalties compared with runway 27.
5. Extend runway further, with further encroachment onto Felton Common. Safety requirements might erode some of the potential benefits.
The overall conclusion in the master plan is that ‘the improvement in performance that might be achieved by extending the runway is relatively small in comparison with the costs and the potential environmental impact’. Therefore the preferred option is the ‘do nothing’ but the issue will be kept under review in subsequent updates of the master plan.
The full master plan can be accessed via the Bristol Airport website.
Thomson Boeing 787
bravoromeosierra,
A poster on another forum has posted a date and times when a B 787 will visit in connection with a long haul announcement. Because I don't believe that PPRuNe encourages the posting of links to other aviation sites, and also because the date has not been officially confirmed, I'll PM you the details and you can make of them what you will.
I suspect that a public announcement will be made nearer the date, assuming the information about a date in the other forum is correct, if the idea is to obtain some publicity for the venture.
The airport’s master plan deals with the issue in some detail and suggests five options (apart from the first the others would all involve an extension at the eastern end of the airfield) that have been considered which, in summary, are:
1. Do nothing and reassess in the light of experience if thought necessary.
2. Extend by 140 metres - the maximum that can be accomplished within existing airport land without any need for airport control of Felton Common. The A 38 would still need to use a 150-metre long tunnel and ILS for 09 would need to be relocated just inside airport land.
3. Extend by 389 metres - the maximum that can be accommodated within existing airport land but the ILS localiser and possibly approach lighting would need to sited on the Common, with a 240 metre by 150 metre area of the Common coming into airport control.
4. Extend by 239 metres with a 150 metre starter strip. This option would add 389m to the runway 27 take off run, but only about 150m to the runway 09 take off run. This therefore means that runway 09 has performance penalties compared with runway 27.
5. Extend runway further, with further encroachment onto Felton Common. Safety requirements might erode some of the potential benefits.
The overall conclusion in the master plan is that ‘the improvement in performance that might be achieved by extending the runway is relatively small in comparison with the costs and the potential environmental impact’. Therefore the preferred option is the ‘do nothing’ but the issue will be kept under review in subsequent updates of the master plan.
The full master plan can be accessed via the Bristol Airport website.
Thomson Boeing 787
bravoromeosierra,
A poster on another forum has posted a date and times when a B 787 will visit in connection with a long haul announcement. Because I don't believe that PPRuNe encourages the posting of links to other aviation sites, and also because the date has not been officially confirmed, I'll PM you the details and you can make of them what you will.
I suspect that a public announcement will be made nearer the date, assuming the information about a date in the other forum is correct, if the idea is to obtain some publicity for the venture.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: The Nether Region
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On a separate tangent I am quite surprised that you can't book BM flights for November yet - are they yet to release their winter schedule?
Was considering using the LH codeshare but if they won't sell me a ticket maybe I wont'!
Was considering using the LH codeshare but if they won't sell me a ticket maybe I wont'!
Brunel to Concorde
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Virtute et Industria, et Sumorsaete Ealle
Posts: 2,283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Winter airline availability
It's the same with Ryanair and easyJet.
Ryanair has only released a handful of routes from BRS for next winter and easyJet is still to announce its entire winter schedule
Ryanair has only released a handful of routes from BRS for next winter and easyJet is still to announce its entire winter schedule
Brunel to Concorde
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Virtute et Industria, et Sumorsaete Ealle
Posts: 2,283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thomson Boeing 787
Regarding recent posts about a Thomson Boeing 787 visiting BRS, the airport's Mayfly for next week has now been published and shows a Thomson Boeing 787 arriving from Manchester at 1110 on Tuesday 19 April and leaving for Stansted at 2115 the same day.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: uk
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let's hope 09 not in use then