LEEDS 5

[pploony]

What has happened to today's PIA flight?,not on the arrivals/departures board at LBA.The Islamabad airport site shows it as cancelled.Is this a one off,or has it been dropped?

[BombardierCR7]

Eid al-Adha falls between 8th and 11th Dec, so maybe something to do with that festival?

[lbalad]

Jet2 Newark

I see todays flight has also been redirected(Gander again?).

What was the reason today?

[globetrotter79]

I see todays flight has also been redirected(Gander again?).
What was the reason today?

It may be something to do with their ETOPS clearances, perhaps? If they've only got a basic level of ETOPS clearance and are having problems today with one or more of the en-route alternates being out due weather, then this might force a longer routing, hence requirement for a fuel stop.

...or I could be talking out of my behind...apologies to all at Jet2 for having unfairly done you a disservice if so!!

[bluepilot]

due to very strong headwinds over the atlantic, planned fuel stop in gander.

[galaxy68]

RTOW or MTOW?

Does the 757 have a restricted TOW on 32? (apart from the obvious factors of wind, temperature and pressure)

[mmeteesside]

I see Thomson are up to their old tricks again - diverting the 763 from Miami - presume it went to MAN? I know it was due to position back there after dropping the LBA pax off ... just because there's a slightest hint of fog

[HOODED]

Yes but the good news is the PIA A310 got in despite the low viz and a tailwind component on the CAT 3 runway, but then again he doesn't live in Manchester! I feel sorry for the Pax.

[rpmac]

Thomson have a bad habit of diverting away from LBA on occasions when others get in without problems. I think the passengers should demand a reason for this treatment, after all they choose to fly from LBA and would expect to arrive back there unless weather related issues prevented it and not simply for the convenience of Thomson having their aircraft back in Manchester earlier.

[kingdee]

Britannia / TUI

Have always used a bit of fog as an excuse,totally pathetic when a cat 111 protected approach is available .The 767 can take a 5kt knot tail wind .More to the crew lets get home earlier and screw the SLF .Merry Xmas .

[Moondance]

Love you local airport fanboys who have never been closer to real aviation than flightsim! 767 can actually take a 15 kt tailwind, but most airlines prohibit autoland on 32 Leeds with a tailwind (and if you've ever done it, which is highly unlikely, you will know exactly why).

[kingdee]

as

you say "most airlines " what about the others ?

[Rainboe]

Are you people really making accusations because the pilots wouldn't land a 767 with a significant tailwind at that awful airport runway 32 at LBA? With a tailwind, it is close to being marginal for a 737-700! It is not unusual to miss the turn off and have to go into the loop at the end....in a 737-700! face it, the place should have been closed years ago. I can't imagine why such a dead loss of an airport is kept open. From an operational point of view, it is nasty and unacceptably dangerous. It's out of the way, unextendable, a terrain nightmare. Airlines are continually trying to thrash out an operation there and finding it defeats them. And you start pointing fingers at operators honesty?

[14 loop]

TOM

I believe that the TOM made the decision to divert whilst over the Irish Sea, the aircraft didn't even try an approach. At the time RVRs were fluctuating at around the 700m level which would have certainly made a Cat1 approach legal on either end. The PIA landed 14.

Hopefully, we will one day see CatII on 14. Sort out the 32 RESA and a more usable CatIII might be a prospect.

[Stampe]

Rainboe is spot on.I would never consider accepting any tailwind component for any landing at LBA let alone an autoland which always go deep even without the influence of the unfortunate runway profile at Leeds.Although authorised I personally would never consider an autoland at LBA unless there was a substantial and constant headwind component.Flight safety is paramount especially where runways overruns are so poor.Just for information I have commanded B738/757/767 occasionally out of LBA over the last 12 years and operated assorted other types for the past 25 years.The actual practise of aviating in and out of LBA requires great care to ensure safety one of the most challenging airfields in the Uk for heavy jet operations.Not all operators or national regulators have the same high standards as I am used to and fortunate enough to be employed by.

[flybar]

Are you people really making accusations because the pilots wouldn't land a 767 with a significant tailwind at that awful airport runway 32 at LBA? With a tailwind, it is close to being marginal for a 737-700! It is not unusual to miss the turn off and have to go into the loop at the end....in a 737-700! face it, the place should have been closed years ago. I can't imagine why such a dead loss of an airport is kept open. From an operational point of view, it is nasty and unacceptably dangerous. It's out of the way, unextendable, a terrain nightmare. Airlines are continually trying to thrash out an operation there and finding it defeats them. And you start pointing fingers at operators honesty?

Rainboe is spot on.I would never consider accepting any tailwind component for any landing at LBA let alone an autoland which always go deep even without the influence of the unfortunate runway profile at Leeds.Although authorised I personally would never consider an autoland at LBA unless there was a substantial and constant headwind component.Flight safety is paramount especially where runways overruns are so poor.Just for information I have commanded B738/757/767 occasionally out of LBA over the last 12 years and operated assorted other types for the past 25 years.The actual practise of aviating in and out of LBA requires great care to ensure safety one of the most challenging airfields in the Uk for heavy jet operations.Not all operators or national regulators have the same high standards as I am used to and fortunate enough to be employed by.

Interesting that both posts are by people from the South East of England. Presumably the 'local' pilots might have a different view.

The actual practise of aviating in and out of LBA requires great care to ensure safety one of the most challenging airfields in the Uk for heavy jet operations.

Correct - possibly part of the problem

[Helen49]

However, it is an Aerodrome Licensed by the CAA Aerodrome Standards Department in accordance with CAP 168.
So what is wrong, ICAO? The UK CAA Licensing Standards? The CAA Aerodrome Inspectors? The airline operations Departments? The pilots?
Comments please!
Helen49

[harrogate]

You need to live in the area to understand the benefits the LBA has for locals. It's not something you can comment on as an outsider.

Gripe about the 'perils' from a pilot's perspective - fine. But comments from people who don't live in the area about the validity of the airport in general are uninformed and utterly invalid, irrespective of the the level of importance and authority the person making the comments attributes to themself.

If you don't feel competent enough to fly in and out of LBA, then there's an easy solution.

Plenty of pilots are happy enough working from LBA, my brother included.

[HOODED]

Forget the tailwind aspect the PIA landed 14 on a CAT 1.

[sparkshy]

nice to see that tool rainboe has surfaced before christmas, i was worried there'd be a mountain of milk bottles outside his door after he'd bored himself to death by repeating his same old bullsh1t to himself.
saves me from ringing 999, thanks.