BIRMINGHAM - 6
My question is why don't BA use BHX as a diversion airport for longhaul flights? Over the past few of years when there have been problems at LHR/LGW, BA have used every other UK airport plus European points such as AMS/FRA/CDG. Surely if they offloaded pax at these points the extra 'mileage' will cause hassle and stress for those concerned.
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: London
Posts: 2,962
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All ready on Forums its the end of July for BHX
BHX is one of only a small number of English Airports that is CAA approved to
handle the A380 and the taxiying chart for them is attached on NATS site as is MAN, and probably LGW too
handle the A380 and the taxiying chart for them is attached on NATS site as is MAN, and probably LGW too
The situation as I understood it last was that the A380 could use BHX, but only with advance notice, but, like I say Ive not checked the updates to see if the new fire equipment has changed that.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Somewhere up there
Posts: 358
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote: crewmeal My question is why don't BA use BHX as a diversion airport for longhaul flights? Over the past few of years when there have been problems at LHR/LGW, BA have used every other UK airport plus European points such as AMS/FRA/CDG. Surely if they offloaded pax at these points the extra 'mileage' will cause hassle and stress for those concerned.
Could be because it's a really small airport for handling more than one or two large aircraft.
I've only been there once - diverted in about 2 years ago as it happens and I was surprised at how small an airport BHX actually is
Could be because it's a really small airport for handling more than one or two large aircraft.
I've only been there once - diverted in about 2 years ago as it happens and I was surprised at how small an airport BHX actually is
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: solihull West Midlands
Posts: 967
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crew Meal,
BHX regularly used to get BA long haul divs for many years. Last time was about 3 yrs ago.
Know that BA nominated ,and BHX accepted 3 747s last winter on the same day, but the weather improved and they all got into LHR.
Its noticeable that there are far less BA widebodies diverting these days.In the past they would hold for 20 mins then divert, now they are seem to hold for far longer.
Expect thats down to belt tightening and divert costs, which now start at £50,000 a plane.
There are also problems with getting coaches at short notice. Newish EU driving regulations, prevent coach drivers doing more than a certain amount of hours before reasonable breaks. Also due cost coach companies have less spare coaches and crew sitting around.
However agree these are not the only reasons, and BA seem to send the small number they do divert as far as NCL and EDI, so still puzzling.
Nigel
BHX regularly used to get BA long haul divs for many years. Last time was about 3 yrs ago.
Know that BA nominated ,and BHX accepted 3 747s last winter on the same day, but the weather improved and they all got into LHR.
Its noticeable that there are far less BA widebodies diverting these days.In the past they would hold for 20 mins then divert, now they are seem to hold for far longer.
Expect thats down to belt tightening and divert costs, which now start at £50,000 a plane.
There are also problems with getting coaches at short notice. Newish EU driving regulations, prevent coach drivers doing more than a certain amount of hours before reasonable breaks. Also due cost coach companies have less spare coaches and crew sitting around.
However agree these are not the only reasons, and BA seem to send the small number they do divert as far as NCL and EDI, so still puzzling.
Nigel
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: solihull West Midlands
Posts: 967
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All names taken.
BHX has 7 full widebodied stands now on the new International Pier, the end 2 can and have accommodated an A380 using airbridges.
Plus it has a stand on the old Eurohub, and 3 remote stands that can accommadate 777 and 747 and two of these you can get an A380 on.
Add to this the new huge Monarch hangar, almost complete has an apron which can take 2 747-8 /77Ws and the Elmdon apron recently having a 747-400 stand marked out.
So BHX does have a lot of options. A few of those are removed in recent winters as Ryan Air are parking up 8 planes each winter.
Nigel
BHX has 7 full widebodied stands now on the new International Pier, the end 2 can and have accommodated an A380 using airbridges.
Plus it has a stand on the old Eurohub, and 3 remote stands that can accommadate 777 and 747 and two of these you can get an A380 on.
Add to this the new huge Monarch hangar, almost complete has an apron which can take 2 747-8 /77Ws and the Elmdon apron recently having a 747-400 stand marked out.
So BHX does have a lot of options. A few of those are removed in recent winters as Ryan Air are parking up 8 planes each winter.
Nigel
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: solihull West Midlands
Posts: 967
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LAX-LHR.
You do make me smile please don't change.
BHX is fully code F designated otherwise the EK couldn't have operated a passenger flt into it on thir A380 !! Also check out the NATS site showing the approved A380 taxiway routes at the airport.
Stand 54C on the new pier is fully marked out for an A380 and has the automated pier tracking system also calibrated for the A380. This is where the EK A380 parked and used the double airbridge.
BHX now has an A380 tug, which Emirates asked for before they chose BHX as one of their A380 alternates.
In relation to Manston, its only being used for training with no passengers and although it has Cat 9 fire cover like the large airports, has no charts for A380s so doubt if it is yet certified for A380 passenger operations.
However you are right that you need a higher fire catergory for emergency flights of A380. BHX like Manston and Prestwick is Catergory 9 , but can be made up to 10 within 30 minutes. That means all but emergency A380 diverts can be handled at BHX and you wouldn't expect BHX to be used for those.
The new fire trucks are not yet in use as crews are still being trained..not sure if they will bring us up to Cat 10 like MAN ?
Nigel
You do make me smile please don't change.
BHX is fully code F designated otherwise the EK couldn't have operated a passenger flt into it on thir A380 !! Also check out the NATS site showing the approved A380 taxiway routes at the airport.
Stand 54C on the new pier is fully marked out for an A380 and has the automated pier tracking system also calibrated for the A380. This is where the EK A380 parked and used the double airbridge.
BHX now has an A380 tug, which Emirates asked for before they chose BHX as one of their A380 alternates.
In relation to Manston, its only being used for training with no passengers and although it has Cat 9 fire cover like the large airports, has no charts for A380s so doubt if it is yet certified for A380 passenger operations.
However you are right that you need a higher fire catergory for emergency flights of A380. BHX like Manston and Prestwick is Catergory 9 , but can be made up to 10 within 30 minutes. That means all but emergency A380 diverts can be handled at BHX and you wouldn't expect BHX to be used for those.
The new fire trucks are not yet in use as crews are still being trained..not sure if they will bring us up to Cat 10 like MAN ?
Nigel
Last edited by nigel osborne; 18th Jul 2013 at 09:29.
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: London
Posts: 2,962
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Edit:
I now see you have found what I was trying to say RE: Fire cover. As this may not be code 10 yet, this is what I am trying to say regarding BHX needing advance notice, as they can ship in the extra tenders to bring it to code 10, but is why BHX is not an A380 alternate just yet. Emirates does not designate BHX just yet. Their TATL A380 fleet and LHR flights uses MAN, the MAN flights use LHR and until recently, STN was the back up point for the 2 airports, however with LGW being fully certified now, this may have changed.
My posts were nothing to do about taxiway charts, stands etc, as Im fully aware an A380 has been to BHX and can physically use the airport.
I now see you have found what I was trying to say RE: Fire cover. As this may not be code 10 yet, this is what I am trying to say regarding BHX needing advance notice, as they can ship in the extra tenders to bring it to code 10, but is why BHX is not an A380 alternate just yet. Emirates does not designate BHX just yet. Their TATL A380 fleet and LHR flights uses MAN, the MAN flights use LHR and until recently, STN was the back up point for the 2 airports, however with LGW being fully certified now, this may have changed.
My posts were nothing to do about taxiway charts, stands etc, as Im fully aware an A380 has been to BHX and can physically use the airport.
Last edited by LAX_LHR; 18th Jul 2013 at 10:04.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: solihull West Midlands
Posts: 967
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LAX-LHR
Thanks for the clarifications but still you confuse me.
You say BHX is not an A380 alternate as its only Fire cover Cat 9 but in June you said Prestwick was an A380 alternate.
However Prestwick is also only CAT 9 fire cover ??
Im sure you are only quoting what you have heard from other sources, but if both are Cat 9 then both are either alternates under that remit, or then both are not.
Nigel
Thanks for the clarifications but still you confuse me.
You say BHX is not an A380 alternate as its only Fire cover Cat 9 but in June you said Prestwick was an A380 alternate.
However Prestwick is also only CAT 9 fire cover ??
Im sure you are only quoting what you have heard from other sources, but if both are Cat 9 then both are either alternates under that remit, or then both are not.
Nigel
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: London
Posts: 2,962
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was under the impression that PIK was fully code 10/F compliant due to it being one of the 2 UK 'hijack' airports, a key Atlantic divert field and regularly seeing the B747-8 amongst others?
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The AIP says Prestwick is fire cat 7, with 8 or 9 available at short notice.
While a 380 is fun for the spotters and a wet dream for the BHX PR department, it causes the overall flow of traffic to be much less efficient. I'm not sure a regular service would be a good thing, although that in itself is still a long way away.
While a 380 is fun for the spotters and a wet dream for the BHX PR department, it causes the overall flow of traffic to be much less efficient. I'm not sure a regular service would be a good thing, although that in itself is still a long way away.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: solihull West Midlands
Posts: 967
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LAX-LHR
Hi,
Prestwicks only fire Cat 7 can be made up to 9 no doubt using the rest of the tenders in the vacinity.
See NATS page below on Prestwick if it loads.
These exchanges of views are great as we are all learning stuff.
http://www.ead.eurocontrol.int/eadba...2013-05-30.pdf
The only thing BHX doesn't have are 2nd deck loaders, however neither does STN,LGW or PIK.
Nigel
Hi,
Prestwicks only fire Cat 7 can be made up to 9 no doubt using the rest of the tenders in the vacinity.
See NATS page below on Prestwick if it loads.
These exchanges of views are great as we are all learning stuff.
http://www.ead.eurocontrol.int/eadba...2013-05-30.pdf
The only thing BHX doesn't have are 2nd deck loaders, however neither does STN,LGW or PIK.
Nigel
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: London
Posts: 2,962
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nope its all good Nigel, Obviously read the wrong sheets lol.
However, I do wonder if PIK is going to upgrade the equipment as its certainly put itself forward to be an alternate for BA, so, must have been on the basis the equipment is sourced?
Anyway, hopefully clears things up. Obviously things will change in the future, especially with the runway extension that BHX be a priority alternate for BA, I was just trying to point out that as it stands at the moment, its not on the 'priority' list.
On to the Publicity tour, hopefully BA will confirm it all soon. They are quite proud of the A380 and keeping quite tight lipped until plans are confirmed, so the news is likely to come from forums groups of the airports in question where they are less tight lipped about visits than from BA themselves.
The B787 will also be doing a similar tour, but will likely just be to BA stations, especially those the A380 cannot get to.
However, I do wonder if PIK is going to upgrade the equipment as its certainly put itself forward to be an alternate for BA, so, must have been on the basis the equipment is sourced?
Anyway, hopefully clears things up. Obviously things will change in the future, especially with the runway extension that BHX be a priority alternate for BA, I was just trying to point out that as it stands at the moment, its not on the 'priority' list.
On to the Publicity tour, hopefully BA will confirm it all soon. They are quite proud of the A380 and keeping quite tight lipped until plans are confirmed, so the news is likely to come from forums groups of the airports in question where they are less tight lipped about visits than from BA themselves.
The B787 will also be doing a similar tour, but will likely just be to BA stations, especially those the A380 cannot get to.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: solihull West Midlands
Posts: 967
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LAX-LHR,
Yes think you are right not heard of any plans to put the BA 787 into BHX.
Haven't heard the full sched for the BA 380 tour although think BHX is Mon 29th July.
Just driven past the runway extension site, giant machines now leveling the end of the extension with hard core gravel.
They have just about finished the new A45 dual carriageway loop and dedicated bus lane, however now saying Sept before that is all completed.Supposedly the road opening up before that as they prepare to join current A45 with new loop both ways.
Nigel
Yes think you are right not heard of any plans to put the BA 787 into BHX.
Haven't heard the full sched for the BA 380 tour although think BHX is Mon 29th July.
Just driven past the runway extension site, giant machines now leveling the end of the extension with hard core gravel.
They have just about finished the new A45 dual carriageway loop and dedicated bus lane, however now saying Sept before that is all completed.Supposedly the road opening up before that as they prepare to join current A45 with new loop both ways.
Nigel
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: London
Posts: 2,962
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just driven past the runway extension site, giant machines now leveling the
end of the extension with hard core gravel.
end of the extension with hard core gravel.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Hobbiton, middle England
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lack of BA diverts into BHX in recent years.
One reason is that BA no longer have a base at BHX so all the customer service, handling etc is done by a third party which costs more and not the same standard as BAs own brand. In fact there isn't even a Oneworld presence now as its mostly Skyteam and Star Alliance.
STN doesn't either but is Closer to London and has a longer runway which helps a bit when landing a 747 on an unfamiliar airfield in possible challenging weather conditions. But the runway extension will help with that one.
One reason is that BA no longer have a base at BHX so all the customer service, handling etc is done by a third party which costs more and not the same standard as BAs own brand. In fact there isn't even a Oneworld presence now as its mostly Skyteam and Star Alliance.
STN doesn't either but is Closer to London and has a longer runway which helps a bit when landing a 747 on an unfamiliar airfield in possible challenging weather conditions. But the runway extension will help with that one.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 647
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reply to splash&dash
From memory there's a fire station very close to the northern boundary of the airfield.. But I do not know if the fire fighters based there have specialist training.
Perhaps someone better placed technically, than me can answer this ?
OK the physical pavement is being extended at the 33 end by 405 metres ( I remember seeing on a civil engineering site that the physical length of Tarmac/Concrete/Asphalt is actually a bit more than this) and the old 33 threshold is being relocated some distance towards the new extension
This will have the effect of increasing the landing distance available on 33 and also on 15 but not necessary by equal distances, I suspect, based on the formal rules that apply in the definitions applied. [edit: looking up the formal definition of LDA].
Would a 300 metre (for the sake of argument) increase in the LDA really make a big impact on weather the airfield is acceptable as a nominated diversion point for large aircraft, all other things being equal ? For the existing length.
I bet the planners looked at these factors. Can anyone enlighten an interested non expert [me].
CAT III
Perhaps someone better placed technically, than me can answer this ?
OK the physical pavement is being extended at the 33 end by 405 metres ( I remember seeing on a civil engineering site that the physical length of Tarmac/Concrete/Asphalt is actually a bit more than this) and the old 33 threshold is being relocated some distance towards the new extension
This will have the effect of increasing the landing distance available on 33 and also on 15 but not necessary by equal distances, I suspect, based on the formal rules that apply in the definitions applied. [edit: looking up the formal definition of LDA].
Would a 300 metre (for the sake of argument) increase in the LDA really make a big impact on weather the airfield is acceptable as a nominated diversion point for large aircraft, all other things being equal ? For the existing length.
I bet the planners looked at these factors. Can anyone enlighten an interested non expert [me].
CAT III
Last edited by Guest 112233; 18th Jul 2013 at 16:39.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: solihull West Midlands
Posts: 967
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CAT111NDB,
Well I saw the EK 77W land in driving rain at BHX some months ago and it stopped halfway down the current runway.
However think it might make a very small difference to have a longer runway, with the threshold moved back.
Splash a dash,
good point about the handling agent probably costing more, but when did BA handling close as we used to get 747 and 772 diverts up till 3 years ago, though BA handling had gone well before this, anyone in the know on this ?
BHX have said quite recently that wide bodied divs can be problematic, as they might discrupt there own flights, I did consider this as a possible reason why we get so few now.
However we had an Iberia A330 div from LHR which in the end offloaded passengers so perhaps not.
BA LHR ops were clearly heard on the day of the A320 incident, telling a pilot who requested to go to BHX he should go to Bournemouth instead, and heeded that.
Yet 3 months before were happy to tell 3 BA 747 crews to go to BHX although they managed to get into LHR in the end.
I would really like to know the reasons, puzzling.
Nigel.
Well I saw the EK 77W land in driving rain at BHX some months ago and it stopped halfway down the current runway.
However think it might make a very small difference to have a longer runway, with the threshold moved back.
Splash a dash,
good point about the handling agent probably costing more, but when did BA handling close as we used to get 747 and 772 diverts up till 3 years ago, though BA handling had gone well before this, anyone in the know on this ?
BHX have said quite recently that wide bodied divs can be problematic, as they might discrupt there own flights, I did consider this as a possible reason why we get so few now.
However we had an Iberia A330 div from LHR which in the end offloaded passengers so perhaps not.
BA LHR ops were clearly heard on the day of the A320 incident, telling a pilot who requested to go to BHX he should go to Bournemouth instead, and heeded that.
Yet 3 months before were happy to tell 3 BA 747 crews to go to BHX although they managed to get into LHR in the end.
I would really like to know the reasons, puzzling.
Nigel.
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: London
Posts: 2,962
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would really like to know the reasons, puzzling
If the BHX agents are busy, or have minimum staff due to not being busy, they themselves can refuse the divert.
BHX are usually quite good at being able to accept diverts, but, cost cutting and undercutting the competition amongst handling agents (which is not just a BHX issue by any stretch of the imagination), means that staffing levels are now close to the bare minimum for the scheduled flying programme, which in turn means less diverts as there is no one to handle them effectively.
Obviously the above is pure speculation as we don't know the reasons diverts are refused/not used, but, the above is happening more and more