SOUTHEND 5
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Essex
Posts: 1,109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
True. It was unusual weather conditions though and only occurred a couple of times if I recall correctly. The A320neos should overcome that with their anticipated improved take-off performance.
Mind you, it demonstrates how great the demand is for the TFS route from SEN.......
Mind you, it demonstrates how great the demand is for the TFS route from SEN.......
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: world
Posts: 3,424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Even if it wasn't full of pax, I suspect it was probably due to stronger than normal headwinds. To have taken on extra fuel to compensate would have meant off loading some pax and/or baggage because of the weight restriction.
The jetstream position as shown in the jetstream archives indicates not headwinds but tailwinds for Saturday's flight. Not strong but tailwinds nonetheless.
The SEN METAR for the morning prior to departure:
METAR EGMC 311050Z 300/07 9999 SCT009 BKN018 03/01 Q0982.
So the low QNH,giving a pressure altitude of 900ft would have taken a chunk out of RTOW and engine anti-ice correction (can anyone quote a figure?) have would taken some more. But enough to prevent a nonstop on a flight that was far from full and would have the benefit of favourable cruise winds and benign destination weather ?
Is there a different answer ? The SEN TAF for the period indicated a probability of snow. So was the conservative decision made to use contaminated runway data at the planning stage so as not to be caught out with an overweight aircraft if the snow materialised ? Or even a performance limiting ADD (perish the thought). Just guesses of course . Come in anyone with authoritative information...
But leaving aside SEN-TFS which always had the potential to be a challenging sector I am curious as to why the issues with the A319 operation such as tech stops and passenger offloads appeared to only start in 2014, i.e the third summer of SEN operation. I can think of several possible explanations, but the consideration of most relevance to this thread is whether the situation resulted from the publication of new survey data of obstacles in the RW24 climb out, i.e trees had grown taller since the previous survey. As they do.
In a previous discussion one well informed poster (BK100 are you still there?) indicated tree lopping was soon to take place and this would address the RW24 second segment climb issue. It looks to me that because of the terrain contours achieving the best result in terms of narrowing the disparity of 06 and 24 RTOW would also require the promulgation of an Emergency Turn procedure on a 15degree slew. See the SOU Type A charts in the UK AIP for an example . The real question is whether any progress is being made.
The SEN METAR for the morning prior to departure:
METAR EGMC 311050Z 300/07 9999 SCT009 BKN018 03/01 Q0982.
So the low QNH,giving a pressure altitude of 900ft would have taken a chunk out of RTOW and engine anti-ice correction (can anyone quote a figure?) have would taken some more. But enough to prevent a nonstop on a flight that was far from full and would have the benefit of favourable cruise winds and benign destination weather ?
Is there a different answer ? The SEN TAF for the period indicated a probability of snow. So was the conservative decision made to use contaminated runway data at the planning stage so as not to be caught out with an overweight aircraft if the snow materialised ? Or even a performance limiting ADD (perish the thought). Just guesses of course . Come in anyone with authoritative information...
But leaving aside SEN-TFS which always had the potential to be a challenging sector I am curious as to why the issues with the A319 operation such as tech stops and passenger offloads appeared to only start in 2014, i.e the third summer of SEN operation. I can think of several possible explanations, but the consideration of most relevance to this thread is whether the situation resulted from the publication of new survey data of obstacles in the RW24 climb out, i.e trees had grown taller since the previous survey. As they do.
In a previous discussion one well informed poster (BK100 are you still there?) indicated tree lopping was soon to take place and this would address the RW24 second segment climb issue. It looks to me that because of the terrain contours achieving the best result in terms of narrowing the disparity of 06 and 24 RTOW would also require the promulgation of an Emergency Turn procedure on a 15degree slew. See the SOU Type A charts in the UK AIP for an example . The real question is whether any progress is being made.
Last edited by Tagron; 1st Feb 2015 at 09:09.
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 452
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just run the numbers for a Boeing 738SFP using R24 in identical conditions and it gives a RTOM of 71.500Kgs that is 26K F25 TAI off Bleeds off TAI on drops it 71.3 i reckon in zero crz winds you could lift around 165 pax to TFS from SEN.
Surprised they stopped at LIS, FAO would be quicker turnaround on the ground. I have tech stopped at FAO and done 31 minutes from touchdown to TOGA loading 10kkgs of fuel.
Surprised they stopped at LIS, FAO would be quicker turnaround on the ground. I have tech stopped at FAO and done 31 minutes from touchdown to TOGA loading 10kkgs of fuel.
The 15 degree slew option was certainly looked at a couple of years ago but it may be I suppose that it proved impractical to implement. It does seem that only 24 departures suffer from this problem so let's hope if it is a matter of removing tree obstacles that this is rapidly achieved.
Certainly the gaining of CAS at SEN might make it more attractive to operators than previously and if the provision of a coach service early and late comes to fruition - and that's not exactly rocket science - this must surely also help considerably.
Certainly the gaining of CAS at SEN might make it more attractive to operators than previously and if the provision of a coach service early and late comes to fruition - and that's not exactly rocket science - this must surely also help considerably.
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: London
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But leaving aside SEN-TFS which always had the potential to be a challenging sector I am curious as to why the issues with the A319 operation such as tech stops and passenger offloads appeared to only start in 2014, i.e the third summer of SEN operation.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Scotland
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tagron-
TFS and FAO weight issues on Saturday caused by high baggage loads, low QNH and not enough headwind RWY 24 / too much tailwind RWY 06.
Contaminated RWY performance isn't planned "just in case" on the day. In fact, contaminated figures are extremely limiting - no flights departed on Friday morning (snow) until the RWY was "WET WET WET."
No limiting ADDs.
Unfortunately the tree obstacle problem drags on. I'm not privy to the specifics but, reading between the lines, politics are involved.
Nextprop-
The preference (mine especially) is to endeavour to get every pax (and their bags) to the destination on the day. Some even enjoy the free scenic flight to EGSS/EGHH/LFRB/LFRS/LPPT....
SWBKCB-
Yes, but an arbitrary cap on pax numbers would mean many unnecessary empty seats on 99% of popular sectors.
LNIDA-
EZY 319s 22k CFMs, 320s 27k.
*******************************
Life in SEN
It would be boring and we'd have nothing to talk about without all of the above!
TFS and FAO weight issues on Saturday caused by high baggage loads, low QNH and not enough headwind RWY 24 / too much tailwind RWY 06.
Contaminated RWY performance isn't planned "just in case" on the day. In fact, contaminated figures are extremely limiting - no flights departed on Friday morning (snow) until the RWY was "WET WET WET."
No limiting ADDs.
Unfortunately the tree obstacle problem drags on. I'm not privy to the specifics but, reading between the lines, politics are involved.
Nextprop-
The preference (mine especially) is to endeavour to get every pax (and their bags) to the destination on the day. Some even enjoy the free scenic flight to EGSS/EGHH/LFRB/LFRS/LPPT....
SWBKCB-
Yes, but an arbitrary cap on pax numbers would mean many unnecessary empty seats on 99% of popular sectors.
LNIDA-
EZY 319s 22k CFMs, 320s 27k.
*******************************
Life in SEN
It would be boring and we'd have nothing to talk about without all of the above!
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Dubai
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BK100
Notice that you say that no aircraft could depart until the runway was Wet wet Wet. Understandable from Easy Jets perspective and the limitations but........................................... with the amount of snow that fell at SEN why did the airside winter plan fail. I notice the aircraft you refer to they took off up 160 mins late according to Flight Radar
If proper anti Icing of the airfield had been carried out at the correct time ( to enable satisfactory hold over time of any product) then this should of taken care of any expected snowfall up to a depth of 2 inches.
Its not as though SEN have to complete anti icing on a 3900m runway and 5 miles of taxiway system.
Perhaps dealing with a small amount of snow was beyond their capability and experience ! Does not bode well for the future and is Easy Jet up for claiming compensation or at least asking some direct questions as to what happened last Friday.
Notice that you say that no aircraft could depart until the runway was Wet wet Wet. Understandable from Easy Jets perspective and the limitations but........................................... with the amount of snow that fell at SEN why did the airside winter plan fail. I notice the aircraft you refer to they took off up 160 mins late according to Flight Radar
If proper anti Icing of the airfield had been carried out at the correct time ( to enable satisfactory hold over time of any product) then this should of taken care of any expected snowfall up to a depth of 2 inches.
Its not as though SEN have to complete anti icing on a 3900m runway and 5 miles of taxiway system.
Perhaps dealing with a small amount of snow was beyond their capability and experience ! Does not bode well for the future and is Easy Jet up for claiming compensation or at least asking some direct questions as to what happened last Friday.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: uk
Posts: 894
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I live about two miles from SEN so I expect I experienced pretty much the same weather as them on Friday.
About 1" snow fell during that period with little if any drifting.
For that to cause closure, which the media say it did, is quite pathetic.
About 1" snow fell during that period with little if any drifting.
For that to cause closure, which the media say it did, is quite pathetic.
Thanks for some informative responses to my earlier post.
LNIDA, those figures for the 738SFP are interesting but do they take account of the obstacle clearance issue for RW24 or are they based only on the runway declared distances ? Because it is the RW24 obstacle clearance that is the gotcha at SEN when tailwind strength precludes the use of 06.
Expressflight, I wonder if it was established that a RW24 Emergency turn was technically infeasible or whether it was considered the effort and expense involved in establishing the procedure would not be justified by the gains ? If the latter then I suggest recent events would point to the need for a new evaluation. As for tree cutting I suppose it is understandable if it has become mired down in politics
Certainly SEN will need to resolve this situation if it hopes to attract more of the larger aircraft and their operators. In that respect I would rate it at least as high a priority as CAS and early morning coach services.
LNIDA, those figures for the 738SFP are interesting but do they take account of the obstacle clearance issue for RW24 or are they based only on the runway declared distances ? Because it is the RW24 obstacle clearance that is the gotcha at SEN when tailwind strength precludes the use of 06.
Expressflight, I wonder if it was established that a RW24 Emergency turn was technically infeasible or whether it was considered the effort and expense involved in establishing the procedure would not be justified by the gains ? If the latter then I suggest recent events would point to the need for a new evaluation. As for tree cutting I suppose it is understandable if it has become mired down in politics
Certainly SEN will need to resolve this situation if it hopes to attract more of the larger aircraft and their operators. In that respect I would rate it at least as high a priority as CAS and early morning coach services.
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Southend
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Snow @ SEN
The runway was sprayed with a Pre-ice coat completed @ 05:15 and the snowfall started around 06:05. The Overaasens were deployed by 06:12 and were working constantly until the R/W opened at 09:20. The runway was ready for use at around 07:15 but EZY made the desicion to hold their aircraft until it was WET/WET/WET. The 20% contaminants wasn't acceptable by their parameters. Also they didnt call for A/C deice until 09:30, by then the snow had frozen to the airframe resulting in a fourfold use of fluids to remove. I think the airport did their part of bargain and the winter plan succeded. SEN cant force operators to depart!
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Between the flower pots
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So where exactly are these offending trees? It does strike me how marginal easyjet operations at Southend are.
Pardon me being ignorant, but are we talking about the TODA figures? Why are the figures the same at both ends when there are only one set of trees?
Take-off Run Available (TORA)
The distance from the point on the surface of the aerodrome at which the aeroplane can commence its take-off run to the nearest point in the direction of take-off at which the surface of the aerodrome is incapable of bearing the weight of the aeroplane under normal operating conditions.
Take-off Distance Available (TODA)
Either the distance from the point on the surface of the aerodrome at which the aeroplane can commence its take-off run to the nearest obstacle in the direction of take-off projecting above the surface of the aerodrome and capable of affecting the safety of the aeroplane, or one and one half times the take-off run available, whichever is the less.
Southend published figures are identical at both ends.
Runway 06 TORA 1739m TODA 1799m
Runway 21 TORA 1739m TODA 1799m
By comparison Luton which has the next shortest London runway easyjet use are
Runway 08 TORA 2160m TODA 3240m
Runway 26 TORA 2160m TODA 3240m
Pardon me being ignorant, but are we talking about the TODA figures? Why are the figures the same at both ends when there are only one set of trees?
Take-off Run Available (TORA)
The distance from the point on the surface of the aerodrome at which the aeroplane can commence its take-off run to the nearest point in the direction of take-off at which the surface of the aerodrome is incapable of bearing the weight of the aeroplane under normal operating conditions.
Take-off Distance Available (TODA)
Either the distance from the point on the surface of the aerodrome at which the aeroplane can commence its take-off run to the nearest obstacle in the direction of take-off projecting above the surface of the aerodrome and capable of affecting the safety of the aeroplane, or one and one half times the take-off run available, whichever is the less.
Southend published figures are identical at both ends.
Runway 06 TORA 1739m TODA 1799m
Runway 21 TORA 1739m TODA 1799m
By comparison Luton which has the next shortest London runway easyjet use are
Runway 08 TORA 2160m TODA 3240m
Runway 26 TORA 2160m TODA 3240m
Last edited by Pain in the R's; 2nd Feb 2015 at 05:30.
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 452
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tagron
I used our EFB performance TODC to produce the figures
For engine failure it has STD 1600 turn right (if i remember?) back to SEN HP
This is for the short field version, we don't operate into SEN, but the data should be valid, The RTOM was for flap 25 26k thrust, no assumed temp TAI off.
For engine failure it has STD 1600 turn right (if i remember?) back to SEN HP
This is for the short field version, we don't operate into SEN, but the data should be valid, The RTOM was for flap 25 26k thrust, no assumed temp TAI off.
Pain in the R's
It's the second segment climb that we're talking about here. That is the portion of the climb path from gear retraction to 400ft (although under JAR this definition may be slightly different) and during this phase a climb gradient of 2.4% must be maintainable with one engine inoperative. The problem on 24 is that this climb gradient at high TOWs does not provide terrain clearance (the trees), thus an RTOW has to be applied which is the max weight which ensures terrain clearance. Runway 06 does not have significant obstacles in the climb path so the problem does not arise. TODA and TORA do not come into the equation in this situation.
As far as the 15degree slew is concerned I don't know why it was abandoned as a proposal; whether it was CAA misgivings or other technical difficulties or simply thought unnecessary at the time. It certainly looks as if it needs to be revisited in light of recent events.
Southend Thud
Thanks for providing a factual report on Friday's snow situation. It's always good to get the facts and put the previous speculation into perspective.
It's the second segment climb that we're talking about here. That is the portion of the climb path from gear retraction to 400ft (although under JAR this definition may be slightly different) and during this phase a climb gradient of 2.4% must be maintainable with one engine inoperative. The problem on 24 is that this climb gradient at high TOWs does not provide terrain clearance (the trees), thus an RTOW has to be applied which is the max weight which ensures terrain clearance. Runway 06 does not have significant obstacles in the climb path so the problem does not arise. TODA and TORA do not come into the equation in this situation.
As far as the 15degree slew is concerned I don't know why it was abandoned as a proposal; whether it was CAA misgivings or other technical difficulties or simply thought unnecessary at the time. It certainly looks as if it needs to be revisited in light of recent events.
Southend Thud
Thanks for providing a factual report on Friday's snow situation. It's always good to get the facts and put the previous speculation into perspective.