St. Helena Service
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Hotel Gypsy
Posts: 2,821
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perhaps I'm over simplifying, but would it not have need a good idea to do a few 'test runs' of aircraft flying approaches to where a would be runway would be built before 260,000,000 UK tax payer Pounds were jeopardised?
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To those who worry about an a/c arriving with not enough fuel to hold, make a few attempts, then decide: the thoughts are that payload might need to be reduced to allow fuel; the a/c needs short field performance and good x-wind handling.
Well here's the answer. Business class seats on a C130 with re-fuelling probe. Enough payload, enough fuel (the tankers have to practice somewhere), short field performance and a 'can land anywhere' attitude and skills, if you use the correct blokes. Job done. Let the RAF make a profit on at least one route; if it all goes against training budgets.
Well here's the answer. Business class seats on a C130 with re-fuelling probe. Enough payload, enough fuel (the tankers have to practice somewhere), short field performance and a 'can land anywhere' attitude and skills, if you use the correct blokes. Job done. Let the RAF make a profit on at least one route; if it all goes against training budgets.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: London
Age: 39
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Any Westerly wind is circulated by the hills, not least the biggie which is about 2-3nm right of track on final to 20.
From what I have read/understand the shifting variable winds/windshear are not solely the problem , but allied to the pretty short runway length they do not leave margins for error.
No room for a displaced threshold
Landing from opposite direction may have a significant tailwind component , short runway, no over run and close to a clip top at far end are problems and 737-8 has had more than a few overrun accidents as readers here know.
Its along trip from Jo'burg and like any Oceanic island a lot can happen to the Weather en route, might be fine to despatch but not good on arrival.
Exploratory fly bys with a herc done some years back are not really replicating behavior of a swept wing jet low down.
Just puzzled someone didnt really make more of an issue of the great big rocks alongside the threshold .
i lived in Bermuda for many years- windy windy windy and runway is 13/31 prevailing and strongest winds , up to 70Kts in winter are from 210-240 and all kinds of airliners and biz jets operate there even though there is high ground close to both approaches. the difference is its dead flat and runway is 10,000 ft plus with benign (to pax if not the aircraft) overuns onto gravel beaches and very shallow water at both ends.
At the end of the day like many complex systems they can tolerate a big deviation from the ideal in one snse (windshear) but not two (windshear and short runway)
No room for a displaced threshold
Landing from opposite direction may have a significant tailwind component , short runway, no over run and close to a clip top at far end are problems and 737-8 has had more than a few overrun accidents as readers here know.
Its along trip from Jo'burg and like any Oceanic island a lot can happen to the Weather en route, might be fine to despatch but not good on arrival.
Exploratory fly bys with a herc done some years back are not really replicating behavior of a swept wing jet low down.
Just puzzled someone didnt really make more of an issue of the great big rocks alongside the threshold .
i lived in Bermuda for many years- windy windy windy and runway is 13/31 prevailing and strongest winds , up to 70Kts in winter are from 210-240 and all kinds of airliners and biz jets operate there even though there is high ground close to both approaches. the difference is its dead flat and runway is 10,000 ft plus with benign (to pax if not the aircraft) overuns onto gravel beaches and very shallow water at both ends.
At the end of the day like many complex systems they can tolerate a big deviation from the ideal in one snse (windshear) but not two (windshear and short runway)
It just fits in with the previous, all-knowing issues from the Department for International Development in Whitehall.
Right at the start of all this they asked for fixed-price contracts from UK civil engineering contractors without giving them the opportunity to go and do a detailed engineering investigation. As a result, and quite sensibly, none of the mainstream UK contractors would quote. As I understand it someone in the Govt still feels they were stitched up on Mount Pleasant in the 1980s, which was paid for cost-plus.
Runway length seems to have been chosen to fit a budget rather than for any aeronautical design reason.
They did the trial flight (picture above) to look at the approach with a Hercules (probably the procurement department found it was the cheapest available that had the range) rather than a proper long-range swept-wing jet airliner with different flight characteristics. I wonder if they waited for a nice day for it rather than doing it in the commonplace rain and wind.
They agreed an air route to Johannesburg which nobody from St Helena wanted to go to, ignoring that all the commercial contacts from St Helena had always been with Cape Town.
Now the initial operator feels it's beyond them. I still would like to see some Air New Zealand pilots with experience of Wellington airport come and have a shot.
Right at the start of all this they asked for fixed-price contracts from UK civil engineering contractors without giving them the opportunity to go and do a detailed engineering investigation. As a result, and quite sensibly, none of the mainstream UK contractors would quote. As I understand it someone in the Govt still feels they were stitched up on Mount Pleasant in the 1980s, which was paid for cost-plus.
Runway length seems to have been chosen to fit a budget rather than for any aeronautical design reason.
They did the trial flight (picture above) to look at the approach with a Hercules (probably the procurement department found it was the cheapest available that had the range) rather than a proper long-range swept-wing jet airliner with different flight characteristics. I wonder if they waited for a nice day for it rather than doing it in the commonplace rain and wind.
They agreed an air route to Johannesburg which nobody from St Helena wanted to go to, ignoring that all the commercial contacts from St Helena had always been with Cape Town.
Now the initial operator feels it's beyond them. I still would like to see some Air New Zealand pilots with experience of Wellington airport come and have a shot.
Now the initial operator feels it's beyond them. I still would like to see some Air New Zealand pilots with experience of Wellington airport come and have a shot.
Leeds - no.
As I said earlier, think of a Funchal/Gibraltar combination.
As I said earlier, think of a Funchal/Gibraltar combination.
Personally I'd love to have a go at St Helena as I like a challenge.
Released 10th June:
ST HELENA AIRPORT STATEMENT FROM GOVERNOR LISA PHILLIPS
“Press reports in the UK and elsewhere that describe St Helena Airport as being ‘scrapped’, ‘mothballed’ or ‘postponed indefinitely’ are incorrect. The situation remains as in our last update. This is that there are wind shear challenges on one runway (20, the northern approach) which means larger planes (eg. 737-800) cannot currently land safely. We are collecting wind data which will allow larger planes to land on this runway, but this will take some time.
“Wind shear is a factor at several airports around the world, including London City Airport, where safe landings happen every day.
“In the meantime, we are working hard to identify an interim flight solution that can land on our second runway (02, from the south). There is no wind shear on this second runway, but there is a tailwind. We have identified aircraft types which can land in these conditions, and airlines that have such planes - and we are now exploring the specific availability of aircraft with these airlines.
“The Airport is certified and open, as demonstrated by the emergency medevac flight last Saturday when we were able to fly a sick baby to Cape Town.
“Naturally, we will keep the public informed … as we have been."
ST HELENA AIRPORT STATEMENT FROM GOVERNOR LISA PHILLIPS
“Press reports in the UK and elsewhere that describe St Helena Airport as being ‘scrapped’, ‘mothballed’ or ‘postponed indefinitely’ are incorrect. The situation remains as in our last update. This is that there are wind shear challenges on one runway (20, the northern approach) which means larger planes (eg. 737-800) cannot currently land safely. We are collecting wind data which will allow larger planes to land on this runway, but this will take some time.
“Wind shear is a factor at several airports around the world, including London City Airport, where safe landings happen every day.
“In the meantime, we are working hard to identify an interim flight solution that can land on our second runway (02, from the south). There is no wind shear on this second runway, but there is a tailwind. We have identified aircraft types which can land in these conditions, and airlines that have such planes - and we are now exploring the specific availability of aircraft with these airlines.
“The Airport is certified and open, as demonstrated by the emergency medevac flight last Saturday when we were able to fly a sick baby to Cape Town.
“Naturally, we will keep the public informed … as we have been."
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: West Midlands UK
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Using Runway 02
Ok, so as we thought, SHG are going to try using Runway 02 with aircraft that can accept the tailwind.
This is fine, except that there is only one instrument approach specified for that runway at present - the RNP one.
It looks as if the VOR/DME approach - in particular the VOR - may not be good enough from the southerly direction, given that the terrain, terminal/combined buildings and also any aircraft on the apron form radio reflectors which could upset the VOR performance. (I assume there is a problem because the VOR/DME approach for runway 20 is blank and totally missing for 02 in the AIP.)
The GBAS system would be ideal for use on 02, but it's not certified yet by ASSI. It's main benefit will be that it will provide good vertical guidance - the only navaid on St Helena to do this. But there may be times when this will be unavailable due to ionospheric effects in the tropical region, when the GBAS correction signals may not be able to keep up with the changes in the radio path.
So far, I think I'm correct in saying that all the flights that have landed on St Helena have been in good VMC. I guess there will be times (perhaps more as the southern winter approaches) where reduced visibility and cloudbase will occur. That will put more pressure on pilots, knowing that they're heading towards a 1000 feet wall of rock (which will hopefully be below and not in front of them when they close in). Not a time to confuse threshold elev and QNH!
This is fine, except that there is only one instrument approach specified for that runway at present - the RNP one.
It looks as if the VOR/DME approach - in particular the VOR - may not be good enough from the southerly direction, given that the terrain, terminal/combined buildings and also any aircraft on the apron form radio reflectors which could upset the VOR performance. (I assume there is a problem because the VOR/DME approach for runway 20 is blank and totally missing for 02 in the AIP.)
The GBAS system would be ideal for use on 02, but it's not certified yet by ASSI. It's main benefit will be that it will provide good vertical guidance - the only navaid on St Helena to do this. But there may be times when this will be unavailable due to ionospheric effects in the tropical region, when the GBAS correction signals may not be able to keep up with the changes in the radio path.
So far, I think I'm correct in saying that all the flights that have landed on St Helena have been in good VMC. I guess there will be times (perhaps more as the southern winter approaches) where reduced visibility and cloudbase will occur. That will put more pressure on pilots, knowing that they're heading towards a 1000 feet wall of rock (which will hopefully be below and not in front of them when they close in). Not a time to confuse threshold elev and QNH!
Looking at the clip above of the new airport, I'm amazed at the shots inside the terminal building, which would be something for a smaller European or US city. The elegant car parking area outside and looping access roads seem extraordinary for something planned around one scheduled 737 a week, plus maybe some extras as time goes on. There are plenty of lesser airports around Europe that still manage with gravel car parking areas. Certainly seems like some architect, paid on a % of construction cost, had the Dept of Overseas development in Whitehall by the balls.
I never understood why the construction project didn't build just the runway first, and get that going to assist with the logistics of doing the remainder, if only for moving in/out the South African construction personnel by Hercules, when any aviation issues would have become apparent before the expense of the landside facilities. That for example is how you do a major construction project in the outback of Australia - airstrip first, then use it to help build all the rest. But it looks like they did the runway last, the terminal building all polished and complete, but the dust kicked up by the landing aircraft looked like they hadn't even hosed down the runway yet after completion.
I never understood why the construction project didn't build just the runway first, and get that going to assist with the logistics of doing the remainder, if only for moving in/out the South African construction personnel by Hercules, when any aviation issues would have become apparent before the expense of the landside facilities. That for example is how you do a major construction project in the outback of Australia - airstrip first, then use it to help build all the rest. But it looks like they did the runway last, the terminal building all polished and complete, but the dust kicked up by the landing aircraft looked like they hadn't even hosed down the runway yet after completion.
Broken Biscuits - Saint Helena is in the SE trades and doesn't have a winter as such. There is a rainy season in April-June and cooler in the latter half of the year. Circling with a cloudbase of 1000' afe is possible based on the runway 20 approaches.
WHBM
The airport was built at a fixed price, I sugguest you read up on what they had to do before sugguesting they built the runway last.
The airport is aiming/designed for 10 737-800 rotations per week.
http://www.sainthelenaaccess.com/app...port_Final.pdf
The airport was built at a fixed price, I sugguest you read up on what they had to do before sugguesting they built the runway last.
The airport is aiming/designed for 10 737-800 rotations per week.
http://www.sainthelenaaccess.com/app...port_Final.pdf
Last edited by peter we; 12th Jun 2016 at 13:36.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: West Yorkshire
Posts: 635
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anybody know what airlines and types the Governor has in mind for 02?....more by luck than judgement they still have hold of the reliable RMS...bet she`s still sailing there this time next year
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: London
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Two small things.
The St Helena Independent alleges that the Met Office has edited its website. I do know that I saw the first Met Office press release and requested a copy of the full report and how the studies were conducted. In reply I was told to contact the airport but no-one has acknowledged my requests. I may tell you if you don't already know that this is the norm for SHG – they do not reply if they can avoid it. St Helena has no freedom of information act.
My second point might help WHBM but a full exposition would mean going back to the High Point Rendel report of June 2001 and even then you have to read it in the context of what was going on in politics. Ms Clare Short had attempted to "incentivise" the whole she-bang of SHG and the Saints themselves. Time was of the essence. Two good runway locations were assessed but land use and strong winds made them improbable. Of the remaining sites the only good one involved a humiliating loss of face which SHG would not countenance.
It took three "goes" for SHG to get the answer they wanted. High Point Rendel, GIC, then Atkins. Think of cavaliers versus roundheads. The cavaliers were SHG/DFID/ASSI and the roundheads were SHELCO/Arup/Boeing [Boeing Airfield Construction that is]. Essentially in the Blue Corner were all the men from whichever ministry and in the Red Corner was commercial enterprise.
The upshot is that the least best option won, the most massive earthworks had to be paid for and the least amount of concrete was poured for the ridiculous amount of RESA
because kitty litter is cheap whereas runway is expensive. Folks when you only have so much yardage for an airport go for the hard stuff. Reasonable?
There I feel better now. I have made all my points before but the principal ones are:- no kitty litter, just hard concrete, full construction all the way; indicate 90 metres RESA, 30 metres strip at each end with paint; the bit in the middle is runway, get your tape measure out... it must be at least 1800 metres, more if you can get it.
Now if it is too windy then you should have gone for either of the two improbables but you [SHG] didn't.
PS for Paully [who is I guess from the handle is from St Paul's]
It is not for the Governor but for the Gov acting on the best advice of ASSI. To say the "Governor" is to lend wings to the belief that the Governor is the "Enforcer" and we know where that gets us - a governor with two hats, head of state and head of government who can do as little or as much as he/she likes. But I get your point. I have in mind an OEW of 33,660kg that qualifies in every way with the PQQ set out in the original document you'll find out on the sthelenaaccess website.
The St Helena Independent alleges that the Met Office has edited its website. I do know that I saw the first Met Office press release and requested a copy of the full report and how the studies were conducted. In reply I was told to contact the airport but no-one has acknowledged my requests. I may tell you if you don't already know that this is the norm for SHG – they do not reply if they can avoid it. St Helena has no freedom of information act.
My second point might help WHBM but a full exposition would mean going back to the High Point Rendel report of June 2001 and even then you have to read it in the context of what was going on in politics. Ms Clare Short had attempted to "incentivise" the whole she-bang of SHG and the Saints themselves. Time was of the essence. Two good runway locations were assessed but land use and strong winds made them improbable. Of the remaining sites the only good one involved a humiliating loss of face which SHG would not countenance.
It took three "goes" for SHG to get the answer they wanted. High Point Rendel, GIC, then Atkins. Think of cavaliers versus roundheads. The cavaliers were SHG/DFID/ASSI and the roundheads were SHELCO/Arup/Boeing [Boeing Airfield Construction that is]. Essentially in the Blue Corner were all the men from whichever ministry and in the Red Corner was commercial enterprise.
The upshot is that the least best option won, the most massive earthworks had to be paid for and the least amount of concrete was poured for the ridiculous amount of RESA
because kitty litter is cheap whereas runway is expensive. Folks when you only have so much yardage for an airport go for the hard stuff. Reasonable?
There I feel better now. I have made all my points before but the principal ones are:- no kitty litter, just hard concrete, full construction all the way; indicate 90 metres RESA, 30 metres strip at each end with paint; the bit in the middle is runway, get your tape measure out... it must be at least 1800 metres, more if you can get it.
Now if it is too windy then you should have gone for either of the two improbables but you [SHG] didn't.
PS for Paully [who is I guess from the handle is from St Paul's]
It is not for the Governor but for the Gov acting on the best advice of ASSI. To say the "Governor" is to lend wings to the belief that the Governor is the "Enforcer" and we know where that gets us - a governor with two hats, head of state and head of government who can do as little or as much as he/she likes. But I get your point. I have in mind an OEW of 33,660kg that qualifies in every way with the PQQ set out in the original document you'll find out on the sthelenaaccess website.
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: West Midlands UK
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WHBM - I agree the airport buildings look relatively palatial. There are other things where expense has not been spared - the navaids provided is a case in point. About the only thing they haven't got (as far as I know) is a VDF.
One thing which strikes me as a waste of money is the perimeter "security" fence. You can see it's even been installed on the first step down from the top of the Dry Gut fill. Now I don't expect there will be more than the odd walker anywhere near the airport site and surely the possibility of trespassers on the runway could be dealt with by stationing someone off to one side when an aircraft is due. It's not like the place is covered in masses of vegetation in which people could hide. In any case, it looks like the whole of the runway area is easily seen from the tower.
But, as I've said before, once you've decided to move 8 million cu m of rock to fill Dry Gut, the rest of the airport infrastructure looks relatively cheap.
But there is one thing which they don't appear to have provided - any decent space for cargo operations. There is no warehouse facility etc for temporary storage of items imported or for export. Presumably they intend to move them immediately from the aircraft down to Jamestown or wherever. Or perhaps they'll just position a few containers somewhere for storage?
One thing which strikes me as a waste of money is the perimeter "security" fence. You can see it's even been installed on the first step down from the top of the Dry Gut fill. Now I don't expect there will be more than the odd walker anywhere near the airport site and surely the possibility of trespassers on the runway could be dealt with by stationing someone off to one side when an aircraft is due. It's not like the place is covered in masses of vegetation in which people could hide. In any case, it looks like the whole of the runway area is easily seen from the tower.
But, as I've said before, once you've decided to move 8 million cu m of rock to fill Dry Gut, the rest of the airport infrastructure looks relatively cheap.
But there is one thing which they don't appear to have provided - any decent space for cargo operations. There is no warehouse facility etc for temporary storage of items imported or for export. Presumably they intend to move them immediately from the aircraft down to Jamestown or wherever. Or perhaps they'll just position a few containers somewhere for storage?
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: London
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BB
I what level of freight do you expect to portage in to an LDA on 1550 metres? I was conversant with the A319-100 and am still current on the B737/700-800.
What I can provide, and others can too, is figures for there and back in likely scenarios. I know my stuff, it is what I was paid for and still am. I thought your last post distracting.
Right now my concern is location [fixed], runway dimensions [governing landing weight mainly but a lot else besides] and least of all is the small amount of manageable freight I can bring in and out. To what was my island, my people.
There is only so much I can do but this thread is getting a life of its own with conjecture and speculation out of all proportion.
I need to get out more.
I have tried to give dimension to St Helena, the real issue. Perhaps I should not bother.
Best wishes
I what level of freight do you expect to portage in to an LDA on 1550 metres? I was conversant with the A319-100 and am still current on the B737/700-800.
What I can provide, and others can too, is figures for there and back in likely scenarios. I know my stuff, it is what I was paid for and still am. I thought your last post distracting.
Right now my concern is location [fixed], runway dimensions [governing landing weight mainly but a lot else besides] and least of all is the small amount of manageable freight I can bring in and out. To what was my island, my people.
There is only so much I can do but this thread is getting a life of its own with conjecture and speculation out of all proportion.
I need to get out more.
I have tried to give dimension to St Helena, the real issue. Perhaps I should not bother.
Best wishes