Airlines, Airports & Routes Topics about airports, routes and airline business.

Heathrow-2

Old 23rd Feb 2019, 14:03
  #901 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Canada
Posts: 50
Originally Posted by 1gintonic View Post
In the early 70's LHR to ABZ and INV were Viscount operated. In about 1976 Aberdeen services were operated by Trident 1E's, formerly from Northeast Airlines. These types, of which there were only 3 in the whole BA Trident fleet were much more suitable for the short runway at Aberdeen than the standard Trident 1C. The Boeing 737-200 then took over in early 80's followed by B737-400 in the 90's. As far as I can recall, LHR-INV continued with Viscounts until the closure of most UK and Ireland routes in about 1982 when Dan Air took on the route. Following their acquisition by BA, B737-400 were introduced until BA stopped the route altogether.
I used to travel LHR-ABZ on the way to LSI in 1974. After the Viscounts BAC 1-11s were used to ABZ, really tight seating. There was also one chaotic weekend when the Viscounts fleet was withdrawn for corrosion/fatique checks due to an accident in South America I think and Tridents were used LHR-ABZ.

Last edited by canuck slf; 25th Feb 2019 at 05:23. Reason: Clarify Trident was LHR-ABZ
canuck slf is offline  
Old 23rd Feb 2019, 17:53
  #902 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 498
Originally Posted by Richard Taylor View Post
I suggest you find from somewhere a sense of humour..... if you can.....
OK, I'll look into it. If you manage to find yours first, do please let me know where from!
pilotmike is offline  
Old 23rd Feb 2019, 19:18
  #903 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 10,973
Gosh, what have I started ?

When I posted that photo of bogged-down Zulu Uniform to illustrate that Tridents were in common use on LHR/ABZ, I didn't expect it would spark off a willy-waving war about how every incident is a near-disaster.

Getting back on topic, given that this is the LHR thread, we can expect the next instalment of Heathrow's Booker Fiction Prize submission (aka the Fly Quiet statistics) in the next week or so.

Watch this space ...
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 24th Feb 2019, 16:21
  #904 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: LHR/EGLL
Age: 41
Posts: 4,315
Originally Posted by Flitefone View Post


Yes: https://www.nats.aero/tbs

And recategorisation of wake vortex minima which is a global initiative.

FF
Enhanced TBS with RECAT EU has been in operation since early last Spring.
Gonzo is offline  
Old 6th Mar 2019, 17:08
  #905 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 10,973
Originally Posted by DaveReidUK View Post
Getting back on topic, given that this is the LHR thread, we can expect the next instalment of Heathrow's Booker Fiction Prize submission (aka the Fly Quiet statistics) in the next week or so.
Well the stats for Q4 2018 have now been calculated, but there's no point in clicking on the link as the page is currently password-protected, presumably while Heathrow mulls over which airline to propel arbitrarily into first place and adjusts the scores to fit.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2019, 05:12
  #906 (permalink)  
Paxing All Over The World
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hertfordshire, UK.
Age: 63
Posts: 8,981
Heathrow inks new deal with airlines to promote higher Load Factors, subject to the UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) approval, will be valid through the end of 2021.

01.03.2019 - 18:18 UTC
The new agreement, which the airport operator called "a landmark deal", has been under negotiations for the past several months. The deal includes "hundreds of millions of pounds" worth of incentives for the airlines to boost their load factors on existing flights.

"Airlines at Heathrow currently operate with average load factors below the IATA global average. If airlines at Heathrow reached global averages for filling aircraft there is an opportunity to reduce passenger charges by 10-20% against what they might otherwise be, in addition to helping Heathrow meet the Governmentís affordability target for expansion," the airport operator said.
ch Aviation
I am curious about this, as every single carrier wants to operate to the highest load factors - why do they need "hundreds of millions of pounds" worth of incentives ?

As for reducing charges to the carriers, I'll wait for the pigs to be launched off 27L...
PAXboy is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2019, 05:20
  #907 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: London
Posts: 205
Paxman,

No they don’t and particularly at Heathrow where carriers are driven by the frequency argument and yield potential in the front cabins in the main.

This leads to the regular over capacity in the back of the bus on certain routes, and price dumping of the economy seats in the market at certain times.



Rutan16 is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2019, 13:39
  #908 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: London
Age: 38
Posts: 445
Originally Posted by Rutan16 View Post
Paxman,

No they donít and particularly at Heathrow where carriers are driven by the frequency argument and yield potential in the front cabins in the main.

This leads to the regular over capacity in the back of the bus on certain routes, and price dumping of the economy seats in the market at certain times.
Which of course means poor people have a chance to visit NYC. I share your anger at plebs being allowed to fly long haul #notreally
Skipness One Foxtrot is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2019, 15:13
  #909 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 411
Only nine off track on BA short haul?
Following detailed analysis with British Airways and NATS, we are aware that not all instances of aircraft that are off-track for reasons outside of the airlines control, are removed from the calculation. Over the coming months we will be working to address this issue.
ie Fix the figures
Trinity 09L is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2019, 16:28
  #910 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: LHR/EGLL
Age: 41
Posts: 4,315
Yes, if aircraft are directed off the SID for safety (due to a missed approach) or weather avoiding, etc, then they are not recorded as track keeping violations.
Gonzo is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2019, 17:20
  #911 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 10,973
Originally Posted by Trinity 09L View Post
Only nine off track on BA short haul?
ie Fix the figures
Coincidentally, I wrote yesterday to Heathrow's CEO challenging him to say how many Fly Quiet & Green points were awarded to each airline for track-keeping and the other six FQG metrics, since those points supposedly add up to the ludicrous aggregate scores that LHR publishes.

I'll report back on the response (if any).
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2019, 17:36
  #912 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 411
Gonzo,I accept your explanation, but did this effect BA 824 on 5/3/19, all other aircraft appeared on track at that time
Trinity 09L is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2019, 18:06
  #913 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: LHR/EGLL
Age: 41
Posts: 4,315
Originally Posted by Trinity 09L View Post
Gonzo,I accept your explanation, but did this effect BA 824 on 5/3/19, all other aircraft appeared on track at that time
Just looked at Webtrack, and that deviation was due to a 27L missed approach, AAL142.
Gonzo is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2019, 18:18
  #914 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 10,973

DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2019, 18:29
  #915 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 411
Gonzo and DRUK thanks for the explanations - one assumes a right turn would have been more appropriate for BA824
T09L
Trinity 09L is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2019, 18:48
  #916 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: LHR/EGLL
Age: 41
Posts: 4,315
Originally Posted by Trinity 09L View Post
Gonzo and DRUK thanks for the explanations - one assumes a right turn would have been more appropriate for BA824
T09L
Iíd guess it was given a heading of 280 or 290ish just to ensure adequate deconfliction against the missed approach.
Gonzo is offline  
Old 20th Mar 2019, 00:42
  #917 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 10,973
Originally Posted by DaveReidUK View Post
Coincidentally, I wrote yesterday to Heathrow's CEO challenging him to say how many Fly Quiet & Green points were awarded to each airline for track-keeping and the other six FQG metrics, since those points supposedly add up to the ludicrous aggregate scores that LHR publishes.

I'll report back on the response (if any).
Well I received a reply today from one of the Heathrow team, responding on behalf of their CEO. Unsurprisingly, he declined to provide the requested breakdown of the metric scores that should add up to those ludicrous aggregate marks (since they are mathematically impossible under the rules of the scheme).

But wait - apparently those published rules aren't actually how the scheme works at all (which any GCSE Maths student could have told us). I'm told that the "How We Calculate" page on the website isn't in fact how they calculate, but is apparently a dumbed-down version aimed at Joe Public, who isn't deemed bright enough to understand the various fudge factors that go into producing the final rose-tinted rankings.

So that's all good then.

Incidentally, the Q4 2018 results have just emerged from their password-protection. I haven't yet had time to analyse them, but initial indications are that Heathrow has tweaked the fudge factor to inflate the scores by around 55% instead of the customary 40% or so.

Watch this space.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2019, 17:35
  #918 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 10,973
Originally Posted by DaveReidUK View Post
Incidentally, the Q4 2018 results have just emerged from their password-protection. I haven't yet had time to analyse them, but initial indications are that Heathrow has tweaked the fudge factor to inflate the scores by around 55% instead of the customary 40% or so.

Watch this space.
Heathrow has this week belatedly published the results from its Fly Quiet & Green programme for Q4 2018.

This time around, even a cursory glance at the results is sufficient to illustrate how absurd they are - instead of giving the airlines an average score of around 750 out of 1000, as with previous quarters' results (already grossly inflated), Heathrow has hiked the average score by over 8% to 813 points.

Readers will recall that, under the published rules of the scheme, the expected average (mean and median) score should be around 500 (slightly more if there are tied places for any of the metrics, for example 522 points for the Q4 results).

Not content with inflating the scores even more than usual, Heathrow has also inexplicably excluded 5 of its 50 busiest airlines from the results.

We will never know how China Southern, El Al, Korean Air, Kuwait Airways or Pakistan International Airlines are judged to have performed, because Egyptair short/longhaul, Icelandair (ditto) and MEA longhaul (all with fewer flights than any of the above) have been substituted instead. In fact El Al and China Southern had over three times as many flights as MEA longhaul during Q4.

The "league table" ranking, in descending order of points awarded by Heathrow, includes the bizarre sequence: 9th, 10th, 13th, 12th, 13th, 14th, 15th, 16th, 17th, 18th, 27th, 20th, 21st, 22nd, 23rd, 24th, 25th, 24th, 27th, 28th.

A more detailed look at the Q4 table shows:

a) Individual airline scores are inflated by between 17% and 240%, with the poorest performing carriers receiving the biggest unjustified increase in their score. The 544 points score awarded by Heathrow to MEA shorthaul is over 380 points more than the airline actually merits based on its performance and Heathrow's rules.

b) 48 out of the 50 airlines in Heathrow's table are awarded more than the correctly calculated average (based on Heathrow's data and methodology) of 522.

c) Turkish Airlines longhaul and Jet Airways are given an unexplained hike up the table, each by 15 places, compared to the positions that their performance merits.

d) Among the airlines entitled to feel aggrieved with this quarter's published results include Icelandair shorthaul, relegated 20 places from its rightful position. Turkish Airlines shorthaul, despite meriting 503 points by Heathrow's own methodology, putting it just above Air Malta, bizarrely ends up ranked 21 places below the Maltese carrier.

e) "RAG" (red/amber/green) classifications are again applied inconsistently; for example Thai Airways and TAP, ranked 44th and 45th, respectively, by Heathrow for early/late movements, get an "Amber" for that category while Scandinavian, ranked 34th for that metric by Heathrow, gets a "Red".

f) For the second successive quarter, 180 flights by Finnair's A330 and A350 fleets (out of an airline total of 905) appear not to have been taken into account in calculating the results, with only its narrow-body A320 family flights having been counted.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2019, 23:10
  #919 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: LHR/EGLL
Age: 41
Posts: 4,315
Iím sure thereís an echo in here.....!
Gonzo is offline  
Old 23rd Mar 2019, 14:28
  #920 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Eas Anglia
Age: 60
Posts: 483
Do we know at what point we are with RW3 ?

It all seems to have gone quiet.
Navpi is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.