Globespan Cape Town now down to twice a week all winter and looks to be replaced by Canadian destinations from April

RW24L in poor weather
 

At the moment 24R is closed at night for maintenance. If the weather is poor, it's supposed to be reopened so that the ILS can be used.

So how come I've had to do two approaches over the last few nights, both using RW24L VOR/DME in heavy rain and crosswind with the approach lights only appearing at "100 above" (550ft above the airport)?

In my airline, VOR approaches are commonplace but in many airlines they are unusual and such an approach under these conditions would have an unacceptably high risk.

Would someone from MAPlc or ATC care to comment, please?

RWY24L Poor Weather
 

757 Operator,

As you say, the minima for VOR approaches varies from one operator to another - each airline should ensure the Airport and ATC are aware of their operating minima so they can take this into account when planning work on the runway. Why not file an ASR and insist on feedback via the usual safety reporting channels?

No, all operators do have the same minima (subject maybe to small national variations in how to apply them). It's just that some operators are unaccustomed to doing VOR approaches, let alone down to minima in a crosswind and heavy rain. Tempting them to do so invites trouble.

There's nothing illegal or theoretically unsafe about what is going on, so an ASR is not really applicable. But it still seems to me to be bad practice.

757Op
First, the good news. No more runway closures until after Christmas :ok:
Second, the bad news. 140 days of single runway ops next year :ouch:
Third, the really bad news. Runway 24R will be resurfaced in 2008 :{
As ATC, we "discuss" runway closures, and try to minimise any disruption, but at the end of the day, it's MA's airport.
Looking on the bright side. In the past, when any runway work was done on the "Single Runway" as was, the Airlines either rescheduled or diverted. Now there is runway 24L/06R. As an aside, if the forecast is not very good, work on 24R is either postponed, or kept to a minimum, so that a "fully equipped" [ILS] runway is available.
Hope this helps
watp,iktch

I bet MAPLC wished they had spent a few more pounds on building a full taxiway system for the new runway, i thought it was very short sighted at the time and i am just a lay man, what do i know ?

Still the batched landings and take offs followed by a runway full of back tracking airliners makes interesting viewing !

I may be wrong but was it not one of the deals to the Mobberly/eco set that the taxiway would not be built all the way intially

G-I-B

GIB I'm sure that's part of it but,
 

Geoff Muirhead axed the taxiway to save in the order of £10 million and the 24L ILS to save £1.5 million

The 06R ILS was installed at CAT l standards.

Sir George Cayley

Chiglet et al, thanks for the info.

Well, if that's what's coming over the next couple of years, now's the time to fit a RW24L ILS. Cat 1 would be fine.

For one of UK's foremost airports to have only a primitive approach aid on the secondary runway is laughable - and £1.5m will seem cheap if even one aircraft gets it wrong.

Also, RW24L is where they try and get the emergencies to land, so as to keep 24R free. Now I've tried RW24L with two engines, I certainly won't be using it on one engine. Sorry MAPlc, but I'll be insisting on an ILS to RW24R and sorry about clogging up your airport for a few hours.

Chiglet has confirmed what I was told today, 140 nights of runway closures next year, resurfacing 2008. I understand MA are considering the installation of an ILS for RWY24L on this basis - not sure whether this would be to CAT1 or 3 standard. As 757operator suggests,we airlines should insist on this over the coming months.

AeroMANC
 

I suspect it would have to be Cat 1 only as the present lighting is only to that level and I presume it would take too long and be too expense to do an upgrade of the lighting - or are the ducts there already?

Yes, it would make sense to have the basic ILS for any time that 24R is out of use.

Scottie Dog

24l & 06r Catiii
 

MA need to consider CAT3 ILS/Lighting - CAT1 doesn't help much in dense fog! Even if there are safety issues concerning dual runway operations in LVP, CAT3 ILS for 24L & 06R would at least keep the place ticking over when 24R & 06L is out of service for long periods. You would assume ducting is already in place for reduced spacing on the centreline. TDZ and Supplementary Approach could be a problem if ducting wasn't installed during the construction.

Runway designation is changing next year to 05L/R & 23L/R. Does anyone have any idea why:confused:

No Complaints ?
 

Having just worked the last two night duties in ATC ( Sunday and Monday), during the inclement weather referred to by " 757 operator ", there was only one period of around six minutes where the weather criteria for VOR / DME approaches, neared the recommended minima (It never fell below). One aircraft executed a go-around during this, followed by a landing some twelve minutes later.
During this whole period I only recieved one observation from a crew after landing, that the weather at the time was " marginal ".
If we are not told that crews are experiencing problems by the crews themselves, and all our conditions for VOR / DME approaches are being met, then we have no reason to suspect that all is not well!!
There are contingencies that should the weather deteriorate below minima, or it is considered that difficulties will be experienced, then we can revert to 24R within 30 - 50 minutes if work on the runway has already started.
To answer "Cleared for take-off's" point about runway designation change, it's all due to the change in the earths magnetic field, called variation. The Magnetic direction for our runway will now err more to 230 degrees than 240 degrees and like wise of course with the reciprocal, thus the need for change.
One idea being put forward however, but not receiving much support, is that to avoid ANY possible confusion between which of the two runways to expect on approach, crossing on the ground, and SIDS for departure, (and believe me sometimes there is a lot of confusion!), is to leave one of them alone, and just rename one to 23 / 05. Would that cause much confusion in the cockpit flying heading 234 to a runway called 24 ?? Comments appreciated. ;)

Standard practice in the rest of the world q.v. ATL, HKG, IAH etc etc...

I have heard MAN is to possibly get a new service to Madrid with a low cost operator. Anyone know anything? Air Madrid, Spanair?

VUELO

Maybe CLICK............

MM

easyJet maybe? The EZ/MAN rumour has been flying round for ages. Trying MAN from an existing base could test the waters?

bmiBaby- with 4 aircraft becoming available (2x new, 2xMME) and 3 going to BHX, MAD could be part of an expansion from MAN

Jet2- They already have Spain covered from MAN, so Madrid would be a logical choice. They would be my favourite to serve the city.

Ryanair- if MAD does ever become a base, as was rumoured some time ago, then MAN could benefit from a route- this is highly unlikely I guess, but possible.

Vueling- entering the UK market must be highly lucrative, but very competitive, so having gained brand recognition in Spain they might be ina good position to give the UK a go?

It really could be anyone!

As of 2nd November 2006, Mahan Air will change its flights TO



Thursdays arriving at 1730hrs, departing 1900hrs



Saturdays arriving at 1800hrs, departing at 1930hrs

and what about Monarch ? :rolleyes:

Since that decision was made, say 10 years ago, the Board members will collectively have been paid quite a lot more than £1.5m in bonuses.

Fact. Check the published accounts.

Re VORDME RW24L, on Saturday night/Sunday morning when we came in the approach lights were visible at "100 above" minima but the PAPI's did not show until below MDA. Not good for manoeuvring, and remember too that the final approach track and the runway don't line up. The weather was far worse than what was officially on this ATIS, which is of course up to 29 minutes out of date. Also, as you might expect in showers, the weather on the approach was a lot worse than on the airport.

Surely the move to reopen 24R shouldn't be when RW24L falls to VORDME minima, but well in advance, say 1000ft cloudbase? The minima are just that, the very worst acceptable conditions. They are not a target for MaPlc to aim at and the runway should be changed well before the minima are reached.

Having to do an approach down to VORDME minima is what you have to do at an undeveloped airport in the Med or Third World, not in mainstream UK just because the airport operator fancies doing a bit of work on the runway that should be in use.

At the moment the long-hauls for next summer are the same as this year, give or take the odd aircraft subsitution (Delta 763s in place of 764s) and the loss of SQ's 2 weekly ZRH/SIN 744 flights. These are probably being replaced by 777s, depending upon aircraft availability.

CX start to Hong Kong indefinitely postponed and there's been no announcement by TG about a possible MAN-BKK service.

CX couldn't get the right regulatory approval to route through Moscow, so it looks like they've given up, because it's all gone quiet.

SQ apparently does very well from MAN. So much so, that there was talk of an additional 3 weekly frequencies, bringing the total to 10. I don't know why the MAN-ZRH-SIN flights have been pulled, other than it's reported that they're not as popular with passengers. Having intermediate stops is no longer really a profitable way to operate.

Nobody seems to know about SQ's plans to replace these two flights, but they are currently taking delivery of 777-300ERs (not sure how many). I think it's pretty safe to say that MAN will receive at least a daily direct 777 in future.

I believe the problem SIA has is that the B747 are leaving the fleet and of course we all know about the A380 to replace them.

G-I-B

antobob
 

yo guys, the antobob that was here in Manchester earlier this week, does anyone know if it true whether it will be coming back with all the equipment it took out ????

No, EMA by the sounds of it - on Tues/Weds.

Looks like the GB airways MLA service is to make a comeback next summer despite its axing for the winter. BA timetable showing a daily service.

2 based A320's again next summer one of which will do the 3*week BRS-TFS on a W pattern. PFO, TFS and HER all confirmed for next summer although no sign of DBV or AGP. There are a few gaps in this schedule although not enough time to do anymore W patterns suggesting one or two new routes from MAN? anyone know more??

Is the EMA-TFS dropped after the winter?

initial

GB will not operate MAN-AGP again.

DBV has been dropped for next summer as well.

Does anyone know why they are dropping AGP? You have to be a little concerned if they can't make AGP work. This is one of the core destinations along with ALC, PMI and FAO. I know there's a lot of competition on the MAN - AGP route but there's so much demand that surely they can all operate in harmony with one another. ZB, WW, LS and TOM all seem to cope with good year round loads despite the large volume of flights. Is this another case of a BA operator running scared of the opposition?

Not that I'm aware of.

Heard mutterings that for every passanger GB carried MAN-AGP it cost them money true or not i am not sure. This will have changed considerably since going to the Connect product IMHO.

Second Runway Operations
 

Just been down the southside of the airport this afternoon and noticed that 24L was being used for departures at 14.15. I thought that the airport adopted a single runway operation between 12.00 - 15.00 daily. Has this changed?

Pathetic
 

Manchester Airport were feeble in the extreme in their handling of traffic today. Granted LVP's, but traffic flow was simply staggering in its slowness. Not knocking ATC, but why has 24L not got a Cat 3 ILS, and why does single runway operation persist when vis is at worst murky? Most professional big airports can handle double the traffic flow in these type of conditions.

Along with the Staff Security debacle, this is a continuing saga of useless management and a poorly run airport. I am voicing the opinion of many MAN-based colleagues as well as my own.

Manchester airport to start charging to pick up passengers.

BBC News

RH,

Whilst I'm sure a CAT3 ILS on RWY24L would beneficial - what help would that have been today? I would suggest a CAT3 ILS on RWY06R would be more of a priority given the operating modes a MAN. My understanding is that they can operate dual runway 24L/24R in LVP's due to cloud (but not RWY06L/06R as 06R is only equipped for CAT1. They need to look carefully at developing dual runway operations in LVP due to visibility, I suspect part of the issue is runway crossing's and the associated runway incursion risk.

I suppose we have to accept that in adverse conditions there is likely to be some degree of disruption.

Week last monday (2nd.) youngest daughter and i passed through MAN. She checked in for a BA flight at about 0530 bound to Oz via LHR. I checked in Jet2 for a flight to VLC at about the same time. I passed through security in about ten minutes and she took 1 Hour 20 minutes to pass through security. Would the large difference in time be due to volume or other reasons?? Just seemed to be a lot of people about at both terminals..

For T1 & T3 you can expect an average of 1 hour to get through security at peak times, it seems illogical though as it varies from day to day. As I now often spend an hour to check in & an hour to get through security, I have cancelled my exec lounge pass & no longer use airside shops, due lack of time.There is no pleasure whatsoever in starting your trip from MAN.
It is frankly appalling, recently passed through a very busy Hamburg, Barcelona & Dusseldorf-all with ZERO security queuing times.Add this to the minimum £1.80 charge to pick pax up, being shortly introduced under the laughable guise of "safety" & "security".
Its certainly making EZY & RYR flights from Liverpool alot more attractive. Do they really think business men on short flights are going to put up with these huge wait times?:rolleyes:

Mr A Tis is right. I flew out of Liverpool last Friday night (A very busy time at Liverpool) and the queue was backed up into the landside buffet area yet the queue was moving and it only took 8 minutes to get through security. All x-ray machines and Security frames were operational and it was well staffed.

Incidentally, Liverpool Airport is to expand the security search area and add a fifth X-ray machine (complete with staff!!!!) in November.