|
[QUOTE=MAN777;11164827]Re contamination of RW2
At the time the excuse was wait for it, "oil dripping on the tarmac and causing contamination, "hang on, we are not talking, B707s, DC8s and Coronados", damn those " leaky old 787s and A380s", in terms of an excuse that did seem something of a stretch, maybe a reduction in rates is more plausible ? although quite why other airports didn't take that route is open to question./QUOTE] The majority of RW 2 is Asphalt/Bitumen which as you probably know can soften and degrade if it comes into contact with solvents (Jet A1, Hydraulic fluid, Oil.) I think keeping RW2 expensive surface in pristine condition is a good call. other airports. Many UK airports utilised all available space during the full lockdown and presumably had a financial incentive to do that despite risk to taxiway surfaces. I accept that taxiways however may be of a different material and therefore that is indeed a different argument. If Manchester has indeed gained substantial revenues in other ways without compromise that is actually to be applauded. |
Man does indeed frequently use available space for aircraft parking (or even car parking :))
Aircraft have been parked on TWY Bravo (B5 next to stand 12), Engine test bay, TWY Alpha near the ETB, on some of the recently completed new sections not yet in use etc, etc. Then you have TWYs Quebec and NB which are routinely dual purpose TWYs or stands. Unsurprisingly the decision/choice considers how long, need to access aircraft safely and ATC views etc, etc. Like all these decisions the final choice is taken after stakeholders are consulted and safety impact assessed. |
Interesting diversion just arrived Air Taihiti B787
|
Originally Posted by chaps1954
(Post 11164991)
Interesting diversion just arrived Air Taihiti B787
|
Medical emergency, crew member, hope ok.
|
Aer Lingus 320 last night too.
Blimey, two diversions in as many days. The whinging must be getting through. 😁 |
I imagine Ozzy, roverman and Suzeman have at least 75 years of experience between them in various capacities at MAN, My own concern would be that if there is a financial incentive to keep a runway closed (beyond direct operational savings), this could delay reinstatement beyond the optimum point of reopening. But hopefully that issue won't arise. https://www.acl-uk.org/wp-content/up...ration-S22.pdf And NO, I have no "beef" with the MAG management team. I actually know a few and have a great deal of respect for them as individuals. But that doesn't mean I won't challenge specific corporate policies which I feel are not in the best interests of the airport operation. It is a very healthy thing for companies to be challenged to reassess certain assumptions where better outcomes might result. A good manager will always welcome constructive criticism. Man does indeed frequently use available space for aircraft parking (or even car parking https://www.pprune.org/images/smilies/smile.gif) Aircraft have been parked on TWY Bravo (B5 next to stand 12), Engine test bay, TWY Alpha near the ETB, on some of the recently completed new sections not yet in use etc, etc. Then you have TWYs Quebec and NB which are routinely dual purpose TWYs or stands. Unsurprisingly the decision/choice considers how long, need to access aircraft safely and ATC views etc, etc. Like all these decisions the final choice is taken after stakeholders are consulted and safety impact assessed. the final choice is taken after stakeholders are consulted and safety impact assessed Perhaps Navpi forgets the whole VS 747 fleet and some VS Airbus types scattered all over the airfield, plus a few extra EZY and not to mention all the large fleets of based aircraft (Ryanair, Jet 2, EZY, TUI etc) parked up H24 because they weren't being used? Plus some Tommy Cook and Flybe if I recall, at least during the first lockdown? |
Air Tahiti still on the ground at 2030hrs
Various reports had 1500hrs 1645hrs 1830hrs departure and still on ground Visited airport at 1630hrs and aircraft was side off old thomas cook hanger, with no steps at aircraft and doors closed Do hope that the passengers have been allowed off and hopefully gone to hotel for the night, If it;s a member of crew presume taken off flight that it can not depart until replacement crew arrive, and presume not many Air Tahiti staff nearby with CDG or LAX being the closest possible |
F-OVAA departed MAN around 21.45 but is now circling over Norfolk. Seen on FR24.
|
Originally Posted by SCFC1EP
(Post 11165215)
Air Tahiti still on the ground at 2030hrs
Various reports had 1500hrs 1645hrs 1830hrs departure and still on ground Visited airport at 1630hrs and aircraft was side off old thomas cook hanger, with no steps at aircraft and doors closed Do hope that the passengers have been allowed off and hopefully gone to hotel for the night, If it;s a member of crew presume taken off flight that it can not depart until replacement crew arrive, and presume not many Air Tahiti staff nearby with CDG or LAX being the closest possible |
Originally Posted by Curious Pax
(Post 11165262)
Finally departed 2143, and now orbiting over Norfolk. At a guess burning off fuel in order to avoid a second overweight landing in one day before completing the return to Paris. I’m assuming that landing a 787 just over an hour into a 10 hour+ flight would be overweight if any 787-knowledgeable folks could shed any light? Long day for the pax to end up back where they started if that is what’s happened to them!
|
Looks like it is now diverting to Birmingham. It left CDG at 10:30 this morning, diverted to MAN due to the crew fatality and now diverting to Birmingham. That’s a long day for passengers and crew alike.
|
Originally Posted by BA318
(Post 11165274)
Looks like it is now diverting to Birmingham. It left CDG at 10:30 this morning, diverted to MAN due to the crew fatality and now diverting to Birmingham. That’s a long day for passengers and crew alike.
|
Originally Posted by daz211
(Post 11165276)
I really can’t understand what’s going on with this flight, obviously the earlier divert was under very sad circumstances but I really can’t figure it out after that, are the passengers even back onboard, why is it now heading to BHX.
A passenger tweeted that they had received no food or drink after 4hrs on the ground in Manchester. |
Originally Posted by BA318
(Post 11165278)
Now gaining altitude again and heading south away from BHX. Perhaps they will go to CDG after all.
A passenger tweeted that they had received no food or drink after 4hrs on the ground in Manchester. |
Originally Posted by Suzeman
(Post 11165179)
Nearer 100 I reckon. But that was then and this is now
With a quick look at the ACL scheduling parameters for Summer 2022, you would know that two runway operation will be back for the season https://www.acl-uk.org/wp-content/up...ration-S22.pdf But do you tell them directly rather than just expressing your views on here? Absolutely 42psi. Particularly this bit . Perhaps Navpi forgets the whole VS 747 fleet and some VS Airbus types scattered all over the airfield, plus a few extra EZY and not to mention all the large fleets of based aircraft (Ryanair, Jet 2, EZY, TUI etc) parked up H24 because they weren't being used? Plus some Tommy Cook and Flybe if I recall, at least during the first lockdown? In terms of todays events extremely sad if unconfirmed reports are indeed true, whilst recognising the discomfort of fellow passengers in extraordinary circumstances, perhaps for today at least those complaints are secondary. |
Originally Posted by SCFC1EP
(Post 11165215)
Air Tahiti still on the ground at 2030hrs
Various reports had 1500hrs 1645hrs 1830hrs departure and still on ground Visited airport at 1630hrs and aircraft was side off old thomas cook hanger, with no steps at aircraft and doors closed Do hope that the passengers have been allowed off and hopefully gone to hotel for the night, If it;s a member of crew presume taken off flight that it can not depart until replacement crew arrive, and presume not many Air Tahiti staff nearby with CDG or LAX being the closest possible |
Unbelievable
|
Originally Posted by daz211
(Post 11165284)
Surly it would have made more sense to Hotel the passengers at Manchester overnight and fly crew in from CDG, The poor passenger will be exhausted by time they get to CDG and then put in a hotel, they won’t get in a room until we’ll after 0200hrs, I just find it odd.
|
Originally Posted by BA318
(Post 11165296)
There are all sorts of problems though. The pax don’t have PLF or compliance with UK regulations/visa requirements for some. Apparently it was heading back to CDG, then had a tech issue, requested to go back to MAN a second time but they said no they only accept medical divert so then seems to be going to CDG at 9000ft.
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is 06:09. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.