Coventry/Birminham Airspace

[twostroke]

My local MP was on the radio banging on about 'safety concerns' due to clashes in airspace between Coventry (Baginton) and Birmingham departures? He said there have been several 'near misses'. Is this an issue, is he talking rubbish, will it get wors when cov start to fly thomsonfly in a month or two?:confused:

[5150]

Sounds rubbish. What do MP's know anyway? Sounds like a popularity soundbite we've come to expect from MP's who go with the majority of the public in order to sway votes in their favour for future elections.

The approach, missed approach and departure procedures for both Coventry and Birmingham take into account each others' airspace. Thomson's new set-up (if it ever gets going!) will have so few movements that would hardly put a strain on air traffic management in that area of the country.

[ITFC1]

He is telling the truth, we filed a near miss there at the end of 2001, after a serious error by one of the controllers, after the CAA investigation, changes are being ade.

So he is telling the truth, not usual for me to say about an MP though

[Chilli Monster]

ITFC1

How can you say one mistake, by one person, means the MP is telling the truth and not scare mongering - which is what you're doing by your comment.

Objectionality, not emotionality, is a far better response.

(And no - I'm nothing to do with Coventry - just can't stand such ill considered responses).

[ITFC1]

Why is my comment such an ill considered response, i don't remember you being there when an immediate avoiding action was given too us, its happened 4 times now, as we use Coventry quite a bit.

We have only filed once,as we would have collided with the other aircraft, anyway, not goingto get into an arguement, but in the report from the CAA changes were going to be made with the procedure, and i hope the have. I think ATC do an excellent.

[twostroke]

So there may be some truth in this safety thing then. Also this week I hear Bham have lodged official objection to cov's operations; anyone got any details?

[2Donkeys]

Who and what exactly are you twostroke....?

[52 North]

"it's happened 4 times now, as we use Coventry quite a bit."

The above statement seems to indicate that there is something inherently dangerous about the procedures for CVT, I don't believe this to be the case as a procedural 1000ft separation is included in all departure releases from runway 23 at CVT against 33 arrivals at BHX. BHX give departure releases, usually to 2,500 ft, they then only descend their inbounds to 3,500ft. It's been like that for a long time and there have only been a few incidents, mainly due to level busts or controller error, which we all know can happen at any airport. There is no guesswork involved, it is procedurally safe (else they wouldn't do it). What's more, all the new pax flights will have southbound dep routes, these are much easier for BHX to integrate into their own traffic.

If it has happened 4 times to one person, it indicates that this is happening all the time - it isn't. (Or if it is, please report it so something can be done about it!)

The objection by BHX may be motivated by commercial pressure, we think they have realised that CVT could be a real thorn in their side, especially as they will finally have a reputable company based there.

52N

[Skypartners]

... may be motivated by commercial pressure ...

Given that BHX is objecting to just about everything almost down to the colour of the loo paper I think the motivation is clear - to 'see off' CVT and all who might choose to fly there. The local TV is crammed full of ads from Brum based operators who all, casually, mention the facilities at BHX with the inference, accurate no doubt that CVT will be on a somewhat less grand scale. It is, however, disingenuous and irresponsible to alarm the public with stories of impending mid-air collisions in order to scotch commercial competition. If every large airfield operator used the same shabby tactic no-one would fly!

Come on Brum - it's a big world out there and you don't own it.

[twostroke]

2Donkies-who or what exactly am I? - Well strangely enough I'm just a mere 'customer' interested enough in what I hear on local radio to find my way here to this website and try and find some truths. The tone of your question makes me think you may vary the answers to suit who you thought was listening, which does worry me a little. Who or what exactly are you, anyway?

52 north and skypartners. You are probably right about the commercially orientated objections from bham. The safety things a bit of a red herring I suppose. I guess coventry's operation just restricts potential capacity at birmingham, and generally gets in their way

[redsnail]

Fly in and out of Coventry quite often at night. Can't say I've ever had a separation problem. Been flying there for a year. Nothing wrong with the Controllers at all.

[twostroke]

thanks redsnail. But it wouldnt be a nighttime problem with cov/bham, since bham pretty much shuts down at night, doesnt it? Isnt it that cov want to enter the big time and do daytime passenger flights that just get in the way of bham's operation?

[CheekyVisual]

Having operated from Brum for about a year I don't think is there is a major safety problem with the CVT operation. It will need some superb ATC co-ordination to make it work efficiently though.

The main problem is straight in approaches onto 33 at BHX from HON. I've twice been kept so high due to CVT outbound traffic that we've had to throw it away. Annoyed pax and additional cost for the airline. Doesn't sound like much in a year but CVT is quite quiet during the daylight hours at present. Suspect the problem may get worse if the Thomson operation becomes sucessful and expands.

If it is going to work ATC is going to have to be 100% slicker. No offence meant to BHX and CVT ATCOs. They're just not used to having to do it and the new procedures it might need may take a while to operate smoothly everytime.

[Manu Forte]

I'm sorry CheekyVisual, but I do take offence! We have had the CVT situation in one form or another for the last three decades (yes, I am that old!) and we at BHX are very adept at handling it.

Consider yourself fortunate to get a straight in approach to 33 at any time - standard procedure is to cross HON at FL 80 then descend in a left hand circuit. It would be a rare occasion indeed that a Coventry departure alone would preclude or interfere with a straight in, given the procedures currently in operation.

We cannot get the CVT departures from 23 out of the way any more effectively than we do now, given noise routings, etc., so I don't really see how you can expect us to be "100% slicker".

If you want to see the problems involved, come and sit in with BHX radar for a couple of hours during the morning rush sometime - the bigger picture as seen from radar is vastly different from that seen from the flight deck of only one aircraft in the system at the time.