BY diversion from LBA. 11/2

[Going loco]

Noticed a solitary diversion from LBA this evening. The Britannia from TFS.

Was this BY up to their usual up there?

[RobT100]

BY upto their usual tricks allright ! Wouldnt have anything to do with the fact that BY base an aircraft at LBA between tues and fri - returning back to its base on fri evening ! Crew must have wanted to get out on the town. Sorry I couldnt help it but it does make you wonder as it was the only divert !

Talking of BY, I have had enough of them at LBA. Went to book a holiday at "thomson" and they were continually trying to push DSA rather than LBA. Listen BY/Thomson - "I AM NOT INTERESTED IN DSA - I WANT FLIGHTS FROM LBA". DSA is a waste of space and will just be a charter airport running on low cost, like the likes of coventry. I will NEVER book from DSA and would encourage most west yorks people not to either (vote with your feet). We want a proper airport with proper routes, LBA is getting there but needs more charter stuff and encourahgement / incentives to base.
So I promptly walked out and booked something from MAN with one of thomsons biggest rivals. I dont like going from MAN but I certainly wont be going to some tin-pot set up like DSA.:ok:

[HOODED]

Rob a bit harsh on DSA really, it won't be a tin pot airport the terminal and car park facilities look very good. At least if you can't go from LBA which I agree is a disgrace you can still fly from Yorkshire rather than going acrross the dreadful 62. As for BY ,yes it stinks as both BMI and Jet2 got in after they had diverted. I'm sure the decision was easy, lets look after ourselves not the 200+ punters down the back who are paying our wages! This is not unusual for BY maybe they are only CAT1 or have different rules for LBA to all the other airlines but when I looked at the weather it was CAT 1 just! and wind was variable at 3 kts. Can't say what it was when they called up though as I looked after I had noticed the divert. They might have been light on holding fuel also. I know a BY FO and he would have pressed to get in so lets not tar all BY crews with this though history does not make them look good.

[682ft AMSL]

From what I could tell the divert call was made somewhere over the Channel based purely on the LBA ATIS at the time. Call to Servisair Manchester shortly after announcing the divert due "LBA weather". No call to LBA ATC to check trends or to pick up feedback from all of the a/c who were getting in on 14 on CAT1. By the time the a/c was descending into MAN, LBA WX had improved sufficiently that RVRs were reported as 'greater than 1100m' down the full length and a landing Jet2 737 reported the lights at 300ft above the threshold.

One might well speculate whether the fact that the a/c normally positions back to MAN over the weekend and the fact the crew avoided an evening's HOTAC in Leeds had more to do with this than the weather. Whathever the reason, 233 passengers faced a late and lengthy trip back across the M62 last night.

682

[Thomas_Cook_757-300]

Hi,

Rob

Who did you book with then? :D I know what your saying about them being pushy!

Regards
Thomas_Cook_757-300

[airhumberside]

So how are the charters from DSA doing in terms of advance bookings?

[Leezyjet]

Ahh BY diverting to MAN from LBA........remember it well - see they are still at it.

When I used to work at LBA back in 93-95 and again in 98, they always used to do that at the slightest hint of bad wx, even when other airlines were getting in with no probs - most of the time BY would not even bother to come and have a look/try but would just go straight to MAN.

It was a bloody nightmare having to sort out coaches at the last minute and then re-unite pax and bags and trying to get the passengers and their bags on the same bus is not as easy as it sounds !!.

It was always us, the poor handling agents that get all the :mad: from the pax too for something totally out of our control - not an airline rep to be seen at LBA back then.


:hmm:

[Dogs_ears_up]

None of those posting on this thread so far list "Pilot" or anything like it in their profiles: In reality, some of you may be, but prefer discretion.

It is usually unwise to second guess decisions taken on a flightdeck by professionals when you were not there at the time and when you lack the specific training, incident details and situational awareness required for making informed comment.

There are any number of good reasons for a diversion, NONE of which anybody here is familiar with in this instance. To suggest that BY deliberately divert and thereby inconvenience customers is childish and reveals more about the lack of detailed industry knowledge of contributors than about the incident.

[Leodis]

I have a strong opinion as you do on this subject, but I think you are a little harsh on our Donny friends. DSA will have its own catchment area and it does not need to try catch any of the LBA punters to be a success. It is a little annoying (understatement) when your driving through Horsforth watching the aircraft fly overhead on their approach into Leeds whilst a bus passes you advertising DSA.

If you are reading Thomson boys and girls, I have just booked to go to on holiday with 'your' company this summer flying from LBA. This is costing over 2000 pounds for the group. Already I have been joking with my work collegues saying that i'm flying from Leeds and returning to Manchester. This really is not a laughing matter, if this actually happens and I find out that it was not justified my friends and I will never use your company again. What I cannot understand is that the customer will always be a companies best form of advertisement. People always tell family and friends of their experiences and people do take notice.

What is funny is that dispite the Thomsons over advertising, LBA will still manage to full that Boeing 767-200 come the start of May!!

[Yellow Sun]

if this actually happens and I find out that it was not justified

And what is your professional or other qualification to make such a judgement?

YS

[Leodis]

and what is your professional or other qualification to make such a judgement?

20 years of local knowledge and the fact that other same alike equiptment can make a safe approach and landing in the same conditions.

This is not a one off, this is happening time and time again. I can remember one day in the autumn when conditions at Leeds were not exactly favorable. I was expecting to see some aircraft possibly divert. The wind was 250 gusting to 45 knots cross wind during the daytime period. The wind then started to abate, by the time the BY flight made its approach the wind had decreased to 260 15 knots with no gusts. The aircraft diverted to Manchester without making a second approach claiming the wind was too strong. It was the only diversion of the day. Someone from a handling agent said the pilot has had a telling off and he has been told he is to return the aircraft to Leeds with the passengers. This then happened.

During summer 2003 Mytravel based the same aircraft at Leeds and there were many occasions when their aircraft landed and the Thomson aircraft landing at the same time diverted in the same conditions.

On one occasion one passenger on returning to Leeds on a coach from Manchester said "after we had diverted to Manchester we landed on the second approach there because the weather was poor there too."

I don't care what anyone says but there is more to this that meets the eye. Not all the Thomson crews are involved, some are very pro LBA some hate the place. Some don't care either way but they live in Manchester!!!

[Yellow Sun]

20 years of local knowledge and the fact that other same alike equiptment can make a safe approach and landing in the same conditions.

Thank you for that. It is now clear that you are offering an unqualified opinion. Just remember the name of this site "Professional Pilots Rumour Network". I really don't care what you write as long as you make it clear that you have no "Professional Pilot" qualification whatsoever. I have been moved to comment on this thread because it contains more misleading and uninformed rubbish than any I can recall in many years.

Unless you have spoken the crew involved, or the company operations controller you do not know the full circumstances behind any decision to divert. Hearsay from

Someone from a handling agent

or someone listening in :

From what I could tell the divert call was made somewhere over the Channel based purely on the LBA ATIS at the time. Call to Servisair Manchester shortly after announcing the divert due "LBA weather".

are irrelevant and misleading. I can only finish by agreeing with Dogs_ears_up you come accross as childish and superficial.

YS

[Leodis]

Yellow sun,

I don't have to tell you who I am or what I do for a living and the only person sounding childish is you given that you show a complete inability to accept anyone elses opinion.

My opinion is based on factual comparisons with other like airlines.

To the LBA dedicated airlines; keep up the good work:-

BMI
Jet2.com
FlyBe
MyTravel
Eastern Airways
LTE
Air Europa
Spanair
Air Malta
Air Southwest
Ryanair

Among others.

YORKSHIRE:ok: the place to be is the city of Leeds.

[Dogs_ears_up]

My opinion is based on factual comparisons with other like airlines No - it's based on uninformed hearsay comments and your own misconceptions.

Let's try and keep this as simple as possible. No two approaches are identical. Aircraft weights and performance will vary amongst type, even though from the outside the aircraft may look identical to each other. Weather conditions will vary and may not match those reported by those on the ground. There are many variables, any of which render a judgement made by an unqualified person unwise.

There's an old saying about discretion being the better part of valour: Sometimes, a decision to divert due to weather (or other circumstances) may be the more sensible option, even though subsequent landings may give the appearance of the opposite!. The decision taken was the correct one at the time and under the circumstances.

I'll declare an interest, working as I do for BY, and have done so for 25 years now. During that time, I am unaware of any single instance when a diversion off LBA (or anywhere else) has been made for the absurd reasons claimed on a previous post. Thomson crews are neither pro, nor anti LBA - It is simply another place where we operate to, no more, no less: Doing so pays our salaries.

[MerchantVenturer]

Dogs_ears_up

I have never worked in the aviation/travel industry and I often make this clear in my posts. I never presume to pontificate on any technical aviation situation, especially pilot or atco-related, because I am just not qualified and my opinion, if I was able to form one, would mean nothing.

That being the case I empathise entirely with the sentiments of your post, the thrust of which I have seen expressed many times in PPRuNe by professionals in exasperated response to amateurs' 'opinions'.

However, I have a rider. I often see posters, whose profile shows them to be aviation professionals, confidently express opinions, especially in Jet Blast, on matters, often legal or police procedures, on which they are equally ignorant but that does not stop them throwing in their three penorth. And their three penorth is usually as misconceived and plain wrong as the views of amateurs on aviation matters.

[Dogs_ears_up]

Point taken... ;)

[DC10FAN]

I find it interesting that here we have another post regards LBA and yet again someone can't resist some more bashing of DSA. I have no bias towards DSA but it's getting very boring. DSA will be a success, it's not a tin-pot airport(let's stick to the facts here); it has a brand new terminal if no-one noticed and hopefully will complement LBA not compete against it.

[airhumberside]

Dont normally ask twice but:
How are the charters from DSA doing in terms of advance bookings?

[Dogs_ears_up]

It gets worse!

Now you mention it, of course it's all coming back to me now. Of course we routinely divert because of the situation with HMC: MAN Customs are much more willing to turn a blind eye. We don't mind upsetting our customers and our German financiers over such an important matter - we're sure they'll understand.

We have crew based at LBA, but they are all planning to move to another base because of the previous difficulties with HM Customs, so this means that the diversion situation will ddoubtless become worse in the Summer when we close the base down due to lack of crew.

Just to add insult to injury, we are the only airline in the UK to employ crew that have transgressed HMC regulations - no other has been affected. How unlucky can you get?

:uhoh:

[Leodis]

For a 'professional' man who is pilot, you have lost your temper rather quickly in this heated debate, I just hope your not on my flight when I go away in the summer with your company. If you choose to be perdantic thats upto you. Happy flying.

Cheers to good living and god bless!:rolleyes:

[Dogs_ears_up]

I Give Up - Somebody else can run with this one - I'm off!

:mad:

[GrahamK]

God damm Britannia, scourge of Bradford airport :mad: :E

[Turn It Off]

It is a little annoying (understatement) when your driving through Horsforth watching the aircraft fly overhead on their approach into Leeds whilst a bus passes you advertising DSA.

Nearly as annoying as when the pilot makes an approach to land outside of their capabilities (which potentially this could be as suggestions are that the weather was marginal) and stuff these 200 people who are so keen to get home into the floor 3 miles short of touchdown and killing a fair few in the process.

Get a reality check, only the crew / ops can confirm why they diverted. Some ideas!
- Maybe the ILS capture equipment had broken and they were below minima for an SRA? That we be a combination of wx and tech.
- Cat1 ILS approach absolute minima 550M, aerodrome operating minima possibly higher. Listened to the ATIS 40NM from airfield (thats the ATIS protected range) and RVR was outside this range.

I could go on but cant be bothered.

Truth is we don't know. If the crew aint sure I'd rather they diverted and I had a bus ride.

TIO

P.S. The allegations (not by myself) were down to a few inderviduals (allegedly) abusing their personal allowances.

Not only is it slanderous, by stating it in the manner you have you are agreeing with the statement. Please provide proof


P.P.S I don't work for BY or Thomas Cook

[Going loco]

We all seem to getting bogged down in the specifics of this particular incident. That's not really the point. The point is that over a number of considerable years, including when I was there in the 90's, Britannia were perceived (note the word: perceived) to be more prone to diverting than other users of the airport.

loco

[terrywilcox]

Personally I am very sad to read the vitriolic comments on this page,by people who should know better. As some of you know,I am but a layman when it comes to aviation. We all have particular subjects in which we profess inside knowledge,but let me say that being a professional in anything,be it solicitor,doctor,policeman or pilot,does not make them a fountain of ALL knowledge. I was particularly hurt by the comment about DSA being a "tin pot airport" . A silly comment not bourne out by any facts. Good luck to LBA, and all airports,they provide jobs for many people. Incidentally,where is the moderator.

[airhumberside]

Send a pm a moderator, that might work

Do you know how ThomsonFly loads from DSA are doing ?

[terrywilcox]

Think that's an item for finnningley thread,airhumberside.

[Leodis]

RobT100,

I am sure you said what you said because it appears whether true or not that Thomsons are turning their back on LBA in favor of DSA dispite the loyal customer base for LBA.

DSA cannot be blamed for this in any way and i'm sure RobT100 didn't mean to be so harsh and I would welcome him back to apologise in some way. What I would suggest to him am others alike is to just carry on voting with your feet. Carry on using other operators and airlines that offer services from LBA. This year i'm flying from LBA with 'Thomsons' on my group booking costing over 2000 pounds. Next year I will choose LBA again, with which ever operator choose to make LBA a departure point.

Airlines such as Jet2.com, BMI, FlyBe and Air Southwest have all made recent commitments to LBA with new services. Thomas Cook and First Choice are offering aditional capacity from LBA.:cool:

Turn it off; Dog_eat_ears

What you are implying is that other airlines using LBA are effectively breaking the rules during high winds and LVPs. You are not understanding what Going Loco is saying. What he is saying is that many times when the weather is NOT marginal at LBA Britannia/ThomsonFly still divert. Yes we don't no the reasons behind the diversions but it does occure alot more with Thomson aircraft than like equiptment with other operators.
As far as I can make out, this thread was started to establish those facts?:hmm:

I have decided to delete one thread about the customs. I did think it was slightly off topic but I still believe it was relevant. :ouch:

[lexxity]

Having read the whole thread, I feel that:

1.) Only the flightdeck have the right and reasons for a diversion to occur. It's not a decision taken lightly, think of how it will affect
future ops if your a/c is in the wrong place, and how do we know the crew are manchester based?
Without comment from the crew concerned then who are we to make such assumptions and accusations?
2.) If anybody out there can provide an accurate divert rate for ALL carriers at LBA, then maybe we can start a sensible thread about diverts concerning BY.

cheers
lexxity

[682ft AMSL]

At the risk of adding anything further which is misleading or irrelevant.....

Statistically BY do have a higher propensity to divert away from LBA than other airlines, relative to the number of movements. In what has been a very mild 04/05winter so far, the absolute numbers are small, but relatively BY make up about 25% of diversions from around 2% of the traffic. I can try and dig out some info from prior years if it helps, but it shows much the same story.

There are I believe a number of rational reasons behind this:

1) BY have operating criteria for LBA ops which do not permit CATIII approaches with any tailwind component. Given the prevailing wind in low-viz conditions at Leeds tends to be from the South and South East, this often restricts BY inbounds to CAT1 approaches only whereas other operators accept tailwind components onto the CATII/III equipped runway. I am not aware whether the zero tailwind criteria is company wide or specific to LBA ops.

2) The nature of the BY schedule means that almost all of their LBA flights are timed to arrive back into Leeds late evening. Low-viz conditions at Leeds are more prevalent at night than day and so almost all of BY's inbound schedule is in the time-frame when LVPs are most likely to be in force. Other operators have a broader schedule across the day and proportionately less of their schedule is exposed to these periods.

3) BY's fairly small flying programme out of Leeds means crews are less likely to have accumulated the local airfield knowledge that the Jet2 / bmi guys have built up. Someone once said (on this forum I think) that the trick to Leeds was to get to know it when the weather was fine so your ready for when it isn't. I guess the BY crews just don't have that opportunity and if the guy up the front isn't 100% comfortable with an approach into Leeds in low-viz or windy conditions, I'd rather take the bus ride everytime.

In the past, other factors have also contributed. In the mid-late 90's, prior to the upgrade of the 14 glideslope, BY introduced higher operating minima for approaches to 14 which increased the minimum touchdown RVR to 1000m. So with no tailwind accepted on 32 and a 1000m minima on 14, they diverted quite a lot over those winters. The use of the -800 for a couple of summers at the turn of the millennium also contributed to a higher diversion rate given the aircraft was not particularly well suited to LBA's short runway.

So various factors over the last 10 years or so have contributed to the situation. Personally I have flown in and out of Leeds as a passenger more times than I can remember and the only 2 weather related delays I experienced were both with Britannia, ironically enough both with the same captain. Once was on a 757 coming in on 14 during the 1000m minima days when we needed 2 approaches to get in and the second was on the -800 when we went into EMA to await cloud base improvements. Both times the Capt (Clive Noel-Johnson) displayed exemplary customer service and communication skills and was obviously determined that if it was safe to do so he would get his passengers to their intended destination. Such was the service I wrote a brief letter of thanks to Customer Services which I hoped reached him.

In terms of a wholesale criticism of the TUI empire, fellow LBA contributors should be careful about lumping in the commercial side of the TUI empire with the flying side. The people who decide to decide how many flights per week to offer from Leeds and to which destinations are not those at the sharp-end doing the flying so to suggest there is some sort of institutional bias against the airport is not something I subscribe to. Ultimately, the commercial guys need to be sure that the decision to operate any given service from Leeds generates incremental profit compared to serving the LBA market for that service from MAN. The flying guys from time to time need to weigh up the option of a 3000m runway at a familiar and wide-open MAN or a tricky CAT1 onto 1900m at an unfamiliar Leeds. Both things can go against LBA from time to time, but that's life.

The other thing to bear in mind is that overall at a time when passenger numbers are rising rapidly, the absolute number of people being affected by diversions away from Leeds is falling. In 2003 there were just 57 diversions from 15,000 inbound ATMs. In the early 90s Leeds was loosing 300 a year from about 12,000.

682

[Leodis]

Thankyou and very well explained. Now why couldn't dog_eat_ears (dogs_ears_up) explain it that way? You would expect a 'professional' answer from a 'professional' person!:*

[RobT100]

LEODIS

yes I will take this opportunity to apologise to any offended party here regarding DSA, thank you for pointing out my way. offence was not what I meant to cause.
However on the question of DSA being a "tin pot airport" I am not convinced for one reason: When thomson were trying to push DSA for my holiday flight I was concerned at one small matter: they explained that I may not have a meal on my holiday flight because, and I quote "facilities at DSA are restricted". Now tell me anyone, what impression does that give ?
Please dont come back and say they are not quite ready, because if they arent they shouldnt be operating. For the s.yorks people then I wish DSA all the luck in the world, for us W.yorks folk i wish they would look after LBA a touch better.
BY have a history of diverts at LBA, all I want is a reason, not somebody telling me that I know nothing. I am not alone in my opinion (and by heck I'm sure I'm allowed one whether i'm professional or not) regarding BY diverts and it would be nice to get an answer.
Good health to everyone.

[Dartania]

Excellent post thanks 628,I have operated into LBA over the past two decades flying 732/733/738/75/767 aircraft and can not remember having ever diverted though it often is a close call at this extremely demanding airport.I believe it to be one of the most challenging airports I,ve ever operated into because of geographic location,runway orientation/length and profile.The runway dished profile on an autoland (where the touchdown is always deeper into a runway) means the aircraft could touch down very late on what is an already extremely short runway coupled with what is usually a crosswind.Therefore as an aircraft commander LBA needs to be treated with a great deal of respect ,additionally a late diversion to MAN can result in being put in the hold on the Leeds beacon before diversion is accepted which can consume a great deal of fuel which of course you don,t want to have much if landing at LBA(short runway) to keep the landing weight down(remember charter flights are normally full compared to locos 70% load factors.So if LBA wants to stay in the airport league tables it needs to lengthen its runway to facilitate more comfortable bad weather operations.

[Tom the Tenor]

Leeds and Cork people should get together to explore our own unique airfield operations. Some of the frustrations etc are remarkably similar. Poor weather and short runway and we can go on from there!

[682ft AMSL]

Thanks for that Dartania. I agree and a number of improvements to the airfield to improve general performance as well as low-viz capability have been discussed e..g

* CATII on 14; I remember an airport board member telling me this was due to be installed "ready for winter 97/98"..still waiting.
* Overrun on 32; there's about 150m at the end of 32 in the 14 undershoot that's ripe for concreting
* 32 undershoot; parallel taxiways, turning loops etc have all been mooted for the 32 end with associated improvements to the undershoot to try and reduce the amount of displacement on the threshold (that said, no one has ever confirmed to me that a raised undershoot would permit the threshold to be moved).
* starter strip for 32 / runway extension

All cost money though and I guess the airport will be looking at how they best allocate the investment monies they have. If we say that 60 diversions per annum at 100 passengers a go = 6,000 passengers + say a further 4,000 affected by knock on cancellations due to diverted a/c and crews being in the wrong place etc. That leaves 2,390,000 passengers to worry about the rest of the time and I wonder whether the airport have taken the view that on a cost / benefit basis, the current low-viz protection is 'good enough'. It's certainly a whole lot better than a few years ago. Rather than spending money trying to get 10,000 down to 5,000 the airport might well take the view that investing in facilities to make life easier for the rest and to attract new business is a greater priority. It's not necessarily an approach I'd disagree with so long as the LVP situation wasn't an hindrance to winning new business. For example the timings of arrivals from the US and Pakistan are such that a fair few would be arriving with early morning mist and fog lingering and if a CO 757 operates to the same criteria as a BY 757 then, well, need I say any more?

Tom - a better idea is for Leeds and Cork people to get together with the Bristol gang to learn how you can run a v.successful business with a short runway and an elevated position.

682

[Leodis]

Dartania and 682AMSL another two very good posts.

Thanks for explaining everything. So Britannia does not look so bad after all, but in response to 682 ref LBAs priorities, I agree other things must be given priority. Additional apron space, terminal development and multistory car parking, must be of greater importance prior to any expensive runway extentions or starter strips etc.

Having said all that and I don't know how much to believe this but, several people from the airport authority have said to have been toying with the idea of a steeper glideslope to both ends. Apparently this would give an additional 150m on either end of the runway, in terms of the start of the threshhold. If possible this could be done with very little disruption.

RobT100 thanks for that, we could do without upsetting those Doncaster folk down the road anymore. They spend enough time closely watching developments at LBA as it is. Mark my words Doncaster will do well and it will be a success, LBA will continue to do very well and it is already a success.

Cheers to everyone at both ends of gods country!:cool: