LHR is wasting airlines' fuel?

[unmanned transport]

Just because at LHR they stack a/c rather than sequence from 100's of miles back, does not mean fuel is wasted more here.
*************************************************
I'm baacckk!!!!

Heavies still have to get down from TOD slow down etc for the stack, just like having to go directly to the rwy. Surely being able to go from TOD directly to the runway rather than to hold in a stack is more fuel efficient. Am I wrong?

Let's keep this thread on topic and not sling the mud across the pond at each other.

(I am aware that I have insulted you good folk in the past and I'M SORRY for doing so).

[FlapsOne]

Same applies to start up.

Why, oh why do they give start up clearance (not just LHR of course) knowing full well that you will spend 20-40 mins in a queue polluting the atmosphere.

Why not just hold everyone on stand (assuming the stand isn't needed) and only start you up when there is a clear run to the runway? It must be possible!

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

UNMANNED.. I accept your fullsome apology. You surely must understand that the major difference between good old UK and the USA is space.. We have very little room to play with and if we wanted to start sequencing jets 200 miles out we'd have to control them well into our neighbouring countries. BUT, and this is a BIG BUT.. if I had a buck for all the times US pilots have told me they prefer our system I'd be damned rich! Heathrow is busy because people want to fly there.. we have to run stacks because we don't have room for long vectors. That is the simple answer.


Flaps. Sorry but you show an extraordinary lack of understanding of commercial airline and ATC operations. If what you suggest could be done, it would be done. Firstly show me ANY airline which will guarantee to get it's flights away exactly at a particular time. I've never known that during a lifetime in aviation. There are so many variables in the system that the best way to achieve a high departure rate is to have a pool of aircraft at the holding point. That way ATC can juggle them around to achieve the best departure order so that the overall delay is kept to a minimum.

[vespasia]

Start up is only given because that's the way the airline wants it! Tug crew are released, stand is released for the next inbound, and let's not forget that start up is also the start of flight and therefore an ontime departure. As an ATCO I try to do what crew request and 99% of the time that means start and take delay at the holding point if necessary.::*

[411A]

LHR was behind the times over twenty years ago, and still not much progress in sight.
Why are we not surprised, considering the ATC units involved?
Infrastructure dictates, and LHR is sadly second fiddle.
The ATC guys do their best, I'm sure, but lack of runway/taxiway/terminal space is the deciding factor.
Better carry that extra twenty minutes holding fuel, just as the NOTAMS indicate (also for a very long time), otherwise bad things can happen
BA excluded of course, as they seem to operate with absolute minimum reserves.
LHR seem to do 'em favors nearly every day.
Surprise...surprise.:}

[unmanned transport]

Don't stacks act like 'choke points' to what should be a free flow of traffic?

[FlapsOne]

Director

I have as much experience as you, probably more, and you clearly didn't understand the point I made.

It has absolutely nothing to do with getting flights away at a particular time but it has everything to do with not making aircraft start up and wait when they are actually ready.

When they are ready (assuming slots and stands not a factor) leave them be until they can taxi and take off with minimal delay.

It's just got to be a better use of resources and, over the period of a year, would save millions of pounds/dollars and major airports not to mention the pollution savings.

[ayrprox]

Unmanned,
as HD(enjoying his retirement i hope, not that i'm bitter, only 27 years to go!:{) says the big problem we have is the lack of space within the uk.
Your statement:

Surely being able to go from TOD directly to the runway rather than to hold in a stack is more fuel efficient. Am I wrong?

is indeed not wrong and in an ideal world with enough space and no danger areas/military restrictions we would love to oblige. However the sad fact is we don't have the massive wide open spaces for vectoring, and that heathrow's current two runways only have a finite amount of slots which at peak times are being used to the full . and 411a the atc units involved are working their nuts off to provide everybody with the best service they can and by the way as has been posted by pilots on this site before we work on a first come first served basis, its too busy to do otherwise so BA joins the queue like everybody else.

Flaps, startup is given because you asked for it, so your company gets an on time departure, also the space thing come into it as well. the stand you are on is needed to house the next arrival . its not the best situation but them's the facts.

[BahrainLad]

(assuming the stand isn't needed)

Welcome to LHR........

[Knackered Nigel]

411A

Actually Heathrow ATC are the fairest bunch in Europe. They don't give BA preferential treatment. At some major European airports, the local carriers are given BLATANT preferential treatment.

That's the brits for you, we play fair....perhaps unwisely!

As for BA taking minimum fuel, we take what we need. No sense in carrying too much excess and foolish to take too little. As you say, one can expect 20mins holding routinely, regardless of weather.

Nowhere else in Europe are inbound delays so bad!

[Gonzo]

The phone calls we field from airlines (and comments from flight crews on the R/T) asking why a/c are being held on stand for a departure delay give a clear message that airlines would rather take the hit of five or ten minutes fuel at the hold than five or ten minutes of delay their competitors can point to. Also, we just don't have the numbers of stands at Heathrow to allow us to do this. Believe me, we don't like a big departure queue either, as it means Ground becomes limited in how flexible he/she can be, depending on runway configuration.

UT made a point about TOD, yes, of course it would be the ideal, but delays and 'choke points' are encountered everywhere. The USA (which has the airspace to do it) handles it with early descent (ie, before planned TOD) and early speed control. The UK handles it by holding.

[Trinity 09L]

Our business is run by bean counters & managers for profit for themselves and shareholders, with no consideration for the environment, and not by professionals ie pilots or ATC.:{

[unmanned transport]

To put it in brevity and as I see it, the prime choke point of the system is the airport infrastructure.

[PAXboy]

(Non pilot speaking) As I understand the following:[list=1]
flow of air traffic from USA towards London
prevailing winds in London
geography of London
[/list=1] A flight arriving from the West, more often than not, needs to land from the East? Therefore:[list=a]
How much fuel will it take to send it 200 miles East, in order for it to fly 200 miles West? (as opposed to enjoying the hospitality of Bovingdon etc.?)
What will be the exact technical and legal process to have our good neighbours in continental Europe, handle the flight, turn it around nicely and send it back to us? This will, naturally, ensure complete integration of the approach sequence as any disruption will cause delay and, eerrrr, waste of fuel?
If said a/c is inspecting Bovingdon and the arrival pattern changes, how much easier is it to break out into approach sequence, rather than still be inspecting Belgium?
If, whilst on your beautiful straight glide down from the heights of USA flying ( :ooh: ) you need to divert for an emergency (any type) would it be easier from a stack where your alternates will be static, as opposed to the 200 mile approach where your alternates will be changing frequently?[/list=a]

[PPRuNe Pop]

unmanned transport

For some reason you seem to have decided that you would start another thread on the same subject that has already been closed. There is nothing to persuade us that it is worthy of repeat but we will leave for a day or so to see what happens.

[Epsilon minus]

Unmanned transport couldn't give damn whether there are stacks at LHR or any other airport for that matter. As is proven by restarting a previously closed thread, his motives are purely to annoy and wind-up other forum users.
PPP. Would you kindly close this thread please.
EM

[Gonzo]

Interesting post, 411A.

You say that 'it's not surprising, given the ATC units involved.....' and then immediately contradict yourself by saying that 'I'm sure ATC do their best'....

Please do enlighten me as to how I and my colleagues do BA favours every day.......

[Bumblebee]

re: delaying on stand at LHR, the approximate cost to BA's operation for delayed departure allegedly amounts to around £300 a minute....

Don't need to be Einstein :8 to work out what's less costly to an operator under those cirumstances.