PDA

View Full Version : LHR single runway OPS


DIRECTTANGODELTA
25th Feb 2006, 15:48
Heard that an incident has caused single runway ops at LHR today, ant ideas why?

Human Factor
25th Feb 2006, 16:29
Not sure if this has anything to do with it but a Cathay A340 flew over my house earlier on with it's gear down at about 5000 feet with around 20 miles to touch down. Seemed a little strange.

Before anyone has a go about irrelevance, I know a thing or two about heavy jet ops into LHR. ;)

AlphaWhiskyRomeo
25th Feb 2006, 16:48
Eurocontrol is warning of 60 minute delays at LHR due to "blown tyre".

Possible it is related to the CX flight that you mentioned.

Human Factor
25th Feb 2006, 17:03
If it is the CX, it would perhaps indicate a tyre burst on take-off from HKG.

Well, it is a rumour network.:E

point5
25th Feb 2006, 17:12
Its bin an ineteresting day at LL...

Virgin A340 landed 09R and scraped an engine pod blocking the runway, and then taxiway for a short while.

Jordanian A310 landed 09L with smoke from undercarriage blocking runway for 5-10mins.

Amercian 41 (B763) div in due high pressure valve prob in right engine.

All sorted and now back to normal dual runway ops.

Cheers!

buzzlitebeer
25th Feb 2006, 17:46
Virgin A340 burst several tyres on landing blocking 09R for departures for over 30 mins. Big delays and usual LHR chaos ensued...

HEATHROW DIRECTOR
25th Feb 2006, 17:57
<<Big delays and usual LHR chaos ensued...>>

Do elucidate Mr buzz... I'm sure a lot of people would like to hear more...

GT3
25th Feb 2006, 18:02
Its bin an ineteresting day at LL...
Virgin A340 landed 09R and scraped an engine pod blocking the runway, and then taxiway for a short while.
Jordanian A310 landed 09L with smoke from undercarriage blocking runway for 5-10mins.
Amercian 41 (B763) div in due high pressure valve prob in right engine.
All sorted and now back to normal dual runway ops.
Cheers!

No runways at LHR. Pah been there done that ;)

buzzlitebeer
25th Feb 2006, 18:39
<<Big delays and usual LHR chaos ensued...>>
Do elucidate Mr buzz... I'm sure a lot of people would like to hear more...
Nothing personal-ATC do a great job. Just that LHR doesn't have much extra capacity for dealing with anything interrupting the usual smooth flow of traffic.

In trim
25th Feb 2006, 18:52
I'd agree with that. Not been at work today, and I'm LGW rather than LHR, but I'm sure the ATC guys have really had to work for their money today. Well done guys, you do a great job at squeezing the most out of those runways.

Human Factor
25th Feb 2006, 18:53
So the big question then, what was the Cathay doing with his gear down so early? :E

haughtney1
25th Feb 2006, 19:13
Possibly weather was a factor...?
I operated a B757 into LGW onto 08R..early this afternoon..reported wind was 020/24G37...needless to say it was a busy last 500 feet:ok:
I live near LHR and the wind is stronger here:uhoh:

Seloco
25th Feb 2006, 21:24
Out of interest, why was the VS landing on 09R? I thought 09L was normal except for early morning BAs sneaking into T4?

Human Factor
25th Feb 2006, 22:51
haughtney1,

I'd be surprised. The gear was down and he hadn't turned base at that point. He'd have had a fair tail wind on base but it would have helped him on final. He may just have had trouble making the ATC speed control. I remember how well the speedbrake worked on the A319 :{ so maybe the A340 is similar. Who knows.

point5
25th Feb 2006, 23:40
GT3 - we didn't lose both at the same time. Jordanian kindly waited til we just got 09R back before he blocked the other!

We were TEAMing this arvo with a number of aircraft landing on 09R to absorb inbound holding delays. These aircraft need not necessarily be BA traffic, just whatever fits in with TCs plans, hence the Virgin A340!

Another day, another dollar!

Gonzo
26th Feb 2006, 08:19
How long before we get a TOI saying that we shouldn't land 09R when the wind is from the NE, then? :E

NigelOnDraft
26th Feb 2006, 08:49
How long before we get a TOI saying that we shouldn't land 09R when the wind is from the NE, then?Given the symmetry of the "problem" [T5 for those not familiar], then I would expect the "TOI" (whatever that is?) to also state not to land on 09L when wind is from the SE :{

Jumbo Driver
26th Feb 2006, 10:18
How long before we get a TOI saying that we shouldn't land 09R when the wind is from the NE, then? :E
Or shouldn't land on 27R when it is strong and gusty from the SW ..
(i.e. straight up 23 ...)

point5
26th Feb 2006, 10:37
Jumbo - such a TOI already exists for 27R. I wonder if T5 will have a similar affect to the BA hangers? I think they're a bit too far away.

Sick Squid
26th Feb 2006, 10:47
Already landed 09L in a strong and gusting South-Easterly and yep, T5 certainly has an effect similar to the hangars.

Edited for a basic North/South misconception of the compass dashing off a quick post while doing the moderator thing over the site... 160/20-33 was what I landed in a few months back, and it was extremely interesting below 500'.

Jumbo Driver
26th Feb 2006, 10:59
Jumbo - such a TOI already exists for 27R. I wonder if T5 will have a similar affect to the BA hangers? I think they're a bit too far away.
Thanks point5.

By the way, what does TOI stand for? Is is Temporary Operating Instruction? If so, what is "Temporary" about the wind effects caused by these buildings?

Surely it should be a standing instruction within the MATS pt2?

GT3
26th Feb 2006, 11:48
Will be a USI (Unit Supplementary Instruction) prior to insertion into the Pt2. So which runways in which winds can we use then??? ;)

Gonzo
26th Feb 2006, 12:27
TOI, USI, OPNOT, NOTAC, ATSIN, ASN, GMN, CTN......

My bain hurts.

edit: You see, I told you!

GT3
26th Feb 2006, 15:48
My bain hurts.

Hows the Brain though?

Jerricho
26th Feb 2006, 16:12
My bain hurts.

If you meant "bane", I'm fine thanks. :}

Gonzo
26th Feb 2006, 16:19
Jer, you have a high opinion of yourself.

But then again, I guess that should be expected!:E

Anyway, back to the topic......What implications would this have on mixed mode (if and when:D)?

Stoic
26th Feb 2006, 17:57
Sick Squid

Why would T5 affect you when landing on 09L with a gusting north-easterly? T5 is to your right and downwind of you when there is a north-easterly when you land on 09L. Surely you mean 09R?

Regards

Stoic

Yea, yes, yes, I realised landing 09L the other day that I'd got it wrong and I meant a SOUTH-easterly, and I knew I'd never get back from the trip in time to edit the post, and I knew that someone would point it out.... ah well. Good spot. 09R applies as the original, but we never get to land 09R when we need to ... I've only ever been given 09R on a domestic for T1 due runway blockage, and never when I'm actually going to T4. Squid

tired
26th Feb 2006, 18:27
Stoic - you beat me to it with that question, I await the answer with baited breath! ;)
Gonzo - 's easy, don't land us on a runway that's downwind of T5 or the BA hangars - simple really!! :) :)
On a slightly more serious note, and purely for my own interest - how long does it take you to change all the landers to the other runway when the landing runway gets blocked? Or to put it another way - if I'm in 1 of the holds when it happens, how much extra holding should I anticipate?
Ta,
t

fly bhoy
26th Feb 2006, 21:15
Stoic - you beat me to it with that question, I await the answer with baited breath! ;)
Gonzo - 's easy, don't land us on a runway that's downwind of T5 or the BA hangars - simple really!! :) :)
On a slightly more serious note, and purely for my own interest - how long does it take you to change all the landers to the other runway when the landing runway gets blocked? Or to put it another way - if I'm in 1 of the holds when it happens, how much extra holding should I anticipate?
Ta,
t

I presume sick squid meant south easterly...I hope:} Yes I did.. thank you. Beer on me... Squid

As to your question, just depends how quickly we can clear the other runway. If there's departing traffic already on the threshold its a case of either taxi it along to vacate, or launch on a heading that takes it away from any possible go-arounds.

As it happened yesterday only two had to go around before we could clear 09R and start landing on it, so didn't really take that long. Only thing for the a/c already in the hold is that, as we're effectively single runway ops from then on, we need gaps to get departures away as well, so hold time will obviously increase, compared to an arrivals only runway. Can't put an exact figure on it though, but one of my TC colleagues could possibly give you a rough figure?!?

FB:ok:

Gonzo
26th Feb 2006, 21:24
Tired,

Fly Bhoy's right. On a decent day we can switch you over visually with not that much warning, assuming the other runway is available for landing. If we do lose a runway, especially on easterlies, that means we have a lot of a/c off the stacks already, so I'd personaly be tempted to not bother trying to set up spacing for depatures. I'd just land the next ten or so a/c to clear the intermediate approach before even thinking about departing anything. It's far better all around if we take a hit on the outbound delay so the stacks don't all fill up immediately and you end up entering the hold at LOGAN at FL nosebleed, mucking up the whole of the TMA.

It depends on the particular runway, but 25 inbounds compared to 40-42 an hour would be approximate. I think 6 mile spacing (default single runway) equates to 24 an hour. However, 09R is a pig for single runway, and I'd add a mile on to every gap to start with.

fly bhoy
26th Feb 2006, 21:38
Tired,
Fly Bhoy's right. On a decent day we can switch you over visually with not that much warning, assuming the other runway is available for landing. If we do lose a runway, especially on easterlies, that means we have a lot of a/c off the stacks already, so I'd personaly be tempted to not bother trying to set up spacing for depatures. I'd just land the next ten or so a/c to clear the intermediate approach before even thinking about departing anything. It's far better all around if we take a hit on the outbound delay so the stacks don't all fill up immediately and you end up entering the hold at LOGAN at FL nosebleed, mucking up the whole of the TMA.
It depends on the particular runway, but 25 inbounds compared to 40-42 an hour would be approximate. I think 6 mile spacing (default single runway) equates to 24 an hour. However, 09R is a pig for single runway, and I'd add a mile on to every gap to start with.
Woohoo, I got one right!!! Doesn't happen often!!!:} Only reason I know though is cos it was me doing arrivals yesterday when it all happened!!!!:mad:
Seriously though, that is indeed what happened yesterday, with us using packed arrivals to clear the ones already off the stacks before figuring out gaps to resume deps as well. We did manage to clear 09L reasonably quickly though so it was ops normal after about 10-15mins or so...albeit with a somewhat increased blood pressure!!!:eek:

FB:ok:

Gonzo
26th Feb 2006, 21:46
Yep, it can certainly wake you up! The worst thing is if Deps refuse to launch the one that's on their threshold because of your go-arounds, so you have to keep sending stuff around! D'oh!:ugh:

tired
26th Feb 2006, 23:21
Fly Bhoy/Gonzo - thanks for the replies, good to have in the back of my mind. If you're going to lose 15 - 17 landings /hour I guess the delays would add up pretty quickly for those not already near the front of the queue.

Gonzo wrote -
"I'd personaly be tempted to not bother trying to set up spacing for depatures. I'd just land the next ten or so a/c to clear the intermediate approach before even thinking about departing anything. It's far better all around if we take a hit on the outbound delay so the stacks don't all fill up immediately and you end up entering the hold at LOGAN at FL nosebleed, mucking up the whole of the TMA."

My thoughts exactly, glad to know you guys think the same!! :)
t

Captain Rat
27th Feb 2006, 03:00
So getting back to the original postings, was the VS a pod scrape or blown tires or both? Guessing it was an A340-600 with the lower od clearance?

HEATHROW DIRECTOR
27th Feb 2006, 07:46
<<The worst thing is if Deps refuse to launch the one that's on their threshold because of your go-arounds, so you have to keep sending stuff around! >>

I've thought long and hard about that and I can't think of why, unless for some reason he has to turn across your climb-out?

ALLDAYDELI
27th Feb 2006, 09:35
Watched the chaos on Saturday with interest. Loads of delays.
At one stage we had simultaneuous take off from 09R and 09L, 2x Airbuses (BMi & BA) if I recall. The VS A340 with burst tyres was parked slewed at a precarious angle off of the taxiway near to T3 which looked unusual.

We are back on westerlies today. Needless to say over the weekend there were certainly some VERY interesting approaches over Colnbrook and gusty touchdowns. It looked real bumpy on finals. I will say some of those VS
A340-600s seem to drift and flap around quite a lot on approach,, I watched one touchdown around 1500hrs on 09L and it was very close to a port wingtip scrape, a gust caught it in the last 20-30ft above ground.

point5
27th Feb 2006, 11:11
It is a requirement that Deps suspends all departures when there is a go-around on the other runway - the fewer aircraft you have in the air, the easier it is to deconflict against a go-around!

It is normally the job of the Arrivals controller to ask TC if the Deps controller can resume departures, stating the direction of the next to depart (I know it is a bit strange) As you can imagine on Saturday, the Arrivals guy has no time to do this at the same time as sending aircraft around, co-ordinaing with TC and the emergency services and putting on an AGI. This means traffic waiting to depart on 09R at the same time as inbound traffic needs to visually switch to land on the same runway :eek:

I suppose you have 2 options here. If we go by the book, Deps must suspend their departures which means there'll be quite a number of go-arounds until full single runway ops commence and the inbound spacing is sorted out. Alternatively, deps could depart the 1 or 2 aircraft they have infringing the runway in order to aid visual switches onto their runway immediately (remember you may not only have the aircraft lined up to depart infringing, but potentially another which has crossed the CAT1 bar). This will decrease the number of go-arounds, however it may require more work with the traffic once airbourne. For example, if the next 2 to go are on the same route but you need to get the runway clear, they could be launched 1 minute apart but would have to be adequately (well 5 miles) separated once airbourne using headings etc...

Not much time to think about the best course of action when these things happen!

southern duel
8th Mar 2006, 13:55
just seen the posting guys.
The VS landed 09R but did not scrape a pod he landed either side of the southern contact lane ( edge of runway) approx 4 to 5 mtrs from the grass edge. He burst 2 tryes doing so. aircraft came to a stop on N5E and fire service attended. The runway was only closed for 20 mins. Sorry ATC but 20 mins is bad news for you i know but i thought we got it back to you very quickly after the clear up where he damaged the edge of the runway. Also the fact the aircaft was slightly infringing the runway but as vis was fine it wasnt really an issue.

Aircraft deplaned on sight and then towed to stand after approx 90 mins.
Captains version was a gust of wind blew him to the right and he was committed to land.
AAIB did attend and i suppose a report will be published soon.

The aircraft went out that night !!