View Full Version : LHR Ground/Tower ?
Don't have access to any Jepps or Aerad at the moment so was wondering, having recently operated from the cargo terminal south of 09R/27L, and taxied along Sierra (S) for 27L to hold point Sierra Bravo 1 (SB1). I wanted to know whether you find it acceptable to cross SB1 and hold just short of the runway in the ILS sensitive area when told "line up 27L after the second BMI A320" or should we wait at SB1 until the 2nd A/C is rolling?
Reason being the two times I've operated from there, there has been several A/C waiting to depart, and the first Captain decided to wait near the runway so not to waist time lining up, while Cpt #2 decided to wait at SB1 until the A/C began to roll.
Cheers
Moving past SB1 when you are still no.3 or more to depart I would not find acceptable. However, moving past SB1 when you are no.2 I would expect, as you would then be ready to go 'wheels up'.
HEATHROW DIRECTOR
3rd Mar 2006, 10:08
"line up 27L after the..........."
No controller would ever use that phraseology so why oh why do pilots????
B Fraser
3rd Mar 2006, 10:26
is the correct phraeseology.... "after the departing ****, line up 27L" ?
I'll be doing my PPL RT exam sometime soon hence the question.
thanks !
B
I'm not joking sir
3rd Mar 2006, 11:04
is the correct phraeseology.... "after the departing ****, line up 27L" ?
Certainly is. Every time it's read back "line up after the..........." is another grey hair. It's poor RT.
Thanks for the reply Gonzo.
Certainly is. Every time it's read back "line up after the..........." is another grey hair. It's poor RT.
I believe it's a human factors issue, it's easier to say the last instruction first and then remember what was said.
eg if you said "line up 27L after the departing BMI A320"
the answer would be "after the BMI A320 line up 27L"
prowler
3rd Mar 2006, 17:23
the way i've been taught about phraseology on a conditional clearance was;
"Behind the landing BMI320, line up & wait rwy XX L/R behind"...........
/hope this helps....:ok:
foghorn
3rd Mar 2006, 17:29
That's ICAO. The UK has a difference filed for conditional clearances. I believe someone took the ICAO one too literally and lined up in a tiddler directly behind a departing heavy, because ATC told him to, natch.
HEATHROW DIRECTOR
3rd Mar 2006, 17:53
Yeah... because the silly boy took the phraseology mentioned by Prowler too literally!
prowler
3rd Mar 2006, 19:39
Yeah... because the silly boy took the phraseology mentioned by Prowler too literally!
Good one.. is it???:yuk:
Then, either the TWR / Rwy ATCO, or his OJTI need to be sent back to Training School, if this poor ATCO 'WORKS LITERALLY BY THE BOOK'...
Rules are there of course, not to be broken,, but can be BENT!Maybe, experience plays a big part in all we do....:E
Regarding my previous post, I should have included that it was ICAO, knowing that in UK, it's a CAA thing....:ooh:
HEATHROW DIRECTOR
3rd Mar 2006, 21:01
Don't understand you, Prowler. The Controller was doing his job exactly as he had been trained to do and certainly needed no re-training.
If you read about half a million threads in this forum you'll know that the only way ever to do our jobs is "by the book". On this occasion the book was proved to be wrong so the UK phraseology was changed - eminently sensible in my opinion.