Heathrow Tower

[pax britanica]

Growing up alongside LHR in the late fifties and sixties the old tower 'was' Heathrow extremely symbolic. I understand it is obsolete now;probably was 15 years ago if it was anywhere other than UK but t hats another story.

Waiting for a flight there the other day and looking at the new tower it must have great view of T5 and the holding areas , approach paths and thresholds for the 09s. However it does seem a very long way away from where the action mostly is which is at 27 holding points and approaches .

I think that statistically there are about three times as many westerly departures than easterlies at LHR. Furthermore the runway holding points and departure taxi ways at the western end of the airport are pretty simple- long straight taxiways north and south of 09R. At the other end of the field the taxiways to the 27 holding areas are a maze of intersecting paths with aircraft approaching the holding point from all sorts of directions.

Is the tower location really ideally suited for the typical days operations at LHR or was it just a question of oops we will need a new tower I wonder where there is space for it. Just idle musings I know but it does seem odd that for an airport where the eastern end has always been by far the busiest to put the tower all the way down at the western end

PB

[Gonzo]

It's not ideal.

Perhaps the best location would have been where the old T3 car park is now being demolished.

[Standby For Start]

When T5 opens, it'll be much better. Anything further east would give us problems seeing all the action. Funnily enough the worst view is of one of the T3 cul-de-sacs, but that's because we're directly above it!

As for the Westerly holding areas, we'll get used to it. It's a good test of your eyesight though and should show any problems up well before the medical is due!

[Max Angle]

It's certainly very tall and I am sure it's very clever but boy is it ugly, what a certain heir to the throne would call a "hideous carbuncle".

[Point Seven]

There is a requirement at Heathrow that to be able to issue conditional pushback clearances controllers need to be able to see 51% of an A320/A321 tailfin.

So the NVCR was located where it is to be able to allow controllers to pass the conditional clearances to aircraft in T5. So it's location is fairly ideal - if it had been positioned on T3 car park, as someone else on here mentioned, the controllers would had have been forced to operate T5 on a procedural basis - which is far from ideal.

P7

[Gonzo]

P7, it's ok mate, you can call me by name! :E

So should we be giving conditional pushbacks off 401 at the moment?

Of course, one could argue that having a better view of the live taxiways and runway exit points is more important than stands/aprons, etc.

But I'm sure you know best......;)

[Point Seven]

Gonzo

As I'm sure YOU are aware, I have never claimed to know best. But I do find the constant complaining tiresome and i think that it is entirely fair to show people who visit this forum that there is an alternative viewpoint (excuse the pun). That it differs from thr masses must in some way make me arrogant obviously:hmm:

I have been up to the NVCR and I'm not sure which runway entry/exit points you can't see??? Granted, the westerly holding points are a fair way away but they would hardly be close if the VCR was on the current site of the T3 car park. Or is it just that it would be easy for the ATCOs to get to if it was there? There are countless towers around the world that have airside sites and I think it is something that we should get used to - and quickly.

All towers have compromises of visibility but when people were tasked years ago to find a site that was agreeable to all parties, I think they did a fair job. And is it so unfair that controllers have to stand up to see certain parts of the airfield - it's no great hardship and I think that with the wages controllers get paid, a certain amount of hardwork is inherent? Even for the shining lights at Heathrow :E

Progresses in technology such as A-SMGCS help controllers who are not right next to the action and a quick glance can help to clear up a positional confusion that acontroller may have. The NVCR has flaws but so would any new tower - it is impossible to make them perfect. However a few voices at the mighty EGLL seem not to be able to take this into account and instead of finding solutions to the challenges, merely focus on tearing apart the hard work that has gone into it. EFPS might not be perfect but it won't be the disaster that people at LL are talking about - look at how SS and KK get on with it. LL isn't so different as they like to tell themselves. And look at some of the changes that ARE positive - the tremendous views, the new ADIS, having your LPO sitting with you so you can see just what the plan is, being able to go to Starbucks and not Costa....

I'm looking forward to going, I can't wait to have a go at controlling from there and i only hope that all the doom mongers will issue apologies on here when it transitions successfully.

P7

[Gonzo]

Banter, old chap, banter.......

Seriously though....By not ideal I meant not ideal. Ideal in this case would be to knock the whole airfield down and start again. For the record, I believe that the location is really the only place that one could put it.

I don't have a problem with it being airside.

I don't have a problem acknowledging the hard work many are doing to get us in on time, I know that to them it seems like they are banging their heads against a brick wall while having their goalposts moved (if you'll forgive the mixed metaphors...).

You asked about the view....aircraft going north on E past E2, then right on A. I seem to remember there was an incursion there a while ago that was spotted by GMC1, not by Air (N) as it would be. That's the situation that worries me.

I'm not particularly worried about the more distant view of the 27 holding points. It will be far better than the view of the same in our sim!

being able to go to Starbucks and not Costa....

Maybe on an Ops break of 45 mins.... ;)

Am I looking forward to going? I honestly am not. That's a crying shame, as I damn well should be looking forward to it. As you say, the views are impressive to say the least, the atmosphere 'feels' far more professional, and it seems exactly like what the LHR tower should be.

PS I liked the 'New AIDS' mention. :ok:

[2miles600feet]

A spirited and most impressive defence P7.

[Point Seven]

You asked about the view....aircraft going north on E past E2, then right on A. I seem to remember there was an incursion there a while ago that was spotted by GMC1, not by Air (N) as it would be. That's the situation that worries me.

Fair point but that incursion was mostly caused by situational awareness due WIP. Markings were placed on the Runway Entry/Exit so hopefully we won't have to experience that again.

And I never mentioned AIDS...:p

A spirited and most impressive defence P7.

Thank you mate.;)

[GuruCube]

I love the way you LL fellas have a unique ability to change a thread into a rant about the NVCR or EFPS. I find it rather impressive! ;)

I was going to mention that surely BAA have the steer on where the Tower goes? Im sure they consult NATS, but its their airport and their tower isnt it? I imagine they have the final word.

It's certainly very tall and I am sure it's very clever but boy is it ugly, what a certain heir to the throne would call a "hideous carbuncle".
Dont worry, Im sure it will look fine once they have painted it in NATS colours (Like our VCR entrance... :} )

[Gonzo]

GC,


you LL fellas have a unique ability to change a thread into a rant about the NVCR or EFPS. I find it rather impressive! ;)


It does require a certain level of skill. :E


Im sure it will look fine once they have painted it in NATS colours (Like our VCR entrance... :} )


The lobby of our new VCR is a straight copy of an IKEA store, right down to the bright yellow and blue. One almost expects a crate or two of those yellow bags to be in the corner.....

[White Hart]

except that you can get a hot meal and something to drink at Ikea..:hmm:

[Barnaby the Bear]

mmmmmm Meatballs! :}

Doe's it move much the wind? You can feel the breeze at EGSS, and that is a structure the bunker builders of WW2 would be proud of! :ooh:

[Max Angle]

the controllers would had have been forced to operate T5 on a procedural basis - which is far from ideal.
Was having separate apron control ever considered. It works very well in the US where many airports are far too big to be controlled from one tower. At a lot of big hubs the companies run their own aprons and pass control to ATC once they leave the area. A secondary tower at T5 could have solved the problem I would have thought.

[25check]

I think the phrase 'US airports are too big' says it all. Heathrow is small, cramped and merging an airlines 'apron control' in with the already complex ATC ground control would be impossible and probably cause gridlock....without even considering being in time for slots etc.

[Giles Wembley-Hogg]

Max

"Separate apron control... works very well in the US"

I beg to differ!!!

In my experience, little co-ordination seems to occur between the agencies and so orderliness and expedition are lost. On the other hand, I've not been to all stations in the US, so my sample is hardly exhaustive and this therefore remains just a personal opinion.

G W-H

[chevvron]

Heathrow cramped? Try LAX, where wide bodies often have to be towed onto stands rather than nose in due lack of wingtip clearance.

[Max Angle]

I think the phrase 'US airports are too big' says it all. Well the big US airports have a larger area than LHR but then they handle a lot more traffic. Atlanta and Chicago handle TWICE the number of movements every year that LHR does in fact they both handle more movements than LHR, LGW and STN put together. They need the space.

[Quincy M.E.]

Atlanta and Chicago handle TWICE the number of movements every year that LHR does in fact they both handle more movements than LHR, LGW and STN put together.

A bit off topic but: why do we always hear on the news that Heathrow is the busiest airport in the world when as you say there are more movements at other airports? Are they saying it is busier according to some other measurment or just wrong?

[GT3]

A bit off topic but: why do we always hear on the news that Heathrow is the busiest airport in the world when as you say there are more movements at other airports? Are they saying it is busier according to some other measurment or just wrong?

It was (possibly no longer) busiest International airport iirc.

[Gonzo]

Quincy, going by international passenger numbers, LHR is the busiest in the world.

In purely a/c movement terms, I think it's 17th in the world, and 3rd or 4th in Europe.

[Quincy M.E.]

Ah I see. Cheers.

[747-436]

Letting some Big Airlines having Apron control at LHR would seem like a bad idea seeing as they have enough trouble sorting out their own things let alone having some control over aircraft movements as well!!

[White Hart]

I second that! Currently, the scheme utilising both Big Airline and SAU to look after gates allocations is pathetic. Too many cooks, and nobody talking or liasing with anybody. How its going to work once the AOs start relocating to new/different Terminals.....:eek:

[ex-EGLL]

Out of interest what is the cab height of the new tower and the distances to the thresholds?

ex-egll

[Gonzo]

I'd guess 85m to the ops floor of the VCR.

No idea of the distance to thresholds.