LTMA Changes?

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

There's a bit of ranting in our local rag (Wokingham area) about forthcoming "changes to flightpaths" in the neighbourhood. People that write such things are rarely clued up on such matters and they know nothing of radar control but I would be interested to hear of any plans. There seems to be a suggestion of additional holding patterns for Heathrow - something to do with mixed mode??

[BDiONU]

I suspect this follows on from the 'tosh' written in The Times very recently which NATS have refuted. Very poor journalism, particularly considering that the scribbler in question was well briefed beforehand!
NATS are working on changes to the LTMA (team of 16 from the summer) but its at a very early stage of planning as yet.
Original article is available online (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article1690728.ece) as is the Editors comments (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/leading_article/article1690538.ece) and the NATS response (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/debate/letters/article1700919.ece).

BD

[anotherthing]

HD,

AFAIK, there are no additional holding plans for heathrow - at least not in the sense of BNN/LAM/BIG/OCK etc... the outer holds have changed recently with the revision of Hurn airspace though.

I watched the local news last night and it ran the story - a chap called Churlish(?) was spouting on about it - I believe his name has come up in threads before... he claims to be a professional pilot - his aircraft are hot air balloons though.

One of the 'facts' he mentioned was a tad misleading - he implied that at the moment A/C fly around the Cambridge area at 20,000', but that these new proposals mean they will fly much lower in the area.... I don't work TC on the North side, but I do know the airspace is just a little lower than 20k there!

However, when the camera cut to a shot of Mr Churlish pointing to charts, there was a piece of paper just to the left of centre that clearly had 'NATS' written on it, along with some wording referring to proposed changes in airspace.

As usual, NATS were at fault by implication for 'wanting to change the airspace'... nothing mentioned about the fact that as EGSS/EGGW/EGLC continue to grow at phenomenal rates due to demand, the airspace has to be revised to accomodate things safely.

However, the 'NATS' paperwork did have one vital thing missing from it, which probably means that it was a very early draft - near the start of planning when all ideas, however weird and wonderful, are taken on board and looked at. Chances are it was some of these early proposals, now binned, that were being referred to.

Oh, I forgot to mention - the vital thing missing from the alleged NATS paperwork was...... the psychadelic fumble-esque swirls of the new logo.... so the rebranding has come in handy in that respect!

[None of the above]

The news item referred to by 'anotherthing' can be found here:.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/nol/newsid_6590000/newsid_6592400/6592409.stm?bw=bb&mp=rm

N o t a

[surfingatco]

The article referred to by HD is here (http://www.getwokingham.co.uk/news/2009/2009939/noise_pollution_fears_over_flight_path_plans)
I've lived in Wokingham for 18 years and I'm used to the sight of the jets heading west towards Wiltshire on easterlies (like last night with too many off the stacks and losing 09L at the wrong time - doh!) - so I don't think people will notice much difference.
Mind you, I'm looking forward to a quieter location when we move to Hayling Island next month in preparation for the move to Swanwick - might only be the noise from the coast guard chopper (and the funfair!) that keeps me awake. In fact, if you check out Hayling Island on Google Earth, the aforementioned chopper features fairly close to my new house!

[Turn It Off]

Are you suggesting people should look on the internet at pictures ofchoppers near your house :uhoh:
The press got this one wrong, NATS were quite quick to jump on it. Have the times published the NATS response, or, does anyone know if they plan to?

[None of the above]

The Times

April 25, 2007


Managing the sky


Sir, NATS, the UK’s main provider of air traffic control, does not yet have a proposal for changes to airspace north of London (report, April 23 (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article1690728.ece) ). We are still in the early stages of designing a proposal and are still some months away from a design fit for consultation.
The airspace concerned, Terminal Control North, does not include the Heathrow stacks and will not lead to an expansion in the total landmass overflown. We are not seeking to avoid a wide public debate on runways; NATS manages airspace, not airport expansion. We are planning for the safe management of busier skies but we are not responsible for the airports policy that drives this.
At the heart of our redesign work is provision for continuous descent approaches, a procedure pioneered by NATS that considerably reduces the noise impact on people living below flight paths, and more efficient use of the airspace to minimise delay and therefore fuel burn and emissions.

RACHAEL REID Director,
Communications NATS Whiteley, Hants

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/debate/letters/article1700919.ece