View Full Version : Alternate as the other LHR runway?
There is a thread in the ATC forum at the moment;
http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/Forum6/HTML/000805.html
Last time I went on a fam flight from LHR I'm sure the crew mentioned something that under certain conditions (distance/wx?) they could nominate the other runway at LHR as their alternate. Is this true, or is it a symptom of advanced dementia on my part?
Gonzo
snooky
2nd Mar 2001, 13:58
Yes, it is true.
Must be a flight of less than 6hrs, and the approach and landing from msa must be possible in vmc.
Cheers, thought I couldn't be going mad!
Gonzo
Wig Wag
3rd Mar 2001, 12:45
Gonzo:- In addition the payload and performance considerations must preclude the carriage of extra fuel. The forecast and actual weather must allow an approach in VMC from +- one hour of the ETA.
Thus you would not expect this dispensation to be used as a part of scheduled planning.
AffirmBrest
3rd Mar 2001, 17:59
Erm... not at the planning stage, but our Part A allows us to use our alternate fuel whilst holding for airports with
- at least 2 seperate runways,
- subject to Wx allowing a single degradation (CAT3B to CAT3A, or CAT 1 to an NPA, for instance) in ground- OR aircraft based equipment and
-where an EAT has been issued (less than 10min at BNN counts)
Theoretically /legally we could land at LHR in CAT3A Wx conditions with 1500kg (final reserve)...tho' hopefully no captain worth his stripes would get into a situation where that would be likely!
It would only practically be used (at least whenever I'm in the FD!) to avoid diverting, for example, with 3500kgs still on board but when you had only literally 2 or 3 minutes left of holding - balance of probabilities, I suppose, and allows the Captain to use his discretion and airmanship (still his responsibilty!)
But what if a aircraft crashes on both R/Ws? What if the A/F goes SNOCLO for an hour? What if there is a fire alarm in the Tower? you may well ask...
Well most/all Captains ask themselves these questions too and fuel plan accordingly.
Just think: wouldn't it be daft, on a beautiful CAVOK day with everything serviceable, to reach your div fuel at 1345, divert to and land at STN with 2800kg still in the tanks (1300 unused) - when your EAT from LAM was only 1346?
This is (my interpretation of) why our rule exists. It seems there are variations on the logic and groundrules for different companies, but the basic premise still makes sense (to me).
------------------
...proceeding below Decision Height with CAUTION...
[This message has been edited by AffirmBrest (edited 03 March 2001).]
We can use the "parallel" runways of LGW and LHR together as a single airport for arrival planning purposes as they are so close together.
Rod
Nubboy
9th Mar 2001, 18:41
Had a mate who planned for that (as wig wag said) when he expected a full load and couldn't get alternate fuel on. He then lost his slot as all some pax failed to join, he was therefore not limited by payload and was delayed in calling the bowser back to take the fuel he couldn't get on before. Such is life.