Landing a/c minima sep

[ShannonACC]

I'm sure that some of you have heard about the near miss that occurred at Dublin last March that's currently doing the rounds on the various anti-social media platforms.

One Ryanair aircraft was on approach, with one lining up. Now, Dublin is notorious for these late clearences at peak-times due to congestion, but blocked and misunderstood radio transmissions played a part.

Aerodrome isn't my "forte". I wanted to clarify this, as a controller in Dublin told me that they weren't 101% either. If an aircraft is lined up, what is the minimum distance that the landing aircraft (DME) can be from the runway before an abort and go-around are issued to two aircraft.
Is there any minima for it? Or are they separated as long as the departure leaves the runway before the arrival touches down?

Thanks in advance,
Eamonn.

[Talkdownman]

In my time at LHR it was 'wheels-up' (meaning preceding aircraft's wheels off the deck...). Probably isn't allowed any more...

[chevvron]

In my time at LHR it was 'wheels-up' (meaning preceding aircraft's wheels off the deck...). Probably isn't allowed any more...

Wot he said but then I'm a retired ATCO who's now FISO so what do I know?

[ShannonACC]

That's what I was thinking, but there might be different regulations for Ireland. I thought that wheels-up was fine, but the two aircraft involved in the incident were 800m apart, so neither were on the runway at the same time, he would've rotated prior to the company touching down, yet it was considered a loss of separation.

[confused atco]

Aerodrome isn't my "forte".
Curious as to what is your "forte"?

[Gonzo]

In the UK,

Unless specific procedures have been approved by the CAA, a landing aircraft shall not be permitted to cross the beginning of the runway on its final approach until a preceding aircraft, departing from the same runway, is airborne.

From CAP493

[Una Due Tfc]

Whenever I've been in the Tower in DUB they've cleared the arrival to land as soon as the departure's wheels leave the tarmac.

[sheepless]

DOC 4444
7.10.1 Separation of landing aircraft and preceding landing and
departing aircraft using the same runway

Except as provided in 7.11 [Reduced runway sep] and Chapter 5, Section 5.8 [Wake sep], a landing aircraft will not normally be permitted to cross the runway threshold on its final approach until the preceding departing aircraft has crossed the end of the runway-in-use, or has started a turn, or until all preceding landing aircraft are clear of the runway-in-use.



- - - -

Then - as needs must - each country adjusts according to their needs and safety cases.......Then Humans apply this..

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

"Reduced separation in the vicinity of the airfield" is always a good get out!

[ShannonACC]

Thank you Gonzo and Sheepless. That's the answer I needed.

[confused atco]

To the OP I have a question.

From a previous post (http://www.pprune.org/atc-issues/563083-heathrow-atc.html#post9015994) by you its intimated that you are based in Shannon.

There is at least 20 current or former Tower ATCO's in Ballycasey not to mention Shannon Tower itself just a phone call away.

So why post a query on the internet when you can simply ask one of your colleagues?

[jackieofalltrades]

"Reduced separation in the vicinity of the airfield" is always a good get out!

I once tried to use that to justify two aircraft getting barely 3 miles over the MCT VOR. They were, after all, within the vicinity of the airfield, just so happened to be so at FL180! ;)

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

Know the feeling jackie!! HNY..

[chevvron]

"Reduced separation in the vicinity of the airfield" is always a good get out!

Couldn't claim that when I did it at high level.
Two DC8s northbound between POL and DCS, on top of one another at 330 and 350. The lower one (Air Canada) asks if 370 is available, 'D' man says 'he can have it if you can get him there'.
Ask the Air Canada if he has the Swissair above him in sight - yes.
Ask Swissair any objection if the Air Canada below you does a visual climbthrough; 'will he be in front or behind' is the reply.
Air Canada says 'I'll come up on your right'
I say 'clear visual climb to FL370'.
There was about a mile between them.

[Talkdownman]

That's fine if you are not surrounded by LCEs who are not aware of what is going on...

[Helen49]

Sounds like the good old days when experience, common sense and a judicious application of the rules took precedence over the paper tigers who could only tell you it was the wrong decision when they had had a week to think about it!!

[We also had more fun and less paperwork!!]

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

Hear hear! Helen.

[NABLAG]

Shannon ACC, I would expect the answer to be in DOC4444 (as Sheepless has kindly pointed out) or in the IAA Dublin ATC Twr MATS.

If you are an IAA employee in Shannon would you have access to the Dublin Twr MATS ?

A little surprised you came up on PPRUNE looking for such info ?

[chevvron]

Sounds like the good old days when experience, common sense and a judicious application of the rules took precedence over the paper tigers who could only tell you it was the wrong decision when they had had a week to think about it!!

[We also had more fun and less paperwork!!]

My mentor at Lindholme (Les Coyle) showed me how to do it a few weeks before on UA37 using the Staxton Type 85 which had huge blips at that range (about 120nm) so I can't claim all the credit.
Just think of the piccies you could get in that situation.

[Talkdownman]

At London ATCC we used to do VMC climbs and descents in Rule 21/22 airspace (whichever it was that particular week…). It seemed like a good idea at the time between consenting adults! Then along came SOPs, Compliance, LCEs, and jobsworths, which spoilt all the fun...

[ShyTorque]

Sounds like the good old days when experience, common sense and a judicious application of the rules took precedence over the paper tigers who could only tell you it was the wrong decision when they had had a week to think about it!!

Totally agree. As another example, as a helicopter operator, I'm now made to to join the queue to use a runway I don't need or want to use and then be required to wait three minutes for vortex wake separation when it's obvious that with a twenty knot crosswind the vortex wake is gone over the airfield boundary and away in seconds.

Yet the rules allow me to hover taxy to the runway to line up and wait if I wanted to, or would have to do in a skidded aircraft. So I'm already airborne.... :hmm:

[chevvron]

You won't get that at 'Woking International' especially if I'm on duty!!

[chevvron]

Sounds like the good old days when experience, common sense and a judicious application of the rules took precedence over the paper tigers who could only tell you it was the wrong decision when they had had a week to think about it!!

[We also had more fun and less paperwork!!]

Les told me an even better one.
DC4 following a DC3; at POL the DC3 is 10 min ahead - separated.
At DCS, the DC4 is 7 min ahead and increasing - separated.
The 'D' man couldn't understand the request from the DC4 to overtake on the right!
(I think I know who you are Helen)

[the Shue]

I like the idea that ShannonACC submitted his inquiry on Pprune. Others can learn about the situation plus you get feedback from colleagues who are not sitting beside you.

Those who think their time is being wasted; go to another post, you don't have to read them all.

[confused atco]

I Have no issue with sharing knowledge.

I have concerns when someone makes reference to a specific occurrence.

The individual claims they are based in Shannon ACC.

They supposedly asked a "Dublin colleague" who was not able to give then an answer.

I found it strange that their next port of inquiry was to post online.

Not to ask any of their "colleagues" in BallyCasey seems strange not to mention pressing a button on the compad and asking one of their "colleagues" in Shannon Tower.

Unlike the UK Irish ATC transmissions are not protected under law and a number of sites frequently listen in and comment online regarding what they have heard/observed.

A particular site has a user with a similar username who's Bona Fides are suspect.

[3miles]

I Have no issue with sharing knowledge.

I have concerns when someone makes reference to a specific occurrence.

The individual claims they are based in Shannon ACC.

They supposedly asked a "Dublin colleague" who was not able to give then an answer.

I found it strange that their next port of inquiry was to post online.

Not to ask any of their "colleagues" in BallyCasey seems strange not to mention pressing a button on the compad and asking one of their "colleagues" in Shannon Tower.

Unlike the UK Irish ATC transmissions are not protected under law and a number of sites frequently listen in and comment online regarding what they have heard/observed.

A particular site has a user with a similar username who's Bona Fides are suspect.

Pointless asking another unit - both the MATS and ICAO state the rules and equally state that there are exemptions to it - such as the ICAO one which says departing A/C is other end of runway, the get out on that is that if the runway is sufficiently long enough blah blah, equally maybe displaced threshold factors, and point at which departures line up from- so it will always be specific especially for capacity constrained multi use runways, and procedures will be approved within mats pt 2 or equivalent. As you can see already the 493 varies on ICAO guidance.

That aside worse thing an pilot can do is go around against a rolling aircraft, unless viewed time to stop the departure - you'll always end up closer to it than you would landing even if the other one still rolling down the runway with wheels firmly on ground - one of you is getting faster the other slower - going around means you get faster and already faster than the departure so will always result in being close and both of you are in a configuration that limits any form of wild acrobatics to avoid - my advice always land it unless ATC send you around(or you think ATC fell asleep)

[Bright-Ling]

Quote from 3miles

"That aside worse thing an pilot can do is go around against a rolling aircraft[/quote]

Not sure I agree;

The runway is very two
Dimensional, in that IF two aircraft are on it they are likely
To hit. The chances of aircraft hitting in the air is surely less, given the third dimension (height) and the ability to turn a few degrees?