A question from Russia
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Moscow
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A question from Russia
I wonder if two (or more) a/c may line up the same RWY (at different places) in your country? Under what conditions?
It is prohibited in Russia which limits capacity a lot.
Thanks to all and greetings from Moscow!
It is prohibited in Russia which limits capacity a lot.
Thanks to all and greetings from Moscow!
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Scotland
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No problem at all providing:
1. It's day
2. The pilots are warned of the number of aircraft ahead of them and their positions
3. All aircraft are on the same frequency
4. The runway characteristics will not render a/c ahead invisible to following a/c
5. All aircraft are continuously visible to the controller.
1. It's day
2. The pilots are warned of the number of aircraft ahead of them and their positions
3. All aircraft are on the same frequency
4. The runway characteristics will not render a/c ahead invisible to following a/c
5. All aircraft are continuously visible to the controller.
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 608
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tee bloody hee!!!!!!!!!!!
You need to visit the ground floor more often !!!!!!
Any more news on "the resigning one"????!!!
Spoke to him 8 days ago and he said would do so the next day! Is it likely then???
B-L
You need to visit the ground floor more often !!!!!!
Any more news on "the resigning one"????!!!
Spoke to him 8 days ago and he said would do so the next day! Is it likely then???
B-L
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Scotland
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Red Four, it was from the top of my head (I use this every day!). However now you've put an element of doubt into it::::
Having just checked MATS pt1, its section 2-7 para 12 (c) "All aircraft are on the same RTF frequency"
Having just checked MATS pt1, its section 2-7 para 12 (c) "All aircraft are on the same RTF frequency"
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Hither and Thither
Posts: 575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
R-S,
Thanks, I couldn't find it for looking. Does anyone know,did these conditions come into force after the Tenerife 747 disaster, or were some of them already in existence? Were the 2 747's on different frequencies?
Thanks, I couldn't find it for looking. Does anyone know,did these conditions come into force after the Tenerife 747 disaster, or were some of them already in existence? Were the 2 747's on different frequencies?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Moscow
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello, guys!
Thanks to all who replied (well done, Spacing!).
Just one more question before we close the subject. Are the mentioned conditions (Re: Recommended Spacing’s reply) final? I mean, is there said anything about the a/c types (who’s ahead and who’s behind) and minimal distances between them to avoid blowing away of little onesJ.
Thank you.
Don’t forget – just 5 days left till the best air display on the CIS territory. MAKS 2001 will show you dancing Kamovs, inverted Mils, Sukhois and Migs breaking the skies, and a lot more. The coming weekend‘s gonna be fascinating!
“Start up approved”.
See you in Zhukovski (SE of Moscow).
Thanks to all who replied (well done, Spacing!).
Just one more question before we close the subject. Are the mentioned conditions (Re: Recommended Spacing’s reply) final? I mean, is there said anything about the a/c types (who’s ahead and who’s behind) and minimal distances between them to avoid blowing away of little onesJ.
Thank you.
Don’t forget – just 5 days left till the best air display on the CIS territory. MAKS 2001 will show you dancing Kamovs, inverted Mils, Sukhois and Migs breaking the skies, and a lot more. The coming weekend‘s gonna be fascinating!
“Start up approved”.
See you in Zhukovski (SE of Moscow).
Nothing about the a/c types. Often send the little one of first with a turn after take-off followed closely by the fast/heavy visual on a SID. The other way arround would not work for vortex reasons, so I can't see any reason for needing to have both on the runway that way..
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Scotland
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As Dan has said, vortex is usually the issue when using this scenario, or, a tight gap and you need to get one away immediately on the vortex requirement.
The usual scenario where I work is slot requirements, we advise the one following of the a/c type to depart ahead, before he is lined up, that way he can line up when he is ready, occasionally pilots of light / small a/c aren't happy having a jet a/c departing a few hundered metres ahead of them!
The usual scenario where I work is slot requirements, we advise the one following of the a/c type to depart ahead, before he is lined up, that way he can line up when he is ready, occasionally pilots of light / small a/c aren't happy having a jet a/c departing a few hundered metres ahead of them!
Pegase Driver
Chulman :
re the daylight requirement stated above. This is in the UK : in Paris CDG it used to be done for years at night as well until last year when a departing MD80 (from the normal end) departed and when passing 120 Kts hit the cockpit of a Shorts which was lining up at an intersection. The controller mis-interpreted the intersections names and thought the Shorts was after the MD80. (At least that is what he claims, it was at night and could not be seen from TWR) Unfortunately the Shorts Co pilot was killed, Capt seriously injured.The MD 80 managed to stop its take off. no injuries there.
Both a/c were on same frequency but one clearance (to MD80) given in French and the line up a intersection to the Shorts given in English. ( this probably prevented the Shorts crew to detect the Take off clearance, but the MD8o crew , who understood English also failed to realise the Shorts was clear to line up at the intersection . )Total review of intersection take offs being done currently in CDG following that crash.
I mention all this because I think it is valid for Russia as you also use 2 languages on the R/T. (Also thanks for the invitation
. saw the Su32 in LFPB last june. Very, very impressive.)
To Red four : Teneriffe. No, both 747s were on same freq, problem was that when the KLM stated: quote : "we are at take off ..." this was heard by both the TWR controller and the Pan Am 747 still backtracking the runway, and both replied simulteanously , resulting in a squeel on the R/T than was inaudible by the KLM (confirmed from their CVR) So in that perticular case the fact that both a/c were on the same frequency actually prevented the controller from stopping the collision.
Morale of the story : there is always a risk in allowing 2 a/c at the same time on any runway.
Post morale : resist (if you can) the so called "capacity enhancers" purely based on putting more a/c per hour on a perticular runway. Next they'll sell you "land and hold short of intersections "( as currently done in the USA )
re the daylight requirement stated above. This is in the UK : in Paris CDG it used to be done for years at night as well until last year when a departing MD80 (from the normal end) departed and when passing 120 Kts hit the cockpit of a Shorts which was lining up at an intersection. The controller mis-interpreted the intersections names and thought the Shorts was after the MD80. (At least that is what he claims, it was at night and could not be seen from TWR) Unfortunately the Shorts Co pilot was killed, Capt seriously injured.The MD 80 managed to stop its take off. no injuries there.
Both a/c were on same frequency but one clearance (to MD80) given in French and the line up a intersection to the Shorts given in English. ( this probably prevented the Shorts crew to detect the Take off clearance, but the MD8o crew , who understood English also failed to realise the Shorts was clear to line up at the intersection . )Total review of intersection take offs being done currently in CDG following that crash.
I mention all this because I think it is valid for Russia as you also use 2 languages on the R/T. (Also thanks for the invitation
. saw the Su32 in LFPB last june. Very, very impressive.)
To Red four : Teneriffe. No, both 747s were on same freq, problem was that when the KLM stated: quote : "we are at take off ..." this was heard by both the TWR controller and the Pan Am 747 still backtracking the runway, and both replied simulteanously , resulting in a squeel on the R/T than was inaudible by the KLM (confirmed from their CVR) So in that perticular case the fact that both a/c were on the same frequency actually prevented the controller from stopping the collision.
Morale of the story : there is always a risk in allowing 2 a/c at the same time on any runway.
Post morale : resist (if you can) the so called "capacity enhancers" purely based on putting more a/c per hour on a perticular runway. Next they'll sell you "land and hold short of intersections "( as currently done in the USA )
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Fort Worth ARTCC ZFW
Posts: 1,155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And what is wrong with Land and Hold Short?
We have used it in it's present configuration (more restrictive) as well as an older version called SOIR (simo ops intersecting runway) for over 30 years with NO problems...
regards
We have used it in it's present configuration (more restrictive) as well as an older version called SOIR (simo ops intersecting runway) for over 30 years with NO problems...
regards
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 608
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr Voigt.....
...I guess if it works for you guys then good for you!
Don't you think it a bit odd that UK Airlines such as BA/Virgin are not, under company policy, allowed to accept a Land and Hold Short?
Fortunately we don't have too many crossed runways in the UK.
NO offence - just don't think that there are any belt or braces there at all.
[ 16 August 2001: Message edited by: Bright-Ling ]
...I guess if it works for you guys then good for you!
Don't you think it a bit odd that UK Airlines such as BA/Virgin are not, under company policy, allowed to accept a Land and Hold Short?
Fortunately we don't have too many crossed runways in the UK.
NO offence - just don't think that there are any belt or braces there at all.
[ 16 August 2001: Message edited by: Bright-Ling ]