EGLL Tower on the Move
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: LHR/EGLL
Age: 45
Posts: 4,392
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not trying to be pedantic, Gonzo, but it also really depends where the 100ft cloud base is as to whether or not Cat 2/3 protection is needed. If you've got FEW about 5 miles north of the airfield then I would say ILS protection probably isn't necessary?
Regardless as to where the cloud is, if we get 5 or more (BKN or OVC) at 200 feet or below, we initiate LVPs. End of story. Yes, you can decrease the spacing slightly as the a/c are vacating the LSA quickly, but it's still LVPs due cloud.
HD,
I think you'll find that the definition of a WX Stby has not changed significantly for the past 25 years or more. If Weather conditions make it difficult for ATC to observe aircraft taking off or landing, MATS Part 1 requires them to initiate a Wx Stby. Therefore during LVPs, a Wx Stby is likely (though not always) to be required.
Perhaps Heathrow has its own procedures, that cover this requirement, without ATC initiation?
At ATC units where sight lines are obscured for other reasons, SRG will require appropriate procedures to be in place, and may even insist that the Airport Authority build a new Control Tower!
I think you'll find that the definition of a WX Stby has not changed significantly for the past 25 years or more. If Weather conditions make it difficult for ATC to observe aircraft taking off or landing, MATS Part 1 requires them to initiate a Wx Stby. Therefore during LVPs, a Wx Stby is likely (though not always) to be required.
Perhaps Heathrow has its own procedures, that cover this requirement, without ATC initiation?
At ATC units where sight lines are obscured for other reasons, SRG will require appropriate procedures to be in place, and may even insist that the Airport Authority build a new Control Tower!
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Spekesoftly.. Wx Standby certainly was a category at Heathrow when I started there in the very early 70s and I recall it being instigated for very strong winds. As far as I can remember, it was later abolished and no such emergency category exists now at Heathrow. (Hopefully one of the current controllers will correct me if necessary).
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: London
Age: 44
Posts: 258
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For those with the slightest of interest... the second 12m section was raised under the cab yesterday. There are now 3 more lifts due before March.
Awaiting the abuse!
Awaiting the abuse!
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: at home
Posts: 401
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here's something for you to mull over.
It bothers me that there appears to be disagreement between the ATCOs on here over the LVP criteria for LL. At present, the decision to go into LVPs is taken by the WM (or Supervisor) in consultation with the Met Observer. Once SAMOS is fully operational in the new VCR, it is my understanding that it will be the ATSA 2 SAMOS Met Observer who "calls the shots" when it comes to Low Vis, as he/she is responsible for the local Met reporting. (The Met Observer will have departed from Northside prior to this)
I hope the training package (ha ha!) can fully clarify the situation regarding LL LVPs that you have been discussing above - I, for one, would not wish to enter into a spat with my work colleagues over whether we are/are not in LVPs. Having said that, I would also expect the Sup/WM not to pressure me into declaring the wx being at LVP minima if my observations didn't concur.
Gonzo, perhaps we can have a quick chat about this at work?
It bothers me that there appears to be disagreement between the ATCOs on here over the LVP criteria for LL. At present, the decision to go into LVPs is taken by the WM (or Supervisor) in consultation with the Met Observer. Once SAMOS is fully operational in the new VCR, it is my understanding that it will be the ATSA 2 SAMOS Met Observer who "calls the shots" when it comes to Low Vis, as he/she is responsible for the local Met reporting. (The Met Observer will have departed from Northside prior to this)
I hope the training package (ha ha!) can fully clarify the situation regarding LL LVPs that you have been discussing above - I, for one, would not wish to enter into a spat with my work colleagues over whether we are/are not in LVPs. Having said that, I would also expect the Sup/WM not to pressure me into declaring the wx being at LVP minima if my observations didn't concur.
Gonzo, perhaps we can have a quick chat about this at work?
Join Date: May 2000
Location: EGTT/FAB/LGW/BOH/FAB/LGW
Posts: 458
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We have no problems at KK with the ATSA 2's carrying out the Met observing with the help of SAMOS, WM's trust our decisions in marginal wx as it is what we are trained to do.
The criteria are very clear and we appear to follow the same as yourselves of cloud CEILING @ 200' or below / sky obscured / IRVR of 600m or less
Good communication is necessary as with most aspects of ATC so they do like a little advance notice before an ob is distributed dropping us into full LVP's
The criteria are very clear and we appear to follow the same as yourselves of cloud CEILING @ 200' or below / sky obscured / IRVR of 600m or less
Good communication is necessary as with most aspects of ATC so they do like a little advance notice before an ob is distributed dropping us into full LVP's
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: LHR/EGLL
Age: 45
Posts: 4,392
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is potential for that sort of thing, yes, but at the end of the day the ATSAs will be the ones certificated by the Met. Office to use SAMOS, not the Watch Managers or Unit Management, and I would hope anyone in a position to question the ATSA's decision would have enough professionalism (!!) to realise what shaky ground he or she'd be on.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: at home
Posts: 401
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EvilJ
Nor me - perhaps you'd care to elucidate further?
HD
There's always many 'cans' at Heathrow - just needs someone to take the lid off one now and again!
GT3
I would hope that no ATSA 2/SAMOS observer would bow to "peer pressure" if it was applied. Safety is the prime concern, not commercial pressure. I would also hope that no Heathrow ATCO/WM/Supervisor would stoop to such a professional "low".
Nor me - perhaps you'd care to elucidate further?
HD
There's always many 'cans' at Heathrow - just needs someone to take the lid off one now and again!
GT3
I would hope that no ATSA 2/SAMOS observer would bow to "peer pressure" if it was applied. Safety is the prime concern, not commercial pressure. I would also hope that no Heathrow ATCO/WM/Supervisor would stoop to such a professional "low".
Last edited by White Hart; 31st Jan 2005 at 08:02.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: on the golf course (Covid permitting)
Posts: 2,131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
point5
have been watching the erection with interest - it's certainly a big one! What exactly does/will the central core contain - just lift shafts and electrical services etc? Presumably the concrete core will be covered by some cladding cos it looks out of proportion at the present time. What about backup method of exiting in case of fire - will you have a stairwell or a helter skelter type slide round the outside as per Sydney (I think)?
have been watching the erection with interest - it's certainly a big one! What exactly does/will the central core contain - just lift shafts and electrical services etc? Presumably the concrete core will be covered by some cladding cos it looks out of proportion at the present time. What about backup method of exiting in case of fire - will you have a stairwell or a helter skelter type slide round the outside as per Sydney (I think)?
point 5