Question For NATS.Swanwick
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: MAN
Age: 61
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Question For NATS.Swanwick
Is it local practice at LHR to reduce seperation between same weight cat. to 2.5nm and under what circumstances and is weight cat ICAO definied?
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2.5nm spacing between particular types and under certain conditions has been in force at Heathrow for many years. Someone up-to-date will fill you in with the latest info...
Join Date: May 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 796
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Basically, under certain conditions detailed in the MATS Pt 2 and where there's no wake vortex separation required then yes, on base leg or on final approach the minimum separation can be reduced to 2.5nm.
This also applies at a few other UK airports in addition to LHR.
This also applies at a few other UK airports in addition to LHR.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Hampshire
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There's a difference between 2.5nm spacing and 2.5nm separation though.
2.5nm separation can be done at any time, if I remember correctly, between two a/c (non-vortex implications) within twenty miles from TD, if they're both either on base or final. Also you have to be using either the H23 or the H10 radars. There is no weather criteria for 2.5nm separation.
2.5nm spacing is offered by the tower at their discretion. I don't believe in the approach part 2 there is any specific criteria for it other than if the twr say its ok and you are fulfilling the requirements of 2.5nm separation. There was a whole list not long ago but its been done away with. There may still be some weather requirements in the twr part 2? We wouldn't ask for it though unless there was a reasonable headwind component on final, reasonable vis, and a dry runway.
2.5nm separation is a useful thing to have even if the tower have asked for standard 3nm spacing on final. One time it is extremely useful is when a/c are 'pulling apart' on final i.e. there is a much stronger upper headwind than lower on the approach. Effectively as a/c descend on the ILS their groundspeed increases pulling them away from the following a/c. 2.5nm separation means we can position a/c 2.5nm apart on final and then let them 'open up' to 3nm before we transfer them to the twr, thus not losing separation, giving the tower the final spacing they require, and keeping the landing rate up and the delays down.
2.5nm separation can be done at any time, if I remember correctly, between two a/c (non-vortex implications) within twenty miles from TD, if they're both either on base or final. Also you have to be using either the H23 or the H10 radars. There is no weather criteria for 2.5nm separation.
2.5nm spacing is offered by the tower at their discretion. I don't believe in the approach part 2 there is any specific criteria for it other than if the twr say its ok and you are fulfilling the requirements of 2.5nm separation. There was a whole list not long ago but its been done away with. There may still be some weather requirements in the twr part 2? We wouldn't ask for it though unless there was a reasonable headwind component on final, reasonable vis, and a dry runway.
2.5nm separation is a useful thing to have even if the tower have asked for standard 3nm spacing on final. One time it is extremely useful is when a/c are 'pulling apart' on final i.e. there is a much stronger upper headwind than lower on the approach. Effectively as a/c descend on the ILS their groundspeed increases pulling them away from the following a/c. 2.5nm separation means we can position a/c 2.5nm apart on final and then let them 'open up' to 3nm before we transfer them to the twr, thus not losing separation, giving the tower the final spacing they require, and keeping the landing rate up and the delays down.
