Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Ground & Other Ops Forums > ATC Issues
Reload this Page >

Separation behind A340 on departure for similar routes

Wikiposts
Search
ATC Issues A place where pilots may enter the 'lions den' that is Air Traffic Control in complete safety and find out the answers to all those obscure topics which you always wanted to know the answer to but were afraid to ask.

Separation behind A340 on departure for similar routes

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 22nd May 2008, 21:03
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: LHR/EGLL
Age: 45
Posts: 4,392
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Separation behind A340 on departure for similar routes

So.........

Is there a case for dropping the A342/3 down a speed group?

Or provide 3 minutes separation behind for a/c on similar routes instead of 2?
Gonzo is offline  
Old 23rd May 2008, 06:20
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
On departure an A340/200 flies very slowly. The speed will be in the order of 180 kts for about 20 miles plus (in my experience). Please correct me if I am wrong. TC tried to have the aircraft put into a lower speed group for years, due to so many catch ups. All the time it was resisted by Heathrow, I believe beacasue it might have reduced runway capacity.
I would still like to see the aircraft in a lower speed group, however, we don't see so many now, so it it not such a big problem.
Over+Out is offline  
Old 23rd May 2008, 11:24
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 375
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Just like to point out that the resistance was from Heathrow Airport and airlines and not ATC.

Makes no difference to us what speed group it is in and it would help our chums at TC who have to deal with the darned things every day.

P7
Point Seven is offline  
Old 23rd May 2008, 12:05
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: swanwick carp lake
Posts: 232
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
a340's are rubbish. by far the worst performing jet aircraft in the tma.
ImnotanERIC is offline  
Old 23rd May 2008, 13:49
  #5 (permalink)  
wizad
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
nice stepladder!!!!
 
Old 23rd May 2008, 13:58
  #6 (permalink)  

Peoples' Champion!
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The speed will be in the order of 180 kts for about 20 miles plus
Additionally during which time, they will have only managed to climb about 20 ft

BH
Big Hilly is offline  
Old 23rd May 2008, 19:59
  #7 (permalink)  

 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 796
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Never mind dropping A340s down a group, can't we drop the A380 into a big bucket somewhere far, far away and forget about it?

The now 20NM gap behind when landing at LHR due ILS issues is just taking the p1ss! If this isn't sorted before more of them start arriving at busier times it's going to lose far more pax and cause more delay than the few extra it carries might ever justify.

It'll be fun if and when the first one calls PAN on a go-around and wants to divert to LGW as well... "your PAN is acknowledged, expect a thirty minute delay whilst we find some extra firemen"

Fingers crossed it's not LVPs either or it will really stuff up everyone else at LGW nicely.
Roffa is offline  
Old 23rd May 2008, 20:22
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: London
Age: 44
Posts: 258
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
SIA will commence a second daily A380 flight into EGLL from July 16th (4 days a week to start off with) so the 20nm spacing may then become more of an issue. UAE commence daily operations on UAE1/2 in December too. But of course the A380 will not have any major impact on airfield operations...
point5 is offline  
Old 23rd May 2008, 21:04
  #9 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: LHR/EGLL
Age: 45
Posts: 4,392
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The 20 mile requirement might not be needed, but until the investigation is complete then we're erring on the side of being safe.

What will happen if the requirement stays? A380 landing fee tripled?
Gonzo is offline  
Old 26th May 2008, 19:28
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Shrewsbury (EGOS)
Age: 38
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Surely the complaints only levitate to the A342/A343 with those amiable yet undoubtedly small CFM-565Cs...

How does an A345 or an A346 compare in departure performance with those huge Rolls-Royce Trent 500s?
321now is offline  
Old 26th May 2008, 22:34
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hants
Posts: 2,295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
All A340s need to be dropped down a speed group... latest safety observation from TC in the pipeline from two days ago...
anotherthing is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.