LGW-LHR div routing
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2005
Location: west sussex
Posts: 206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LGW-LHR div routing
Hello ATC types!
Any Swanick CCF controllers out there that can answer this one. would like to know what a realistic route would be for an aircraft going around from LGW (either runway) and declaring an intention to divert to LHR (again, either runway and effects of traffic levels on route)
Ta in advance,
JS
Any Swanick CCF controllers out there that can answer this one. would like to know what a realistic route would be for an aircraft going around from LGW (either runway) and declaring an intention to divert to LHR (again, either runway and effects of traffic levels on route)
Ta in advance,
JS
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Variable for a non-Mayday/Pan, I think, subject traffic. Probably towards a hold. If it is any help, I was approaching LGW in the 'second hurricane' (last century) with STN as an alternate and every second a/c going around when I nervously asked the routing to STN from LGW (3000' wind 300/65) to be told 'via WOD'.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
<<We would have to check that BAA LL would accept you first >>
Gawd - really? Never used to be anything to do with ATC.
When I left the standard procedure was to BIG at min stack. If there was a problem we would keep it low - around 3-4000 - and feed it downwind.
Gawd - really? Never used to be anything to do with ATC.
When I left the standard procedure was to BIG at min stack. If there was a problem we would keep it low - around 3-4000 - and feed it downwind.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 523
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
jonseagull,
As HD suggests expect probably to BIG, maybe OCK, at Min stack level.
Unless you declare a PAN or above during the Div then you will not be treated preferentially to other LHR traffic, so you can expect to hold and take your turn in the system. If you declare a PAN etc then you'll get one of the best services you've ever received
A few points though, I'm not based LGW but well familiar. Did a crewing favour recently which involved arriving back at LGW at 2330 local. OFP planned DIV was LHR, which was dubious to me being after night restrictions had taken place (so carried STN fuel).
Asked around TC couple of days later and a few interesting facts came to light...
1. Legally you CAN file LHR as alternate as declared as H24 in the UK AIP.
2. LHR would not let you land unless your handling agent was there. (rare to find anyone after the night closure, and don't believe ours are!). To do so would involve being totally stuck after landing and NOT able to either disembark or just fuel up and re-launch (within night restriction period) for LGW.
3.To land WOULD invoke a heavy fine for breaking the night restrictions and landing without a NJM.
Happy for any additional LL'ers to add their thought to the above
Beware what management promise and plan
BTW, CCF was a well old name from well back in the Drayton days - must be showing your age
Cheers
30W
As HD suggests expect probably to BIG, maybe OCK, at Min stack level.
Unless you declare a PAN or above during the Div then you will not be treated preferentially to other LHR traffic, so you can expect to hold and take your turn in the system. If you declare a PAN etc then you'll get one of the best services you've ever received
A few points though, I'm not based LGW but well familiar. Did a crewing favour recently which involved arriving back at LGW at 2330 local. OFP planned DIV was LHR, which was dubious to me being after night restrictions had taken place (so carried STN fuel).
Asked around TC couple of days later and a few interesting facts came to light...
1. Legally you CAN file LHR as alternate as declared as H24 in the UK AIP.
2. LHR would not let you land unless your handling agent was there. (rare to find anyone after the night closure, and don't believe ours are!). To do so would involve being totally stuck after landing and NOT able to either disembark or just fuel up and re-launch (within night restriction period) for LGW.
3.To land WOULD invoke a heavy fine for breaking the night restrictions and landing without a NJM.
Happy for any additional LL'ers to add their thought to the above
Beware what management promise and plan
BTW, CCF was a well old name from well back in the Drayton days - must be showing your age
Cheers
30W
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
<<LHR would not let you land unless your handling agent was there.>>
Just to emphasise that this is not an ATC problem and if Gatwick has a diversion short of fuel, ATC will pop you into Heathrow no questions asked. However, when I wsa there, the plebs that ran Heathrow could be very, very, very nasty at times. I've had to tell someone on final approach that the authority would not accept the flight. He diverted to Farnborough. On another occasion an HS125 taxiied out and the authority said to tell the pilot he was too early and if he went he would never be allowed into Heathrow again. He went. On both occasions, there would have been no delay to other traffic but BAA, or whoever runs it now, believed that they were God. Maybe things have changed for the better now?
Just to emphasise that this is not an ATC problem and if Gatwick has a diversion short of fuel, ATC will pop you into Heathrow no questions asked. However, when I wsa there, the plebs that ran Heathrow could be very, very, very nasty at times. I've had to tell someone on final approach that the authority would not accept the flight. He diverted to Farnborough. On another occasion an HS125 taxiied out and the authority said to tell the pilot he was too early and if he went he would never be allowed into Heathrow again. He went. On both occasions, there would have been no delay to other traffic but BAA, or whoever runs it now, believed that they were God. Maybe things have changed for the better now?
