Question to EGKK TWR ATCO's
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Question to EGKK TWR ATCO's
Hi,
My question to you guys who are working in the busiest airport of the world using a single runway in your daily operation is about the procedure used in EGKK regarding the wake turbulence separations between arrivals and departures vs. the displaced threshold.
According ICAO :
A separation of 2 minutes shall be provided between Medium (Upper & Lower), Small or Light aircraft following a Heavy aircraft and between a Light aircraft following a Medium or Small aircraft when operating on a runway with a displaced threshold when:
(a) A departing Medium (Upper & Lower), Small or Light aircraft follows a Heavy arrival or a departing Light aircraft follows a Medium or Small arrival;
(b) an arriving Medium (Upper & Lower), Small or Light aircraft follows a Heavy aircraft departure, or an arriving Light aircraft follows a departing Medium or Small aircraft;
(c) if the projected flight paths are expected to cross.
My question is
:
Do you strictly apply this rule, or does your regulator accept exceptions. Example : a B747 landing on 26L followed by a A320 or a citation-jet (LIGHT) departing from the end (M1/3) ?
Thanks for your answers !!!!
My question to you guys who are working in the busiest airport of the world using a single runway in your daily operation is about the procedure used in EGKK regarding the wake turbulence separations between arrivals and departures vs. the displaced threshold.
According ICAO :
A separation of 2 minutes shall be provided between Medium (Upper & Lower), Small or Light aircraft following a Heavy aircraft and between a Light aircraft following a Medium or Small aircraft when operating on a runway with a displaced threshold when:
(a) A departing Medium (Upper & Lower), Small or Light aircraft follows a Heavy arrival or a departing Light aircraft follows a Medium or Small arrival;
(b) an arriving Medium (Upper & Lower), Small or Light aircraft follows a Heavy aircraft departure, or an arriving Light aircraft follows a departing Medium or Small aircraft;
(c) if the projected flight paths are expected to cross.
My question is
:Do you strictly apply this rule, or does your regulator accept exceptions. Example : a B747 landing on 26L followed by a A320 or a citation-jet (LIGHT) departing from the end (M1/3) ?
Thanks for your answers !!!!
Join Date: May 2000
Location: EGTT/FAB/LGW/BOH/FAB/LGW
Posts: 458
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If we believe that the flightpaths will cross we apply the required wake vortex. The bulk of our operations do not require this as the departure will still be rolling at the point where the previous lander touched down.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: southeast england
Posts: 138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The devil is in the detail!
In the ICAO requirements the a), b) and c) layout makes it look like those situations are separate - what it actually means (note the cunning semi-colons after a) and b)) is that if the flight paths are expected to cross in situations a) or b), THEN that wake turbulence separation is applied. It's not often that those conditions exist here at Gatwick (and we can often avoid them tactically e.g. light aircraft use holding point B to reduce the likelihood of such a situation), but if they do, we aplly the separation.
Hope this helps
In the ICAO requirements the a), b) and c) layout makes it look like those situations are separate - what it actually means (note the cunning semi-colons after a) and b)) is that if the flight paths are expected to cross in situations a) or b), THEN that wake turbulence separation is applied. It's not often that those conditions exist here at Gatwick (and we can often avoid them tactically e.g. light aircraft use holding point B to reduce the likelihood of such a situation), but if they do, we aplly the separation.
Hope this helps
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: HANTS
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Been a while since I was there and I'm sure you will get a more comprehensive and up to date answer before long but...
best hourly movements circa 10 years ago around 55,think it must be approaching 60 by now...this includes heli traffic but there are not so many of those.Daily rate best was over 850,would like to see the latest on that myself.Achieved by top notch tactical usage of holding points and slot times by ADC,close coordination between ADC and App regarding spacing and extremely accurate spacing by App...occasionally complemented by the ability to use 2 1\2 mile gaps when weather conditions permit.
Gatwick is possibly the best example of how to maximise rwy utilisation at a single rwy field.
I stand to be corrected
best hourly movements circa 10 years ago around 55,think it must be approaching 60 by now...this includes heli traffic but there are not so many of those.Daily rate best was over 850,would like to see the latest on that myself.Achieved by top notch tactical usage of holding points and slot times by ADC,close coordination between ADC and App regarding spacing and extremely accurate spacing by App...occasionally complemented by the ability to use 2 1\2 mile gaps when weather conditions permit.
Gatwick is possibly the best example of how to maximise rwy utilisation at a single rwy field.
I stand to be corrected
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Toronto
Age: 57
Posts: 531
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Back in the late 90s before the second runway was built at Manchester, the movement rate was often 55+/hour. Granted this wasn't for as many hours in the day as Gartwick but it was done. The record stood at 57 for a couple of years and then one September morning between 8 and 9am the 60/hour was achieved without any helicopters. 
32 departures and 28 arrivals IIRC.
I don't think that record could be broken unless there were a concerted effort to load the place up with low runway occupancy types. Accurate spacing from approach and perfect weather conditions (light head wind) contributed to the achievement.
Then the second runway arrived and took all the fun out of it.
32 departures and 28 arrivals IIRC.I don't think that record could be broken unless there were a concerted effort to load the place up with low runway occupancy types. Accurate spacing from approach and perfect weather conditions (light head wind) contributed to the achievement.
Then the second runway arrived and took all the fun out of it.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: southeast england
Posts: 138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Busiest hour 60,
busiest day 897 (IIRC the 895 was revised upwards but not 100% sure?)
regularly 55-57 an hour, but all subject to right weather, right combination of traffic etc. The more heavies in the mix, the more difficult it is to achieve
busiest day 897 (IIRC the 895 was revised upwards but not 100% sure?)
regularly 55-57 an hour, but all subject to right weather, right combination of traffic etc. The more heavies in the mix, the more difficult it is to achieve
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: southeast england
Posts: 138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
some claim that BNE is busier...and they do it better with a single rwy
Don't want to knock anyone here and complexity can make a huge difference, but in numbers using the runway terms BNE has a way to go yet...
Runway utilisation improvement is one of the nats consultancy streams sending out managers all over the world (to the relief of us workers). So we could tell you, but we will all be sacked for taking work away from our managers.
