Gatwick arrivals
Thread Starter
Trinity I cannot see how a second runway would displace the noise evenly because the approach paths will not change. I personally cannot see the need for it apart from when the main runway is closed for maintenance, but with emerging technologies I wonder how long it will be before there is a gbas installation for the standby runway to give it an increased capability.
Last edited by tubby linton; 13th Apr 2015 at 22:25.
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Cheshire, UK
Posts: 326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whatever the 'need' may or may not be, Gatwick (and other London airports) offer enormous economic, cultural and social benefits which far far far outweigh your individual NIMBY concerns.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: London
Age: 69
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The NATS presentation on the "stabilisation trials" and Dame Deidre's letters about Gatwick flight paths have been released by CAA :
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/reque...ncoming-640229
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/reque...ncoming-640229
It is a bit silly.
In a quiet period last year, I was offered a visual approach to Gatters from the south, and got all excited.
US: "5 mile final okay?"
ATC: "Oh no. I'll still have to vector you to a 10 mile final".
Facepalm. We just did the ILS via Tunbridge Wells, as per usual.
In a quiet period last year, I was offered a visual approach to Gatters from the south, and got all excited.
US: "5 mile final okay?"
ATC: "Oh no. I'll still have to vector you to a 10 mile final".
Facepalm. We just did the ILS via Tunbridge Wells, as per usual.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: In the rain
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agreed. The management-class love of "standard" nonsense even when entirely unnecessary is heartbreaking.
If you live in / near Tunbridge you can complain to Gatwick Airport about the increased long finals on 26. They were implemented to reduce holding (but not real delays) and appease E Grinsted I believe?
I preferred holding, then diving for 6 miles, over the current tour of Sussex & Kent procedure.
If you live in / near Tunbridge you can complain to Gatwick Airport about the increased long finals on 26. They were implemented to reduce holding (but not real delays) and appease E Grinsted I believe?
I preferred holding, then diving for 6 miles, over the current tour of Sussex & Kent procedure.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Controllers don't wind you all round the skies for fun. They are constrained by the daft regulations to suit the anti-noise brigade. That said, I worked for many years with a colleague at Heathrow who blatantly ignored the "established no later than 10DME at night" rule. Nothing happened to him.
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: HANTS
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Controllers don't wind you all round the skies for fun. They are constrained by the daft regulations to suit the anti-noise brigade. That said, I worked for many years with a colleague at Heathrow who blatantly ignored the "established no later than 10DME at night" rule. Nothing happened to him.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: The foot of Mt. Belzoni.
Posts: 2,001
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But what are these "professionals", professional in GAPSTER?
I recently attended a presentation by the chairman of The Airports Commission, Sir Howard Davies.
A colleague of mine asked him why noise abatement procedures/arguments are still based on the noise-levels that aircraft made 20-30 years ago?
He didn't know the answer.
I recently attended a presentation by the chairman of The Airports Commission, Sir Howard Davies.
A colleague of mine asked him why noise abatement procedures/arguments are still based on the noise-levels that aircraft made 20-30 years ago?
He didn't know the answer.
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Earth
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gatwick Approach Spacing
In my experience, the final approach gaps (e.g. pack - minimum vortex spacing, alternate, 5 mile gaps or 6 miles after a Heavy) were always agreed between the respective Tower and Approach supervisors taking account of inbound/outbound demand and delay. Approach (TC) never just put an a/c on a 6 mile final because thy felt like it. The captain could always refuse of course if he/she considered the approach would be rushed (they rarely did).
Whilst the trial data shows missed approaches reduced by about 2 every 3 days, more a/c in the vectoring area on extended intermediate and final approaches would help to reduce holding delays that are measured by NATS.
Whilst the trial data shows missed approaches reduced by about 2 every 3 days, more a/c in the vectoring area on extended intermediate and final approaches would help to reduce holding delays that are measured by NATS.
Thread Starter
Del , yes I have googled it. The trial seems to have been produced to minimise go-arounds. It would help if pilots were actually ready as they taxi over the holding point. i once saw a Norwegian 737 sit on the threshold for over two minutes whilst the tower were calling him over and over again He finally woke up, didn't apologise and departed. Luckily it was a slack arrival period and he didn't inconvenience anybody. A number of airlines SOP is for certain actions to be completed as they cross the line ,so they can never be fully ready before they are given line up clearance. if you then throw in that the crew may be under training this further slows the process., and because of this arrivals go on a tour of West Kent.
The criteria for a CDA is to avoid any level flight but the rules don't quantify whether this has been achieved wifh a uniform descent rate. Looking at the arrivals you see some aircraft who seem to have an excessive rate down to about 4000ft and then realise they are low and adjust to a V/S of 200fpm.This usuallly is noticable on base leg and coupled with the Airbus signature whine produces a lot of noise. Perhaps some minimum altitude gates should be introduced as part of the CDA. For instance instead of the current clearance to 4000ft and then 3000ft , make it 5000ft until the traffic is clear of Tunbridge Wells and then descend to 3000ft.
Nats need to remind pilots that they must be fully ready to depart and reinstate the guidance and requirements for a CDA and make the chart companies and airlines aware of it.
The tours of Sussex and Kent to avoid holding are nonsense as to a pilot trying to judge their descent rate you have no idea of how far west or east you are going to be taken and the resulting track miles. It is a blatent way to maniplulate the statistics and fools nobody and wastes time and fuel .
The criteria for a CDA is to avoid any level flight but the rules don't quantify whether this has been achieved wifh a uniform descent rate. Looking at the arrivals you see some aircraft who seem to have an excessive rate down to about 4000ft and then realise they are low and adjust to a V/S of 200fpm.This usuallly is noticable on base leg and coupled with the Airbus signature whine produces a lot of noise. Perhaps some minimum altitude gates should be introduced as part of the CDA. For instance instead of the current clearance to 4000ft and then 3000ft , make it 5000ft until the traffic is clear of Tunbridge Wells and then descend to 3000ft.
Nats need to remind pilots that they must be fully ready to depart and reinstate the guidance and requirements for a CDA and make the chart companies and airlines aware of it.
The tours of Sussex and Kent to avoid holding are nonsense as to a pilot trying to judge their descent rate you have no idea of how far west or east you are going to be taken and the resulting track miles. It is a blatent way to maniplulate the statistics and fools nobody and wastes time and fuel .
Last edited by tubby linton; 15th Apr 2015 at 12:24.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: T.C.
Age: 56
Posts: 275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tubby, you are a pilot that really really really needs a liaison visit to Swanwick.
Please arrange one at the earliest opportunity, as some of your ideas are ridiculous, as you will discover when you sit and watch Gatwick approach and the TMA.
I did send you a PM, and I will happily arrange this for you.
Please arrange one at the earliest opportunity, as some of your ideas are ridiculous, as you will discover when you sit and watch Gatwick approach and the TMA.
I did send you a PM, and I will happily arrange this for you.
Thread Starter
Nimmer,Pm never received.
I cannot afford the petrol to venture to Swanwick as I had a huge paycut last year courtesy of my employer's former owners.
I can happily sit and watch the arrivals and the TMA on Flight radar though, and perhaps you could tell me what I am missing.
I did visit West Drayton a number of years ago and an atco bought the first round at the close of proceedings!
Is there any particular idea you had issue with?
I cannot afford the petrol to venture to Swanwick as I had a huge paycut last year courtesy of my employer's former owners.
I can happily sit and watch the arrivals and the TMA on Flight radar though, and perhaps you could tell me what I am missing.
I did visit West Drayton a number of years ago and an atco bought the first round at the close of proceedings!
Is there any particular idea you had issue with?
Last edited by tubby linton; 15th Apr 2015 at 16:58.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 523
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tubby,
I'm afraid Fligh Radar el al gives NO appreciation of the system, the constraints or conflicts - it is NO substitute for witnessing the REAL operation and discussing the issues over a coffee (or beer after shift) with our COLLEAGUES from the 'other side'...
Vectoring over Sussex/Essex is necessary to form the approach sequence and no different to that at LL albeit LL does it from North and South rather than just the South side at KK. Vectoring, forming the sequence, is an essential part of maximising/optimising the runway capacity - hugely important to us the customers as well as the airports themselves etc....
At first descent to an Altitude we are given track miles 99% of the time with which to set up the CDA. I observe many different ways of achieving it some intelligent, some less so as you suggest. 200fpm DOES however conform with the CDA criteria, however the fault is with us pilots in less intelligent use of ATC track distance (and other data available within the flight deck) rather than ATC
I appreciate that times have been tough with your employer, you have my sympathies, I know you're employer is one I and many others would have jumped at the opportunity to join in better times, and one until recent times I personally held in high esteem...
PLEASE take Nimmer's invitation at face value (I don't know him/her - or at least don't think so..) but what I do know is there is NO greater education/understanding achieved other than visiting the coalface of the operation and meeting the great folk who work there TRYING to do their best for both us AND the system at large....
If petrol cost is the true reason for not visiting - 1. Sign up for a TRUCE and NATS will facilitate a visit upon request to the Ops room first AND will pay your petrol. 2. I believe in the relationship with the folk on the south coast so much, a one time only offer - sort a visit with Nimmer, PM me and I'll pay your actual petrol! (Genuine offer!)
So, sort a visit, go with an open mind and lots of open questions - learn, discuss your ideas and frustrations... they're ALWAYS glad to see and chat with us
Brgds
30W
(fellow pilot)
I'm afraid Fligh Radar el al gives NO appreciation of the system, the constraints or conflicts - it is NO substitute for witnessing the REAL operation and discussing the issues over a coffee (or beer after shift) with our COLLEAGUES from the 'other side'...
Vectoring over Sussex/Essex is necessary to form the approach sequence and no different to that at LL albeit LL does it from North and South rather than just the South side at KK. Vectoring, forming the sequence, is an essential part of maximising/optimising the runway capacity - hugely important to us the customers as well as the airports themselves etc....
At first descent to an Altitude we are given track miles 99% of the time with which to set up the CDA. I observe many different ways of achieving it some intelligent, some less so as you suggest. 200fpm DOES however conform with the CDA criteria, however the fault is with us pilots in less intelligent use of ATC track distance (and other data available within the flight deck) rather than ATC
I appreciate that times have been tough with your employer, you have my sympathies, I know you're employer is one I and many others would have jumped at the opportunity to join in better times, and one until recent times I personally held in high esteem...
PLEASE take Nimmer's invitation at face value (I don't know him/her - or at least don't think so..) but what I do know is there is NO greater education/understanding achieved other than visiting the coalface of the operation and meeting the great folk who work there TRYING to do their best for both us AND the system at large....
If petrol cost is the true reason for not visiting - 1. Sign up for a TRUCE and NATS will facilitate a visit upon request to the Ops room first AND will pay your petrol. 2. I believe in the relationship with the folk on the south coast so much, a one time only offer - sort a visit with Nimmer, PM me and I'll pay your actual petrol! (Genuine offer!)
So, sort a visit, go with an open mind and lots of open questions - learn, discuss your ideas and frustrations... they're ALWAYS glad to see and chat with us
Brgds
30W
(fellow pilot)
I did visit West Drayton a number of years ago and an atco bought the first round at the close of proceedings!
While I take your point about go arounds caused by departing traffic on the runway, the stabilisation trial should reduce go arounds experienced due to unstable approaches.
As far as your last comment re wasting fuel and time is concerned, the primary aim for any airport operator would surely be to improve runway utilisation?
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Botswana
Posts: 887
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Speaking as a pilot it is often more or less impossible to achieve a CDA with uniform descent rates within the margin of or above 1000fpm as the aircraft simply won't slow down. A heavy 320 with Sharklets and a tailwind bears that out perfectly. Therefore you almost always need to get under the nominal glide path then slacken off the rate of descent to achieve the deceleration.
I agree hammering it down then reducing to 200fpm is a bit much though but what doesn't help is that Gatwick Director is almost always over optimistic with the estimated track miles, especially on 08. That is not a criticism as such as I appreciate it will often be very difficult to be that precise. However it does ruin the execution somewhat if you're told 21 miles by Director and it ends up closer to 30.
I agree hammering it down then reducing to 200fpm is a bit much though but what doesn't help is that Gatwick Director is almost always over optimistic with the estimated track miles, especially on 08. That is not a criticism as such as I appreciate it will often be very difficult to be that precise. However it does ruin the execution somewhat if you're told 21 miles by Director and it ends up closer to 30.
Tubby
My No2 son and his wife are both TMA South controllers and I am certain they would be more than pleased to show you around Swanwick , not the management bit of course! They might even offer you a bed for the night.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Tunbridge Wells, UK
Age: 45
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I live just slightly East of TW at almost the exact point where aircraft begin their left turn onto 26L. To be honest I've not noticed any increase in traffic in the last 5 years of living here and the noise doesn't bother me at all as it's hardly significant. We get disturbed far more by the noise of the traffic on the A21 when the wind is in a particular direction 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Earth
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DeL Prado
NATS' own data shows go-arounds due to unstable approaches were approximately a 1/800 event. Is the aggravation the extended finals and more concentrated base leg is causing around Tunbridge Wells really worth the tiny gain? I understand one resident is going to the High Court to force NATS to revert to the old system.
NATS' own data shows go-arounds due to unstable approaches were approximately a 1/800 event. Is the aggravation the extended finals and more concentrated base leg is causing around Tunbridge Wells really worth the tiny gain? I understand one resident is going to the High Court to force NATS to revert to the old system.