Question for EGPH ATCO's
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: At the foot of the Lammermuirs
Posts: 344
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Question for EGPH ATCO's
When you are sequencing traffic on approach to 08/26 do you base the spacing on the assumption that the aircraft will make the turnoff to taxiway B/C?
PPRuNe's favourite BABE!!
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: under the duvet!!!!
Posts: 303
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Runway 08/26 has been closed for nearly 3 years mate!!!
If you mean for the main runway 24/06 we use 6 miles spacing for final approach. This is to allow tower to get a departure off in the gap, but does make the assumption that the first lander will make the turns off the runway at B1 or C1.
If there are no departures waiting to go then we can reduce this spacing slightly, however again assuming that the turn offs will be made by no1.
For some of the larger aircarft which we know will miss the turns and have to go to the end to turn, we build in larger gaps on finals to accomodate that, hopefully preventing the second aircraft having to go around.
Hope that is helpful with what you wanted to know.
If you mean for the main runway 24/06 we use 6 miles spacing for final approach. This is to allow tower to get a departure off in the gap, but does make the assumption that the first lander will make the turns off the runway at B1 or C1.
If there are no departures waiting to go then we can reduce this spacing slightly, however again assuming that the turn offs will be made by no1.
For some of the larger aircarft which we know will miss the turns and have to go to the end to turn, we build in larger gaps on finals to accomodate that, hopefully preventing the second aircraft having to go around.
Hope that is helpful with what you wanted to know.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: At the foot of the Lammermuirs
Posts: 344
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Correct, I did mean 06/24! It would have been interesting to see some of the big boys trying to land on the old "club" runway!
I was once a regular at EGPH, flying with Turnhouse FC. It was a major blow when we lost 08/26. Beginning of the end for TFC, I'm afraid. Nowadays the only time I land and take-off from EGPH is as fare paying pax.
The question popped in to my head a couple of weeks ago when arriving on a flight from EGLL. We seemed to land a bit long and this was then followed by very hard braking and lots of reverse thrust. I assumed he/she was trying to avoid upsetting you folks by missing the turning and having to taxi to the turning point and delaying the 3 departures waiting to go! It was then I also thought about the arrivals and how missing the turning would likely cause further problems.
One other think I have noticed recently is the number of bmi A320 flights I am on using the full length and not the intersection for departures. Is it just my imagination or have bmi SOP's being modified meaning that they have to request full length more often? A couple of years ago I was a regular on LX's flight to ZRH. Depite only using a Saab, they always used full length. I was told that it was their SOP that they always had to use full length if available.
Thanks for satisfying my curiousity ATCBabe!
I was once a regular at EGPH, flying with Turnhouse FC. It was a major blow when we lost 08/26. Beginning of the end for TFC, I'm afraid. Nowadays the only time I land and take-off from EGPH is as fare paying pax.
The question popped in to my head a couple of weeks ago when arriving on a flight from EGLL. We seemed to land a bit long and this was then followed by very hard braking and lots of reverse thrust. I assumed he/she was trying to avoid upsetting you folks by missing the turning and having to taxi to the turning point and delaying the 3 departures waiting to go! It was then I also thought about the arrivals and how missing the turning would likely cause further problems.
One other think I have noticed recently is the number of bmi A320 flights I am on using the full length and not the intersection for departures. Is it just my imagination or have bmi SOP's being modified meaning that they have to request full length more often? A couple of years ago I was a regular on LX's flight to ZRH. Depite only using a Saab, they always used full length. I was told that it was their SOP that they always had to use full length if available.
Thanks for satisfying my curiousity ATCBabe!
Last edited by Gaza; 8th Sep 2002 at 22:09.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: EU
Posts: 413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Many operators who use PH infrequently only publish performance data for the full runway length; hence their crews have to use it regardless.
I once heard a pilot say that there were only really two things to remember in aviation:
"There's nothing more useless than runway behind you."
and
"The only time your aeroplane has too much fuel onboard is when it's on fire."
Maybe BMI have taken heed of the former.
I once heard a pilot say that there were only really two things to remember in aviation:
"There's nothing more useless than runway behind you."
and
"The only time your aeroplane has too much fuel onboard is when it's on fire."
Maybe BMI have taken heed of the former.
