PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific (https://www.pprune.org/australia-new-zealand-pacific-90/)
-   -   Gold Coast needs an ILS (https://www.pprune.org/australia-new-zealand-pacific/475442-gold-coast-needs-ils.html)

Jabawocky 26th Jan 2012 23:40

Gold Coast needs an ILS
 
This morning the Gold Coast has rain and low cloud SCT/BKN005 depending on the moment, rain showers and vis down to 3-4000 and there are Air NZ, VA couple of JQ's holding all over the joint doing multiple approaches, none of which have landed, a Tiger having a go right now and will be next to Brisbane for sure, all for the want of a proper bit of infrastructure.

The follow on effect is there are several JQ and VA and others now getting holds and vectors out to sea to accomodate the diverting Goldies that have burnt up tonnes of fuel out off Kingscliff :ugh:

Yep as I type this GoCat964 missed, and another Virgin waiting to have a go but decided against it and off to Brissy to beat the Tiger who will now be behind. Either cunning plan or low on "stay and play" fuel.:E

What a disgrace.:=

http://i849.photobucket.com/albums/a.../photoYBCG.png
http://i849.photobucket.com/albums/a...RAD27-1-12.jpg

UnderneathTheRadar 26th Jan 2012 23:50

They could use the AirAsiaX dive'n'drive sea level approach as demonstrated abely on multiple occasions....

UTR

penetrator 27th Jan 2012 00:11

I find it hard to believe that the Gold Coast has not had an ILS put in before Wagga Wagga has:rolleyes:, with all the International & domestic jet traffic.:ugh: Rex must have some political pull With John Sharp in the Ivory tower.

601 27th Jan 2012 00:14


Gold Coast has not had an ILS
Maybe it is a terrain problem?

c100driver 27th Jan 2012 00:35

Maybe just a good RNP AR approach would work.

Nulli Secundus 27th Jan 2012 00:36

Terrain is possiby an issue, but remember London City has an ILS at both ends AND overcomes obstacle clearance with something like a 6 degree glideslope. And just to add a thought on aviation infrastructure (or lack of), surely the same argument holds true for providing an auto land capability in at least SY & ML?

For such a wealthy country, we really fall short on investing in our own transport assets.

maggot 27th Jan 2012 01:01

RNP down to 250' or so should do it - as c100 pointed out...

Captain Dart 27th Jan 2012 01:04

Agreed Nulli. For all the power the 'green' lobby has, e.g. those stupid 'long life' light bulbs, huge wind farms that have debatable return on all the energy invested in their manufacture and maintenance and, of course, the carbon tax scam: how much aviation fuel has been burnt into the atmosphere over the years through holding and diversion from Australian airports with almost third world approach facilities?

VH-ABC 27th Jan 2012 01:33

Big difference in what you'll see at 800' at the bottom of a non runway aligned VOR approach, compared to 200' at the bottom of an ILS with a nice big fat set of HIALS bang in front of you... Regardless of the H2O Wally.

teresa green 27th Jan 2012 01:46

It has always been a terrain problem, aka that shite of a hill at the northern end or they would have had a ILS years ago. The Goldie has always been a battle especially this time of the year, and I did more go arounds here than anywhere else over the years, and it is a absolute shit of a place at night when you are in Stormy WX. Cannot see it changing.

Icarus2001 27th Jan 2012 01:49

That is very true but a runway aligned RNAV approach to runway 32 will get you down to 737' agl.

The cost of installing an ILS is huge and the ongoing calibration checks are also costly. Better to cost shift to airlines who bear the cost of the holding diversions etc. That is business at work for you. That is why airports should be government owned infrastructure, like roads and ports.

If more work could be done to get the RNAV minima down to 450'agl as used at some airfields that would help. Is it survey or terrain issues?

Popgun 27th Jan 2012 02:17

RNP 0.11 the key...
 
The RNAV (RNP) RWY 14 Approach gets you down to about 370'...required vis 1900m. (RWY 32 RNP gets you down to about 260' / 1300m)

Being centreline-aligned and on-slope at that height would mean you'd get in on most occasions, including over the last few days when some of those heavy rain showers has sent the visibility way down...

Now if only we could get everyone trained up in order to make this a reality. As slow as the progress (no KPI bonuses on offer) is on that score, I think its more likely to happen than Queensland Airports, the State or Federal governments coming up with several million dollars for 'nasty' aviation infrastructure. :ugh:

Most airports in Africa are better served than what we have on offer here in Australia.

PG

PS. and while we're at it...can we please get the :mad: owners of Ballina airport to spend some dosh on their airport. FFS, what a disgrace...even some cheap runway end strobes would be a huge help in trying to get into this sub-standard, GA field!!! :ugh::ugh::ugh:

Jabawocky 27th Jan 2012 02:18


GOLD COAST (YBCG) RAIM GPS RAIM PREDICTION 261400 YBCG TSO-C129 (AND EQUIVALENT) FAULT DETECTION NO GPS RAIM FD OUTAGES FOR NPA TSO-C146A (AND EQUIVALENT) FAULT DETECTION NO GPS RAIM FD OUTAGES FOR NPA FAULT DETECTION AND EXCLUSION 01261433 TIL 01261439 01270855 TIL 01270904 01271429 TIL 01271435 01280851 TIL 01280859 01281425 TIL 01281431 01290847 TIL 01290855 GPS RAIM FDE UNAVBL FOR NPA METAR SPECI YBCG 270200Z AUTO 12013KT 6000 // SCT007 BKN013 OVC053 24/22 Q1012 RMK RF00.2/020.6 TAF TAF AMD YBCG 270003Z 2700/2724 10012KT 5000 LIGHT RAIN BKN006 BKN012 OVC025 FM270300 09016KT 8000 LIGHT RAIN BKN015 OVC030 TEMPO 2700/2724 3000 SHOWERS OF RAIN BKN008 INTER 2700/2724 2000 HEAVY RAIN BKN006 RMK T 24 25 25 24 Q 1012 1011 1011 1012 ATIS ATIS YBCG I 270106 APCH: EXP INSTRUMENT APCH RWY: 14 SFC COND: WET + WIND: 110/12 MAX XW 8KTS + VIS: REDUCING TO 4000M IN RA CLD: FEW005 BKN010 OVC020 + TMP: 24 QNH: 1012
And they keep on missing :}

yes a RNP might be a good option, I just figured that some folk might not cope with that concept.............

They could use the AirAsiaX dive'n'drive sea level approach as demonstrated abely on multiple occasions....

UTR
And not so abley at times either.....although they have not hit anything yet! :sad:

Nulli Secundus 27th Jan 2012 02:25

"The cost of installing an ILS is huge"
How much?

How much as a proportion of the asset value?

How much as a proportion of lost revenue due diversions etc. over the years ahead.

Come on, let's make Australian aviation an easy place to do business! This is a wealthy country. Its not a cost........ its an investment in efficiency & the future. No different to ports, rail or road upgrades.

mostlytossas 27th Jan 2012 02:42

What would you want an ILS at any Queensland airport for?
After all it's beautiful one day, perfect the next isn't it? Or so the blurb goes..........
Meanwhile it is back to the cricket with 8 octas of blue in Adelaide.........;)

RAD_ALT_ALIVE 27th Jan 2012 04:08

London City does have a high angle glideslope ILS capability sure - but it is limited to a very few types of jet equipment and some turbo props. There are no (as far as I know) B737s or A320s capable of using it. There is a special 'steep approach' mod for A318s available that allows BA to use it. I don't know what ERJ/CRJ types (if any) can use it, but there is a great youtube vid showing a 'memorable' landing there by a BAe146/RJ, so I guess they use it too.

As for MEL/SYD not having autoland capability - well that's just nonsense too. Unless the reference was meant to be to CATII/III, most ILS equipped runways in Australia used by airlines can be used for autolands. And MEL even has CATIIIa capability on RWY 16.

But back to the case in point - OOL - QF developed a couple of RNP approaches there a few years back. I'd guess that they're using them to advantage when they go in there on crappy days. So, yes it is frustrating that airport operators don't spend money on infrastructure, but it is just as frustrating that airlines don't spend money on sophisticated equipment options and training that would permit them to use low-minima RNP at non-ILS airports.

Otherwise, just follow Xanadu - if they can, anyone can...:sad:

Transition Layer 27th Jan 2012 04:37


Maybe just a good RNP AR approach would work
You mean the very same ones we QF drivers carry around in our Jepp charts and are approved to fly. Haven't had a close look at the Cooly charts but I'm pretty sure the minima would be in the order of 250-300' for a 0.30 RNP approach.

Too bad the QF Group considers Cooly a 'leisure' market and thus has 100% of flights operated by the Orange Star. Maybe on sh1tty days like today QF could pick up a bit of slack and run the 738s up there. Would be a good PR stunt if QF were the only ones getting in while everyone else is on the bus to/from Brissy.

As RAD_ALT_ALIVE says, you can whinge all day about the lack of infrastructure, but the reality is that the airlines involved should pull their fingers out and get RNP-AR approved and move into the 21st century.

Popgun 27th Jan 2012 04:49


pretty sure the minima would be in the order of 250-300' for a 0.30 RNP approach.
RNP 0.30

RWY 14 = 429' / 2200m and RWY 32 = 353' / 1800m

Jetstar drivers apparently issued with the approach plates...but yet to be trained. :ugh:

Slasher 27th Jan 2012 05:08

OOL was always a bitch of a place in the Wet and it looks like nothin's changed.


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:24.


Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.