Gatwick-Heathrow Airlink
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Colchester
Age: 67
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gatwick-Heathrow Airlink
Just further info on a couple of threads on the above...
I worked for BAH when the service was set up and joined the service as a ground engineer soon after in 1978. The aircraft was owned by BAA as was then, crewed and maintained by BAH with passenger handling and support by BCal. It operated 10 round trips a day, mostly full in the mornings but frequently had birthday trips for children (and their dads) in the afternoon.
The Senior Officer was indeed a mormon priest, I always remember him declining offers of coffee and tea supplies from BCal just because he didn't drink it never mind the rest of us.
One peculiarity of its livery was it was up-side down to the rest of the BCal fleet as the S61-N had a tendancy to turn turtle if it ditched in rough seas and a black belly would not be seen, not that there was much of that between LGW and LHR.
Initially it used to use the full flight path at LHR joining about 2 miles out. This soon stopped when it caused some concerns as its top speed was less than the fully laden 747's stalling speed following behind. The ATCO's finally conceded and allowed it to approach from the south. This did however have its issues as it meant crossing 28L in between landing aircraft but the turbulance could quite possibly have flipped it if the pilot was too quick.
As it had a maintenance crew 24/7 it was one of the best looked after aircraft going and was washed ever day, mind you it neaded it as it spent so much time at idle on the ground the sides were covered in Jet-A1 residue.
I worked for BAH when the service was set up and joined the service as a ground engineer soon after in 1978. The aircraft was owned by BAA as was then, crewed and maintained by BAH with passenger handling and support by BCal. It operated 10 round trips a day, mostly full in the mornings but frequently had birthday trips for children (and their dads) in the afternoon.
The Senior Officer was indeed a mormon priest, I always remember him declining offers of coffee and tea supplies from BCal just because he didn't drink it never mind the rest of us.
One peculiarity of its livery was it was up-side down to the rest of the BCal fleet as the S61-N had a tendancy to turn turtle if it ditched in rough seas and a black belly would not be seen, not that there was much of that between LGW and LHR.
Initially it used to use the full flight path at LHR joining about 2 miles out. This soon stopped when it caused some concerns as its top speed was less than the fully laden 747's stalling speed following behind. The ATCO's finally conceded and allowed it to approach from the south. This did however have its issues as it meant crossing 28L in between landing aircraft but the turbulance could quite possibly have flipped it if the pilot was too quick.
As it had a maintenance crew 24/7 it was one of the best looked after aircraft going and was washed ever day, mind you it neaded it as it spent so much time at idle on the ground the sides were covered in Jet-A1 residue.
I flew in it just once, on a Saturday evening from Heathrow to Gatwick. It operated from a series of porta-cabins (or so it seemed!) near where the current stand 301 is located.
I can remember a briefing just before we trooped out to the flight, and the guy giving the briefing advising a gent that he would have to remove his hat! The gent was a little upset at this, because it was keeping his wig in place!
There was also a lady with a child in a push-chair, and I remember seeing the groundie walking across the ramp with the push chair under one arm and the child under the other, and the mother chasing behind. This was all because it was loaded/unloaded 'rotors-running'.
I was quite surprised to see just how many big houses with their wn swimming-pools there were in Surrey.
I can remember a briefing just before we trooped out to the flight, and the guy giving the briefing advising a gent that he would have to remove his hat! The gent was a little upset at this, because it was keeping his wig in place!
There was also a lady with a child in a push-chair, and I remember seeing the groundie walking across the ramp with the push chair under one arm and the child under the other, and the mother chasing behind. This was all because it was loaded/unloaded 'rotors-running'.
I was quite surprised to see just how many big houses with their wn swimming-pools there were in Surrey.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: South Wales
Age: 51
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How useful would that service be nowdays?
With the M25 so busy, all it takes is one small accident for the whole motorway to become a huge car park!
Imagine travelling between Heathrow and Gatwick in 15 minutes, that has to be anyones idea of heaven!!
With the M25 so busy, all it takes is one small accident for the whole motorway to become a huge car park!
Imagine travelling between Heathrow and Gatwick in 15 minutes, that has to be anyones idea of heaven!!
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Onboard the Newaer
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I had the pleasure of flying on it sometime about 1982 from LHR to LGW. Staff standby fare was £4.00 oneway I believe (ripoff!!) 
I had to get to a meeting in a pub somewhere and all my mates were impressed by me arriving by chopper!! Never got to join the 1500 ft Club though! 
I had to get to a meeting in a pub somewhere and all my mates were impressed by me arriving by chopper!! Never got to join the 1500 ft Club though!
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: England
Posts: 762
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think it's ATC callsign was "Link 1" to LHR and "Link 2" returning to LGW where it parked on stand 1, adjacent South Pier. Normally used the Alpha hold area for take-off/landing.
I remember occasionally a Bristows? S61 replaced it when presumably in for maintenance.
I remember occasionally a Bristows? S61 replaced it when presumably in for maintenance.
The people who planned the route between the two control zones designed it purely in environmental terms and did not take account of ANY other activity in this airspace 'because it was open FIR'. On the original route via Oxshott, this was OK, but when they re-routed it further west near Brooklands and Fairoaks, all sorts of conflictions arose, and on one occasion when the pilot wanted to descend and was told if he did, he would find himself in confliction with a BAC 111 in the PAR pattern for Farnborough, he got most irate; he simply couldn't understand there might be IFR traffic operating on 'his' route!
Having said that, I think it would be beneficial to re-examine the concept in the light of the fact it was terminated when the M25 opened (on the grounds it was no longer necessary), but nowadays as has been said, this stretch of M25 is so congested, an aerial link would take a small amount of pressure off it.
Having said that, I think it would be beneficial to re-examine the concept in the light of the fact it was terminated when the M25 opened (on the grounds it was no longer necessary), but nowadays as has been said, this stretch of M25 is so congested, an aerial link would take a small amount of pressure off it.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: South of Penge
Age: 74
Posts: 625
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anybody remember the predecessor to this?
I cannot remember the details but an innovative operator used to run an Islander between the two Airfields , IIRC operating off a small piece of redundant taxiway at Heathrow.
I expect it it was such a good idea that he got pushed out by the big boys.
I cannot remember the details but an innovative operator used to run an Islander between the two Airfields , IIRC operating off a small piece of redundant taxiway at Heathrow.
I expect it it was such a good idea that he got pushed out by the big boys.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
does Westward Airways ring a bell?
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
on the page link above there is a further embedded PDF link with the whole history of the airlink - very interesting reading
even mentions PPRuNe
even mentions PPRuNe
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
<<The ATCO's finally conceded and allowed it to approach from the south. >>
Ho! Ho! You must be joking, of course. The ATCOs had to follow procedures laid down by the airport authority. We wanted it out of the way ASAP and, when weather permitted, frequently "bent" the rules by letting it air taxi to it's stand and later take-off from its stand, or the adjacent taxiway. We would also let it land on 27L when possible instead of the appointed spot on the 05 threshold to save it taxying time. There was no problem getting it across the runway as landing "heavy" jets were firmly on the ground by the time the Link crossed, by which time Vortex was not an issue.
Once we got things sorted out it was no real problem to ATC. The relationship between us and the Link blokes was pretty good: An ATC colleague of mine went on a "fam flight" on the Link. When it landed back at Heathrow with no pax, on the way out the flight attendant, who was somewhat pale, pointed accusingly at him saying: "It was you flying it, wasn't it??!!" Of course, I cannot comment either way....
Ho! Ho! You must be joking, of course. The ATCOs had to follow procedures laid down by the airport authority. We wanted it out of the way ASAP and, when weather permitted, frequently "bent" the rules by letting it air taxi to it's stand and later take-off from its stand, or the adjacent taxiway. We would also let it land on 27L when possible instead of the appointed spot on the 05 threshold to save it taxying time. There was no problem getting it across the runway as landing "heavy" jets were firmly on the ground by the time the Link crossed, by which time Vortex was not an issue.
Once we got things sorted out it was no real problem to ATC. The relationship between us and the Link blokes was pretty good: An ATC colleague of mine went on a "fam flight" on the Link. When it landed back at Heathrow with no pax, on the way out the flight attendant, who was somewhat pale, pointed accusingly at him saying: "It was you flying it, wasn't it??!!" Of course, I cannot comment either way....
Last edited by HEATHROW DIRECTOR; 5th Mar 2008 at 11:47.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: London
Posts: 311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Air Links between Gatwick and Heathrow Article
Yesterday I received an email from a Lady in Thailand thanking me for the Article mentioned above and asking some specific SLF type questions.
Today I drop into PPRUNE and discover Hairy Fool started a new Airlink Thread.
Both of these unconnected, but coincidental events have made me think that it is time to update the PDF So:
Opssys
Today I drop into PPRUNE and discover Hairy Fool started a new Airlink Thread.
Both of these unconnected, but coincidental events have made me think that it is time to update the PDF So:
- Does anyone have an image(s) of the Airlink Timetable
- Any Information I have missed off that should be included
- Any Comments on how the Article could be improved (I am going to regret asking that )
Opssys
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: It wasn't me, I wasn't there, wrong country ;-)
Age: 79
Posts: 1,757
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GLINK
Just loved GLINK, I was LGW based but had to CMCL out of LHR to out station base, so commuted on GLINK. M25 sucks so it should be brough back, that's if it can properly operate with verti out/in at both locations.
I was shown some of the complaints lodged re 'noise pollution', it turned out that some of these had come from a certain 'Capt Camberly Golf Course' who's hobby was polling a VC10 for Imperial!
I was shown some of the complaints lodged re 'noise pollution', it turned out that some of these had come from a certain 'Capt Camberly Golf Course' who's hobby was polling a VC10 for Imperial!
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: London
Posts: 311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh Merlinxx, why did you bring up the noise complaints, just when I was having a good day.
The Information was (unfortunately) no surprise, but for the last 20 minutes I have been muttering 'bl**dy Surrey NIMBY b*st*rds' under my breath. Fortunately the 'Dried Frog Pills' have kicked in and instead of Hating them, I'm just mildly irritated.
On a serious note, when I was researching the Article, I got the distinct impression that re-establishing the Airlink was politically a NO, NO and would operationally be a lot more difficult to handle at the LHR end today, so even if the NIMBYs could be defeated, the logistics would be against it.
But it would solve so many problems for Business Passengers Interlining between the Airports (plus the odd inter-airport Commuter).
Finally - G-LINK Configuration - I have seen 28 Seats quoted in several places, however my fragile memory says 23 Seats, anyone know for certain?
Opssys
I was shown some of the complaints lodged re 'noise pollution', it turned out that some of these had come from a certain 'Capt Camberly Golf Course' who's hobby was polling a VC10 for Imperial!
On a serious note, when I was researching the Article, I got the distinct impression that re-establishing the Airlink was politically a NO, NO and would operationally be a lot more difficult to handle at the LHR end today, so even if the NIMBYs could be defeated, the logistics would be against it.
But it would solve so many problems for Business Passengers Interlining between the Airports (plus the odd inter-airport Commuter).
Finally - G-LINK Configuration - I have seen 28 Seats quoted in several places, however my fragile memory says 23 Seats, anyone know for certain?
Opssys
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Colchester
Age: 67
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How many seats
The basic aircraft was capable of holding 28 seats but because of the baggage hold config it lost a few. The standard hold was under the floor inside the large 2 part door behind the cockpit but this was not big enough for all the junk passangers wanted to carry (try getting skis' under the floor). So an extra wall was built around the floor hatch up to the ceiling closing the door off from the passenger cabin. This allowed the BCal baggage handlers to stack more in.
The only thing is this made it lose 4 seats making it 24. I think you may be right at 23 however because as it was carrying ordinary passengers instead of trained oilies they left the seat out beside the emergency exit near the tail. Otherwise the only unobstructed exit was the drop down steps because of the extended baggage bay wall closing of the big door.
The only thing is this made it lose 4 seats making it 24. I think you may be right at 23 however because as it was carrying ordinary passengers instead of trained oilies they left the seat out beside the emergency exit near the tail. Otherwise the only unobstructed exit was the drop down steps because of the extended baggage bay wall closing of the big door.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Colchester
Age: 67
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Notes
Phileas Fogg
You must have had some lay-in, we used to start up at 06:15 for the position to the airfield and the 1st flight at 06:45
Geezers
Hats weren’t the only things that went flying around, I remember one of the baggage handlers dropping a case and us in the ground crew chasing ladies smalls around the pan.
I also had to carry a child to the aircraft, I think he was so scared of me (big ugly bloke with a hairy face and sunglasses) that he forgot about being scared of the noise from the rotors, poor sod.
Heathrow Director
My apologies, I realise that the ATCO's at the pointed end didn't want it on the normal approach either, more that the hierarchy were somewhat conservative at 1st.
It wasn't the landing aircraft so much more the jet wash from those going full chat on their way out.
Opssys
Don't remember the actual timetable but it did one flight at around 06:45, getting back about 45mins later. Stopped so the aircrew could have their wheetybangs then 4 flights till lunch at 1 hour turnarounds. After lunch it was 3 flights and stop for tea (all very civilised) and finally 2 more trips before it went home to bed. This makes 10 round trips a day.
Merlinxx
We received someone’s vest in the post complaining about the oil stain on it stating it was synthetic mineral aircraft oil and as the link was over head it must be our fault. They were right about what it was except the S61 did not use any form of synthetic oil.
Couple of other memories...
One night it was snowing heavily on its last return the aircrew could not see the taxiway lights. I had to walk out to the corner of the pan with a pair of illuminated marshalling wands to let it find me with its night sun and then walk it back to its position on the gate. Later I was told that ground control were doing their nut about some idiot walking around in the dark airside! Who me....
After the brekky stop we engineers used to dash over to the BAH base to get post and equipment for the lunchtime shutdown. On our return the aircraft already on the pan and the tanker driver standing there with one of its wheels under his arm. It turned out that as the aircraft was approach the pan on the ground it was overtaken by one of its wheels because a bearing had collapsed and the wheel fell off. The pilot kept it light on its (remaining) wheels to unload the passengers and then flew it back to the engineering base. There we talked him to land directly on to a jack to prevent undue side load on the undercarriage, fitted a new leg and back into service.
You must have had some lay-in, we used to start up at 06:15 for the position to the airfield and the 1st flight at 06:45
Geezers
Hats weren’t the only things that went flying around, I remember one of the baggage handlers dropping a case and us in the ground crew chasing ladies smalls around the pan.
I also had to carry a child to the aircraft, I think he was so scared of me (big ugly bloke with a hairy face and sunglasses) that he forgot about being scared of the noise from the rotors, poor sod.
Heathrow Director
My apologies, I realise that the ATCO's at the pointed end didn't want it on the normal approach either, more that the hierarchy were somewhat conservative at 1st.
It wasn't the landing aircraft so much more the jet wash from those going full chat on their way out.
Opssys
Don't remember the actual timetable but it did one flight at around 06:45, getting back about 45mins later. Stopped so the aircrew could have their wheetybangs then 4 flights till lunch at 1 hour turnarounds. After lunch it was 3 flights and stop for tea (all very civilised) and finally 2 more trips before it went home to bed. This makes 10 round trips a day.
Merlinxx
We received someone’s vest in the post complaining about the oil stain on it stating it was synthetic mineral aircraft oil and as the link was over head it must be our fault. They were right about what it was except the S61 did not use any form of synthetic oil.
Couple of other memories...
One night it was snowing heavily on its last return the aircrew could not see the taxiway lights. I had to walk out to the corner of the pan with a pair of illuminated marshalling wands to let it find me with its night sun and then walk it back to its position on the gate. Later I was told that ground control were doing their nut about some idiot walking around in the dark airside! Who me....
After the brekky stop we engineers used to dash over to the BAH base to get post and equipment for the lunchtime shutdown. On our return the aircraft already on the pan and the tanker driver standing there with one of its wheels under his arm. It turned out that as the aircraft was approach the pan on the ground it was overtaken by one of its wheels because a bearing had collapsed and the wheel fell off. The pilot kept it light on its (remaining) wheels to unload the passengers and then flew it back to the engineering base. There we talked him to land directly on to a jack to prevent undue side load on the undercarriage, fitted a new leg and back into service.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: London
Posts: 311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hairy Fool.
Many thanks for the update on config, timings and the 'incidents' (any more?). Before BAH stepped back from the Operation and BCH became the Aircrew/Engineering providers, I had stopped being a real person and become a suit (although I did escape to the real world occasionally).
So my personal memories are of a true JV running a tight operation to a demanding schedule requiring extremely high despatch reliability and it worked a darn sight better than anyone could have expected, because of the people in the core 'Airlink Team' were determined to make it so!
Opssys.
Many thanks for the update on config, timings and the 'incidents' (any more?). Before BAH stepped back from the Operation and BCH became the Aircrew/Engineering providers, I had stopped being a real person and become a suit (although I did escape to the real world occasionally).
So my personal memories are of a true JV running a tight operation to a demanding schedule requiring extremely high despatch reliability and it worked a darn sight better than anyone could have expected, because of the people in the core 'Airlink Team' were determined to make it so!
Opssys.