Landing on a 9000' runway after a 747 turning off on a taxiway half way down planning to continue to GA terminal at end, you want to remain well above until well past any exhaust.
There's quite a bit of turbulence behind the monsters when they have to make a 135 degree turn, even a hundred feet up. |
Originally Posted by Fuji Abound
I struggle with the comments about wasting the controllers time, particularly if it is for a jolly
1. The controller is getting paid to do a job, and if you are paying the landing fee you are contributing to his salary. If the airport authority agrees you are paying your way commercially frankly the controllers views are pretty irrelevant. |
It is total b*lls for ATC or anyone else to suggest that GA should not use large airports since GA is all about going on a 'jolly'.
90% of all aircraft passengers are flying on a 'jolly', usually holidays. I can appreciate the operational difficulties of mixing small, low speed aircraft with large high speed ones, but let's lose the 'GA is just for fun' criticism. Virtually all flying falls under this heading. (And what's wrong with having fun anyway...?) |
A look from the other side
I have an apology: I'm not a pilot (though I'm thinking of becoming one). However, I can see it from the airport's point of view.
Whilst aviation can be fun, a major airport is a business. The holidaymakers are just passengers, the air traffic controllers' customers are the airlines. If an airline is delayed to slot in a GA plane, they can put a lot of pressure on both the airport and the air traffic control service. Don't forget that if an airline is severely delayed European Law means that airlines have to pay compensation. You may be interested in: http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/youandyo...6_05_thu.shtml and http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4598786.stm I suspect the fees NATS charges airlines is a lot more than the ones it charges GA pilots (so they have priority). I remember hearing a discussion on the radio about traffic flow on roads. One of the things that was said was that the closer you are to capacity the bigger the impact of any disruption. I hear that most major airports operate at close to full capacity to maximise their profits. I remember in the phone in for another You and Yours programme: http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/youandyo...6_01_tue.shtml one of the contributers said that one of the major airports had at least 9 heavy jets stacked at any one time and improving the flow management of that would reduce the fuel/time airlines needed. I hope I haven't annoyed anyone. All I'm just saying I can see the other side of the coin. Ps. You'll need Real Audio if you want to listen to the radio programmes concerned. |
As part of our training here in Western Australia, we had to come into Perth Airport (OK, not as busy as a European or American large airport;) ) to qualify us to fly in controlled airspace. This always involved a low pass (300ft pull out) rather than a touch and go. It was interesting the different perspective on that big old runway. Couple of times ended up orbitting while waiting for one of the big boys to come in.
Never had a problem with ATC, they were always friendly and keen to help. Only time I struggled was when there was an Asian trainee on and I was REALLY struggling to understand her. |
Originally Posted by Crashed&Burned
90% of all aircraft passengers are flying on a 'jolly', usually holidays. I can appreciate the operational difficulties of mixing small, low speed aircraft with large high speed ones, but let's lose the 'GA is just for fun' criticism. Virtually all flying falls under this heading. (And what's wrong with having fun anyway...?)
Skyhawk. |
All times are GMT. The time now is 11:11. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.