Shock horror - Nigel has to wait.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: UAE
Age: 59
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just out of interest, what happened at LHR when the VS 340 did the gear up landing a couple of years back. What was the resulting action by ATC? and what action taken by any Skippers out there who may have been low on juice?
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: LHR/EGLL
Age: 45
Posts: 4,392
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
T5 cranes generally affect the westerly go-around slopes, but are a bit closer to the touchdown point if you're landing on easterlies! That's not including any other cranes that might be up and about around the airfield...quite common.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An interesting thread to be sure but I take exception to some of the more wide sweeping statements. I have seen 15 years of Longhaul and Ultra-Longhaul flying with a great many very experienced drivers including 8 years of ETOPS operations. Under our company fuel policy a diversion airport is not required unless it is below the alternate criteria and holding fuel cannot be carried. And if your nearest alternate is over 3 hours away that is a lot of holding fuel. If your destination is an island in the pacific you maybe committed some 2 or more hours out to a single runway in the middle of the night. It is a daily occurrence in the real world.
We are paid to manage the risks in real time in a fluid situation where S##T happens on a regular basis. However you cannot cover every possible occurrence every time you go to work. Like many things in aviation nothing is 100% certain and we can only do what is reasonable given the circumstances based on our own experience and that of others that have gone before us.
If you have the luxury of options then good luck to you, but sometimes in the real world you don’t have them, through no fault of your own. You have to play the cards you are dealt, not just the ones that you would like to have in your hand.
We are paid to manage the risks in real time in a fluid situation where S##T happens on a regular basis. However you cannot cover every possible occurrence every time you go to work. Like many things in aviation nothing is 100% certain and we can only do what is reasonable given the circumstances based on our own experience and that of others that have gone before us.
If you have the luxury of options then good luck to you, but sometimes in the real world you don’t have them, through no fault of your own. You have to play the cards you are dealt, not just the ones that you would like to have in your hand.
To all those jokers that routinely add to the planned fuel.
thank God you are not long haul.How would you possibly operate
singapore-Lhr in winter with minimum contingency and max TOW.
Are you offloading freight?pax before you leave your hotel on
every trip!
However,l always keep a note on how much fuel is burnt in the hold at LHR and adjust departure fuel accordingly(when l had the luxury on the 777).Contingency is added to take account of all
sorts of factors and as far as l am concerned not for the anticipated holding,which is not the gospel BA management are
spouting.
thank God you are not long haul.How would you possibly operate
singapore-Lhr in winter with minimum contingency and max TOW.
Are you offloading freight?pax before you leave your hotel on
every trip!
However,l always keep a note on how much fuel is burnt in the hold at LHR and adjust departure fuel accordingly(when l had the luxury on the 777).Contingency is added to take account of all
sorts of factors and as far as l am concerned not for the anticipated holding,which is not the gospel BA management are
spouting.
Join Date: Dec 1997
Location: Suffolk UK
Posts: 4,927
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gonzo could you give us a bit more information about the effect that T5's cranes have on Heathrow runway utilisation? If the departure runway is routinely closed to arrivals and we're not aware of it, we have been basing our stay/divert decisions on false data, which is fairly serious stuff. If I understand you correctly, we should be treating Heathrow as a single-runway airport for the moment.
I seem to remember reading (perhaps in the ATC forum?) that the procedure to demand the lowering of the cranes failed on one occasion due to a crane operator being uncontactable. Is this true? What notification have the airlines had of this procedure and its operational ramifications?
I seem to remember reading (perhaps in the ATC forum?) that the procedure to demand the lowering of the cranes failed on one occasion due to a crane operator being uncontactable. Is this true? What notification have the airlines had of this procedure and its operational ramifications?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: the Tearooms of Mars
Posts: 206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My goodness you’ve all been busy whilst I’ve been away. My original post sought only to highlight the poor airmanship displayed by arguing with ATC on a very busy frequency, but I see that the conversation has returned to the subject of fuel reserves approaching Heathrow. Having argued this out so many times on PPRuNe, I’ve come to the conclusion that there are some people who cannot be persuaded by rational argument so it’s an area I’ve long since left alone. They are convinced that civil aviation is run for their benefit and the sooner the CAA do as they’re told the better.
My view is simple. For the purposes of planning a public transport flight, you need a sufficient amount of fuel to reach your destination. When you reach the destination, you need a sufficient amount of fuel to reach another runway in the event that your primary is denied you. You need also plan a certain amount of fuel in case anything unexpected happens, for which you had not the prior knowledge to make provision.
If you know, or have reasonable suspicion to believe, that there may be delays inbound to your destination, then that fuel must be added to your planned burn. 15 minutes holding is like 60 track miles on your route of flight. You wouldn’t plan your LHR-JFK flight as far as Calverton or Deer Park and hope you had the fuel left to complete the flight, just as you wouldn’t plan your return to 10W and divert the last hundred miles. So why do it with holding?
Equally inbound to New York, would you consider a Canarsie 13L approach as a diversion from ILS 31R? You might be lucky and get a late switch to another runway such as VOR 22L at JFK, but I would not make the same assumption for LHR. And when you declare your emergency and cut into the inbound queue, what of the chap who had to make room for you?
This isn’t about diversions or action nearing fuel exhaustion. This is about airmanship. Where were all your airplanes this morning Mr Big?
My view is simple. For the purposes of planning a public transport flight, you need a sufficient amount of fuel to reach your destination. When you reach the destination, you need a sufficient amount of fuel to reach another runway in the event that your primary is denied you. You need also plan a certain amount of fuel in case anything unexpected happens, for which you had not the prior knowledge to make provision.
If you know, or have reasonable suspicion to believe, that there may be delays inbound to your destination, then that fuel must be added to your planned burn. 15 minutes holding is like 60 track miles on your route of flight. You wouldn’t plan your LHR-JFK flight as far as Calverton or Deer Park and hope you had the fuel left to complete the flight, just as you wouldn’t plan your return to 10W and divert the last hundred miles. So why do it with holding?
Equally inbound to New York, would you consider a Canarsie 13L approach as a diversion from ILS 31R? You might be lucky and get a late switch to another runway such as VOR 22L at JFK, but I would not make the same assumption for LHR. And when you declare your emergency and cut into the inbound queue, what of the chap who had to make room for you?
This isn’t about diversions or action nearing fuel exhaustion. This is about airmanship. Where were all your airplanes this morning Mr Big?
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: LHR/EGLL
Age: 45
Posts: 4,392
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Scroggs.....
I have no idea what, if any, info the airlines have about these cranes. I would say that there are always some cranes up...some affect landings on some runways, some don't. It varies over the day. From what I've seen, far more cranes affect landings on 09R and 09L than 27L or 27R, due to their position on the west of the airport. However, some infringe the 27L/R missed approach clearance slopes. We cannot forecast which cranes will request to operate in advance of AOSU (Aerodrome Ops) ringing us. I don't know of any current method flight crew inbound could learn about the availability of the departure runway for landings. Is that sort of info feasible to put on the ATIS? "Heathrow arrival info Alpha, landing runway 27L, runway 27R not available". Trouble comes when the cranes go up.....do we give a broadcast on the approach freqs? I don't know.
I have no idea what, if any, info the airlines have about these cranes. I would say that there are always some cranes up...some affect landings on some runways, some don't. It varies over the day. From what I've seen, far more cranes affect landings on 09R and 09L than 27L or 27R, due to their position on the west of the airport. However, some infringe the 27L/R missed approach clearance slopes. We cannot forecast which cranes will request to operate in advance of AOSU (Aerodrome Ops) ringing us. I don't know of any current method flight crew inbound could learn about the availability of the departure runway for landings. Is that sort of info feasible to put on the ATIS? "Heathrow arrival info Alpha, landing runway 27L, runway 27R not available". Trouble comes when the cranes go up.....do we give a broadcast on the approach freqs? I don't know.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: London
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gonzo
The advice/warning 'Departure R/W not available for landing' on the ATIS would do no harm, so I reckon it's worth including. At 1700 on a busy summers day I'd forgo info on the dew point if ATIS space is limited
The advice/warning 'Departure R/W not available for landing' on the ATIS would do no harm, so I reckon it's worth including. At 1700 on a busy summers day I'd forgo info on the dew point if ATIS space is limited
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: LHR/EGLL
Age: 45
Posts: 4,392
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airbus,
Impossible from our point of view, I'm afraid, we don't know in advance which cranes will be requested to be raised. At the end of the day they can be pulled down if we get enough notice, but it takes time, I'd reckon to be safe at least half an hour.
I'm not sure how much BAA/HAL know about which cranes will be up or down.
Impossible from our point of view, I'm afraid, we don't know in advance which cranes will be requested to be raised. At the end of the day they can be pulled down if we get enough notice, but it takes time, I'd reckon to be safe at least half an hour.
I'm not sure how much BAA/HAL know about which cranes will be up or down.
And how realistic is the "recall the crane within 15mins"? How many layers of management and organisational barriers are there between approach control (who I suppose are the authority who would initiate the process), apron ops, site management (I assume they are an outside contractor), crane contractor, and finally the do-ers who would move it (unless they are not unofficially working on something more profitable - after all, if they are to maintain a 15 minute readiness they will sit around a lot!) Does a real chain of command exist? Given the number of different contractors found on a major construction site, there is a danger of privatised railway syndrome setting in
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: LHR/EGLL
Age: 45
Posts: 4,392
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Steamchicken,
No idea. As explained earlier, one 'crane driver (?)' was out of the cab having his lunch, so couldn't answer the phone telling him to get the crane down.
We in the tower are the ATC agency involved. We just tell approach that 'Runway 27L is not available', and then switch the ILS off.
No idea. As explained earlier, one 'crane driver (?)' was out of the cab having his lunch, so couldn't answer the phone telling him to get the crane down.
We in the tower are the ATC agency involved. We just tell approach that 'Runway 27L is not available', and then switch the ILS off.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With respect to the lowering of cranes and the availability of the departure runway, the NOTAM/briefing made available to a Big Airline in the UK states, "LHR CRANES... all cranes infringing transitional or approach surfaces for RWY 09L/R will be lowered for ldg" (amongst a lot of nause about the exact position of HORKA and a trial clearance delivery procedure).
I don't think that this information really conveys the complexity of the problem in getting the cranes down, and may lead crews to believe that the airport is still 2 runways rather than effectively a single runway. Maybe ATC Ops need to have a look at AIS briefing?
Whether you are one who commits or one who doesn't, I strongly recommend a visit to LTCC. You will be surprised at how much you can learn there.
G W-H
I don't think that this information really conveys the complexity of the problem in getting the cranes down, and may lead crews to believe that the airport is still 2 runways rather than effectively a single runway. Maybe ATC Ops need to have a look at AIS briefing?
Whether you are one who commits or one who doesn't, I strongly recommend a visit to LTCC. You will be surprised at how much you can learn there.
G W-H
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 104
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gonzo
Since this is Class A NOTAM that appears to be inachievable, is there any chance you might seek clarification?
OTH : FROM 04/03/28 18:13 TO 04/12/31 23:59 EST A0884/04
E)MULTIPLE CRANES IN TERMINAL 5 CONSTRUCTION SITE ADJOINING RWY
09L/09R THR UP TO 246FT AMSL. ALL CRANES INFRINGING TRANSITIONAL OR
APCH SURFACES FOR RWY 09L/09R WILL BE LOWERED FOR LANDING ACFT. ALL
CRANES INFRINGING TAKE OFF CLIMB SURFACES FOR 27L/27R WILL BE LOWERED
FOR DEP ACFT. PUBLISHED LANDING OR TAKE OFF DATA IS NOT AFFECTED BY
ANY OF THE CRANES. OUTSIDE NORMAL OPERATIONS, ALL CRANES CAN BE
LOWERED WITHIN 15 MINS IF REQUIRED.
Since this is Class A NOTAM that appears to be inachievable, is there any chance you might seek clarification?
OTH : FROM 04/03/28 18:13 TO 04/12/31 23:59 EST A0884/04
E)MULTIPLE CRANES IN TERMINAL 5 CONSTRUCTION SITE ADJOINING RWY
09L/09R THR UP TO 246FT AMSL. ALL CRANES INFRINGING TRANSITIONAL OR
APCH SURFACES FOR RWY 09L/09R WILL BE LOWERED FOR LANDING ACFT. ALL
CRANES INFRINGING TAKE OFF CLIMB SURFACES FOR 27L/27R WILL BE LOWERED
FOR DEP ACFT. PUBLISHED LANDING OR TAKE OFF DATA IS NOT AFFECTED BY
ANY OF THE CRANES. OUTSIDE NORMAL OPERATIONS, ALL CRANES CAN BE
LOWERED WITHIN 15 MINS IF REQUIRED.
Couldonlyaffordafiver
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: The Twilight Zone near 30W
Posts: 1,934
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fair cop, L337, you're right.
Thinking about it, once you're at the holding fix you can bin the second runway, although I've always thought fairly hard before doing that. Worst case I suppose would then be landing on the second runway using your reserves, having yelled the M word, knowing that any infringement of the runway would be cleared 15 mins after your shout and that you have 30 mins reserve. Not sure I'd like to justify that one in the office.
All within SOPs though, I think.
Thinking about it, once you're at the holding fix you can bin the second runway, although I've always thought fairly hard before doing that. Worst case I suppose would then be landing on the second runway using your reserves, having yelled the M word, knowing that any infringement of the runway would be cleared 15 mins after your shout and that you have 30 mins reserve. Not sure I'd like to justify that one in the office.
All within SOPs though, I think.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Human Factor
I think you have indeed summarised the worst case scenario. However, whilst we refer to the situation as being "committed to Heathrow", in effect you are committed to one approach with no ability to divert. There is no need for that approach to be to Heathrow.
For example, if you are holding and committed at LAM and 09L is blocked, rather than use the "M" word and wait while they try to get the cranes down, you may as well try for SS. In a similar way you could try MH from BIG, KK from OCK and GW from BNN.
I am not saying it will be easy and you will have to buy beer for the boys and girls in TC for the rest of your natural life, but it goes to show that being "committed to Heathrow" doesn't mean that you have to land there.
Just as an aside, don't forget that the "E" in EAT is "expected" not "exact".
Just some thoughts
G W-H
I think you have indeed summarised the worst case scenario. However, whilst we refer to the situation as being "committed to Heathrow", in effect you are committed to one approach with no ability to divert. There is no need for that approach to be to Heathrow.
For example, if you are holding and committed at LAM and 09L is blocked, rather than use the "M" word and wait while they try to get the cranes down, you may as well try for SS. In a similar way you could try MH from BIG, KK from OCK and GW from BNN.
I am not saying it will be easy and you will have to buy beer for the boys and girls in TC for the rest of your natural life, but it goes to show that being "committed to Heathrow" doesn't mean that you have to land there.
Just as an aside, don't forget that the "E" in EAT is "expected" not "exact".
Just some thoughts
G W-H
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
G W-H
Don't totally agree...
You are correct, that whilst at, say LAM, and given the airfields around London, from each hold, LHR fuel will get you to one or more airfields.
However, once you have started the approach from LAM, at some stage (and realistically fairly soon after), you are now genuinely committed to LHR if you wish to touchdown with Reserve Fuel.
I am reading this debate in a "wider" context as well. Why confine oneself to LHR here? JAR allows such committing to occur at any airfield, even single runway, in defined circumstances. And there need to be no "alternatives" such as you mention.
If people are unhappy with the committing principle, there is only one solution to this whole dilemma. The PAN/Mayday call should occur when it is likely/definite that you will land with less than Reserves + Diversion. Only this would ensure that aircraft are landing with the fuel that some here expect, the PAX probably expect, and ATC seem to expect.
The issue of fuel on departure, that 411A and everyone advocate, is a bit of a red herring. Its the issue of what we do as the fuel runs down that matters i.e. at what Fuel State we divert, shout at ATC, call PAN/Mayday etc. It's no good saying "I'm alright - I left with an extra 45mins holding" if you don't know how to deal with it when that's gone.
Just some thoughts...
NoD
but it goes to show that being "committed to Heathrow" doesn't mean that you have to land there
You are correct, that whilst at, say LAM, and given the airfields around London, from each hold, LHR fuel will get you to one or more airfields.
However, once you have started the approach from LAM, at some stage (and realistically fairly soon after), you are now genuinely committed to LHR if you wish to touchdown with Reserve Fuel.
I am reading this debate in a "wider" context as well. Why confine oneself to LHR here? JAR allows such committing to occur at any airfield, even single runway, in defined circumstances. And there need to be no "alternatives" such as you mention.
If people are unhappy with the committing principle, there is only one solution to this whole dilemma. The PAN/Mayday call should occur when it is likely/definite that you will land with less than Reserves + Diversion. Only this would ensure that aircraft are landing with the fuel that some here expect, the PAX probably expect, and ATC seem to expect.
The issue of fuel on departure, that 411A and everyone advocate, is a bit of a red herring. Its the issue of what we do as the fuel runs down that matters i.e. at what Fuel State we divert, shout at ATC, call PAN/Mayday etc. It's no good saying "I'm alright - I left with an extra 45mins holding" if you don't know how to deal with it when that's gone.
Just some thoughts...
NoD