Wikiposts
Search
Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Runway State

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 6th Aug 2001, 20:59
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 929
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Arrow Runway State

Can anybody come up with a reason for Gatwick not wishing to give their Rwy State over the air. I had to ask four times landing in heavy rain the other day. Two calls were totaly ignored by the Twr; finaly I got we don't have that!.
Funny the water was about an inch deep!
Is this a liability issue.
Just asking?
IcePack is offline  
Old 6th Aug 2001, 23:53
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Exclamation

Hi Icepack.

The problem is that to get on official runway state including breaking action GAL need access to the runway for a mumeter run. It takes 10 minutes in each direction, uninterupted, which therefore has an impact on movement rates. They are very reluctant to do that unless they have to which usually means only in snow or known runway icing conditions.

This came up on another forum. I believe for some of you that means you have to assume the b/a is poor which impacts your landing criteria? Doesn't seem quite right somehow.
Christopher James is offline  
Old 7th Aug 2001, 01:18
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 608
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Post

I appreciate the problems faced by controllers in the towers at these busy airports, but why don't they give an unoffical observation?

I know they are, in some cases, some distance from the actual runway, but using the good old "Unofficial Observation, Pilot of preceding 737 reports runway surface as flooded" (etc) might help.

Otherwise, yes. It is the airfield operators responsibility to report on its satte, and a controller is right worried in these litigious times.

Personally, I think it is piss poor that HAL/GAL seem more worried about the declared landing rate.
Bright-Ling is offline  
Old 7th Aug 2001, 02:23
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,915
Received 4 Likes on 2 Posts
Post

And if an A/C slides off the R/W, it will do wonders for the landing rate! Appreciate the difficulties in busy periods, but agree an "Unofficial Ob." is fine for starters.

Official Ob. could then be done on an on/off basis, between movements. GripTester, or mumeter not required just to give damp/wet/flooded etc. Stick it on the ATIS, job done.
spekesoftly is offline  
Old 7th Aug 2001, 02:59
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Near Stalyvegas
Age: 78
Posts: 2,022
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thumbs down

A "totally" unofficial observation/response
At "Most" MAJOR airfields, the runway 'state' is determined by a "Runway Inspection". If it p*sses down, and the "Declared" r/w state is "Dry, dry, dry",
We [as ATC] can do nowt about it. [As you look out of the "Tower" and do not [neccessarily] agree with the "Official" obs, then it is "TSB" Tuff S*it Baby".
At EGCC/MAN we do pass a[totally (unofficial) observasion] wx state
we aim to please, it keeps the cleaners happy
chiglet is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.