Concorde Go-Around
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I operated with some of the Cabin Crew yesterday...
Gist of it was - Olympic failed to clear in time, Concorde went around from ~400'. Had come from BGI, so even shorter of fuel than usual (?). Mutterings about some further (minor?) problem meant they / ATC got it on the ground fairly quickly....
The Cabin Crew gave more details than I've given above, but am in no position to verify these, so will leave it at that!
NoD
Gist of it was - Olympic failed to clear in time, Concorde went around from ~400'. Had come from BGI, so even shorter of fuel than usual (?). Mutterings about some further (minor?) problem meant they / ATC got it on the ground fairly quickly....
The Cabin Crew gave more details than I've given above, but am in no position to verify these, so will leave it at that!
NoD
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Camp X-Ray
Posts: 2,135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are you sure it was Sunday? I thought the BGI operated on a Saturday, which would tie in with a definite Concorde go-around on Saturday night when 09R was in use for landing. That was just one of a number of go-arounds due to a blocked runway that evening, and at least two of them declared emergencies due to low fuel after the go-around.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Near Heathrow
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From Airliners.net
I think this knowlegeable response by 'Atco' should help!
RE: Heathrow Go- Arounds
Username: Atco
From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2001, 119 posts, RR: 51
Reply: 8
Posted Tue Jul 29 2003 12:04:59 UTC+1 and read 578 times:
I can shed some light on the situation on Saturday as I was at work in the Terminal Control ops room.
The day started on Westerlies, however as the wind changed Easterly ops became necessary.
That normally means 09L landing and 09R departing. As 09R is not used as the landing runway during normal ops it is not configured as such.
Due to the construction of T5 and the associated infrastructure, there are now large cranes under the 09L approach building the M25 link road, and this meant that 09L did not provide adequate obstacle clearance for arrivals and it was decided that 09L would be departing runway and 09R the arrival runway.
This caused numerous problems as 09R does not have lead off lights from the runway onto the taxiways, and planes simply stopped on the runway unsure of where to vacate. Compounding this probelm was that work in progress meant Block 85 could not be used to vacate the runway, which was where many aircraft were coming to a stop. Even with 6 mile spacing there were inevitably some go-arounds. Even Concorde went around, and then declared a mayday at 10dme on its second approach. Of course it landed without incident, but the delays, combined with a bit of weather avoidance created an interesting day all round.
Regards
Garry
I think this knowlegeable response by 'Atco' should help!
RE: Heathrow Go- Arounds
Username: Atco
From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2001, 119 posts, RR: 51
Reply: 8
Posted Tue Jul 29 2003 12:04:59 UTC+1 and read 578 times:
I can shed some light on the situation on Saturday as I was at work in the Terminal Control ops room.
The day started on Westerlies, however as the wind changed Easterly ops became necessary.
That normally means 09L landing and 09R departing. As 09R is not used as the landing runway during normal ops it is not configured as such.
Due to the construction of T5 and the associated infrastructure, there are now large cranes under the 09L approach building the M25 link road, and this meant that 09L did not provide adequate obstacle clearance for arrivals and it was decided that 09L would be departing runway and 09R the arrival runway.
This caused numerous problems as 09R does not have lead off lights from the runway onto the taxiways, and planes simply stopped on the runway unsure of where to vacate. Compounding this probelm was that work in progress meant Block 85 could not be used to vacate the runway, which was where many aircraft were coming to a stop. Even with 6 mile spacing there were inevitably some go-arounds. Even Concorde went around, and then declared a mayday at 10dme on its second approach. Of course it landed without incident, but the delays, combined with a bit of weather avoidance created an interesting day all round.
Regards
Garry
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 531
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was the one who sent the bird around. A combination of events led to the olympic being unable to vacate at his chosen turn Blk 85. The pilot tried his best to make 86 in time however with the poor weather and the speed of concorde on the approach the go-around became inevitable.
Sounded and looked good from the tower.
If anyone knows the pilots of the conc on saturday put them in touch as i owe them a beer!
Sounded and looked good from the tower.
If anyone knows the pilots of the conc on saturday put them in touch as i owe them a beer!
)
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Stuck in the middle...
Posts: 1,638
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
The 'Airport' show on UK Horizons TV channel once had a bit from LHR tower where they sent Conc around off 27L when someone (I think an MS A340?) didn't get off in time... Think it was the same episode they got Tony B. away in a nice grey VC10.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Daventry UK
Posts: 487
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Could someone advise on what I have seen described (In the US) as a "snowstorm of paperwork" following a declaration of emergency? ( Carduelis: I presume Concorde declared an emergency, rather than actually calling Mayday, which I would have expected to see on News at Ten?)
It crossed my mind recently when delivering my Warrior to maintenance with minimum fuel (a field with a lot of uses where runway obstruction is not impossible) - I had sufficient fuel for return to base, but only just.
I think a lot of GA pilots would stop short of telling the truth about their fuel position for fear of the consequences and of course there is the recent case in the US of a pilot running out of fuel after a flight plan dispute.
It crossed my mind recently when delivering my Warrior to maintenance with minimum fuel (a field with a lot of uses where runway obstruction is not impossible) - I had sufficient fuel for return to base, but only just.
I think a lot of GA pilots would stop short of telling the truth about their fuel position for fear of the consequences and of course there is the recent case in the US of a pilot running out of fuel after a flight plan dispute.
Couldonlyaffordafiver
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: The Twilight Zone near 30W
Posts: 1,934
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the UK, declaring an emergency means either a Mayday or Pan call. Anything else and ATC are perfectly at liberty to ignore you.
Within Big Airways, there is a requirement to declare a Pan if you think you are likely to land with less than minimum fuel, or a Mayday if you are certain that this will be the case.
As far as paperwork goes, from a flight crew point of view, you are required to file an MOR (or company equivalent) and hand in the flight documents (PLOG, loadsheet, etc.).
Within Big Airways, there is a requirement to declare a Pan if you think you are likely to land with less than minimum fuel, or a Mayday if you are certain that this will be the case.
As far as paperwork goes, from a flight crew point of view, you are required to file an MOR (or company equivalent) and hand in the flight documents (PLOG, loadsheet, etc.).
Due to the construction of T5 and the associated infrastructure, there are now large cranes under the 09L approach building the M25 link road, and this meant that 09L did not provide adequate obstacle clearance for arrivals and it was decided that 09L would be departing runway and 09R the arrival runway.
This caused numerous problems...
This caused numerous problems...
