Overreporting on GA MAN
 

http://www.manchesteronline.co.uk/ne...ory=82617.html

"A British Airways jet was forced to climb and bank steeply moments from landing to avoid another aircraft waiting to take off at Manchester Airport.

The BA service from Glasgow made a sharp right turn and had to "fly round" when the BWIA aircraft taxied on to runway one on its journey to Port of Spain."

This is an extract from a news report, yet again overegging the pudding on go arounds, the rest of the report is no better, and since when has MAN had a runway "one"?

Didn`t look very exciting to me, a heavy A340 a bit slow on the take off roll and caused a BA 737 to go around no panic just a standard go around with a right turn to keep clear of other traffic

Golf India Bravo

Foxmouth
Man has had a runway 1 since runway 2 was constructed.

I was there on Friday morning and it was as has been said, a slow to depart 340 which resulted in a "BOG STANDARD" go around.
A case of over dramatic reporting yet again

Sorry should have read Foxmoth. No offence intended

A BA service from Glasgow? I think not. (Citiexpress)

A BA B737 from Glasgow? Surely some mistake here?
BA do not at the moment operate from GLA to MAN and only operate B737s into MAN from LGW (occasionally LHR.)

Pedantic? ME??:*

Media interest in MAN has been somewhat over zealous for many moons. I remember my father fending off a certain excitable reporter on more than one occassion when he worked for a now defunct carrier as Station Manager. These chaps still have willing cohorts employed in various positions around the airport, all happy to earn a few quid pushing stories of gallantry and ineptitude. It fills column inches in the Manchester Evening news on a quite day. At some stage in all our careers we will be the subject of the most horrendous exaggerations by morons with access to a printing press.I'm afraid it will never end. :(

John8b
MAN might have a runway one to a spotter, but to a pilot it has runways 24L & R and 06L & R:p

Actually, foxmoth you'll find that's how most of the local spotters refer to the runways, too. :ok:

They're not all anorak-sporting numpties, you know........ :ooh:

You are quite right Foxmoth, If you are a pilot I hope you never have need to use 24L.

Very strange, I was reading the replies on Manchester -on- Line
re the article and thought that the first reply sounded familiar and it has been cut virtually word for word from my first post on here and used by someone else

Hmmm

Golf India Bravo

John8b
Actually I HAVE used 24L, on MANY occasions - as have many others when taking off from MAN:p ;)

Didn`t make it very clear, must be my age, I was, as you must realise that I meant 24L for landing.

John8B
Just to let you know I now HAVE used 24L for landing, really not a problem, just a long taxi in:cool:

"AIRCRAFT IN "STANDARD GO-AROUND" SHOCKER!!!!"

Please :yuk:

And here's me thinking that a 24015KT wind would mean 24L for take off and 24R for landing!:(

Not when they are working on 24R!

here's the moron's e-mail address !!

[email protected]

for your pleasure !!!

He's only doing his job to be fair. The media is all about pandering to, and giving your paying readership what they want. in terms of "news".

And what the general punter man-on-the-street wants, in my experience, is a shockingly good headline and story that will provoke some sort of reaction - whether it be shock, sadness or that warm feeling of being informed.

It's not the journalists we should blame - they're only the "supply" :)

You'll also find many airport personnel refer to the runways as 1 (old) and 2 (new) for ease of communications.

I think you'll find everyone is using 24L between 2200-0600 due WIP on the first runway. VOR/DME, and no big deal!