Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Misc. Forums > Spectators Balcony (Spotters Corner)
Reload this Page >

BA has money to burn! (The LGW 'bridge')

Wikiposts
Search
Spectators Balcony (Spotters Corner) If you're not a professional pilot but want to discuss issues about the job, this is the best place to loiter. You won't be moved on by 'security' and there'll be plenty of experts to answer any questions.

BA has money to burn! (The LGW 'bridge')

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 29th May 2004, 08:23
  #41 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Bedfordshire
Age: 43
Posts: 302
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Besides the slanging going on, the bridge looks superb. I hear its only the second bridge over a taxiway. It seems the airport have done a great job considering the other bridge over in Denver (correct me if I'm wrong) has had its share of problems. Something along the lines of an A320 will fit underneath but not a 319? Isn't it Frontier who had to change an order to compensate for that?

On another note Exeng, nearly all of RB's aircraft had departed by the time BA ferried the aircraft down. Would have made for a good stunt if he'd got involved. Although on all the promotional mousemats the BAA were dishing out at the bridge presentation it is a Virgin 747 superimposed under the bridge...

As far as my 'comment' goes, this is a rumour site dont forget, and quite often rumours don't have a clear cut source.
No comment is offline  
Old 29th May 2004, 09:55
  #42 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Horsham, England, UK. ---o--O--o---
Posts: 1,185
Received 4 Likes on 2 Posts
Arrow

Seems rather short-sighted if you can't fit an A-380 under it too!

But, I guess they could dig a slope under it to gain extra clearance - or how about a tunnel!
Out Of Trim is offline  
Old 29th May 2004, 11:27
  #43 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: In the Desert
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
or even a brodge over the bridge. Look a bit like spaghetti junction after a while with aircraft lost all over the shop
Desert Nomad is offline  
Old 29th May 2004, 12:42
  #44 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: EGTT/FAB/LGW/BOH/FAB/LGW
Posts: 458
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The nose-wheel collapse has been accounted for with the bridge clearance, the SP can fit underneath the bridge as it is but if one where to suffer nose-wheel collapse there would not be sufficient clearance.
SilentHandover is offline  
Old 29th May 2004, 13:19
  #45 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 293
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Will A380 fit under bridge at LGW

I used taxi way Lima and went under the new bridge at LGW the other night and wondered - would an A380 fit under there??
Which plans were drawn up first - the architects for the new bridge, or Mr Airbus?
Anyone have any facts and figures for the height measurements?
Fuel Crossfeed is offline  
Old 29th May 2004, 13:23
  #46 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 1,914
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
For goodness sake, stop this 'nose wheel collapse' thing! Are there Jumbos littered around airports everywhere tipped on their noses? It only happens as a maintenance function- the nose wheels are in fact very strong, and none of that will be going on under the bridge! What are the odds of a 747 suffering nosewheel collapse in the crucial 20 feet or so to get under? Let's worry about meteorites/Lassa fever breakout/ earthquakes/malaria in the south of England/Volcanic activity in West Sussex.....you know, real things to worry about!
Notso Fantastic is offline  
Old 29th May 2004, 13:48
  #47 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 361
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Here here Notso
Anti-ice is offline  
Old 29th May 2004, 14:01
  #48 (permalink)  

aka Capt PPRuNe
 
Join Date: May 1995
Location: UK
Posts: 4,541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Devil

I'll put this back in R&N as long as the 'silly question' brigade promise to stop the "what if?" scenarios that have odds of 1:10,000,000 of actually ever happening.

What with the "If the nosegear were to fold at just the wrong moment .........?" and the infantile BA vs Virgin handbags at 10 paces duel how can anyone expect a thread to stay in R&N?
Danny is offline  
Old 29th May 2004, 14:58
  #49 (permalink)  
Megaptera
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I agree with Out-of-trim, it seems a little short-sighted not to build this bridge high enough for an aircraft type currently under construction (A380) to pass under. I'm sure the A380 will turn up at Gatwick one day and we all know what Murphy's law says...
 
Old 29th May 2004, 16:35
  #50 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,915
Received 4 Likes on 2 Posts
Danny,

Whilst I fully agree that the probability of such a nosegear collapse is unlikely in the extreme, I had heard a rumour that certain type(s) of B747 would not be permitted to taxi under the new bridge at LGW, for this very reason, as a specific condition of the 'safety case'. SilentHandover's reply would seem to confirm this.

However, I fully respect your views on the matter, and apologise for phrasing the question (now deleted) in a manner deemed inappropriate for R&N.

If this post is also out of order, please delete.

Last edited by spekesoftly; 29th May 2004 at 19:58.
spekesoftly is offline  
Old 29th May 2004, 19:04
  #51 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Everywhere
Age: 55
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Ba has money to burn(the LGW bridge)

Re: A380..and passing under the bridge...have read in one of the LGW airport newspapers..that the BAA...bore in mind the A 380..whilst planning the bridge..and consequently, all the stands at the North terminal (Extension) will be accessible to it..but it will have to go around the extension, as opposed to under the bridge.
bunnygirl is offline  
Old 29th May 2004, 19:24
  #52 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 378
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Its a shame if BA agreed to supply the BAA with a 747 that they didn't check to see what Branson was up to.

I havn't see any mention of this stunt on the TV or in the papers, but a few hundred mouse mats will stay on peoples desks (with the associated free advertising) long after thay have forgotten who was first!
woodpecker is offline  
Old 30th May 2004, 08:45
  #53 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Quite near 'An aerodrome somewhere in England'
Posts: 26,821
Received 271 Likes on 110 Posts
I don't think anyone really gives a tuppeny damn about whose aircraft taxyed under the bridge first - the only real story is that the bridge has been opened. That's if it's a story at all.......

Always thought that a VC10 could fit under the new Severn Bridge fairly easily. Now that would be a story
BEagle is online now  
Old 30th May 2004, 15:07
  #54 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Dubai
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
And who will be the first helicopter to air taxi under it.........
Sandy Toad is offline  
Old 2nd Jun 2004, 14:57
  #55 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: uk
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
On a serious note does it matter who has a jumbo under it first.

Having worked out of LGW since it opened the north terminal it fills me with pride that the terminal is expanding in such a spectacular way.

With the aviation industry able to expand at most of the worlds airports pretty much at will, London is restricted by the residents all round heathrow and gatwick, it is superb to see immagination used to solve space issues.

I hope that this is a sign of new expansion back at Gatwick and all airlines including BA and Virgin can operate profitably out of Londons 2nd Airport for many years to come.

Come on lets bury all the bad blood here and hope for a succesfull future for any airline that operates aircraft under Gatwicks eyecatching new landmark structure.

Both now and in the future.
heavy crew 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.