London City Thread
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: egt
Age: 49
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Define blocking the G/P.
Good job pilots now days are trained to carry out DME approaches. OR Visuals for that argument
Good job pilots now days are trained to carry out DME approaches. OR Visuals for that argument
Last edited by operationsair; 10th Sep 2007 at 23:16. Reason: Blaim my mother.
Why on earth has it been moved to a position blocking the glidepath ?
Would it make any difference if it had been positioned the other way round ? Sort of counter-intuitive to have parked it with its tail sticking up into the 10 approach like it has been.
Been lucky with the weather so far, but September is traditionally the month when autumn mists and LVPs start.
Would it make any difference if it had been positioned the other way round ? Sort of counter-intuitive to have parked it with its tail sticking up into the 10 approach like it has been.
Been lucky with the weather so far, but September is traditionally the month when autumn mists and LVPs start.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: all over
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Even inside the company it's only known that it will take a "little" bit bit longer to bring back the a/c in flight condition, no dates have been published, no idea how and where to do it. it was only said that BAE will strongly support and that a special agreement with the airport has been established.... We know nothing as well....
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: all over
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Today I received the message that it will definately repaired, but it will take up to 14-16 weeks. At the moment they have the intention to ship the Avro across the river.... Sorry, this is all which was communicated. No idea when they will start.
More info Ref Repair
The RJ100 is longer than the 146 from which it was developed. Traditionally, if you lengthen an aircraft you make it vulnerable to tail strikes. The A20 vs A321 is a case in point. 321 tailstrikes are relatively common compared to the 320. Interestingly, the accident statistics show that it's on landing (as with this RJ100) they tend to occur and not on rotation.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: at the edge of the alps
Posts: 447
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On rotation a tail-strike happens more or less only with single-engine ops, as the general upward movement of the A/C will lift the tail out of harm's way for all but the most hearty "tugs" on the wheel. On landing, everything is moving downwards....
The only one I remember at our operation was in a DH8-300 at idle power which was flared for too long. I am glad I never saw the "touched runway" caution light (which wasn't resettable BTW
)
The only one I remember at our operation was in a DH8-300 at idle power which was flared for too long. I am glad I never saw the "touched runway" caution light (which wasn't resettable BTW
)
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Switzerland, Singapore
Posts: 1,309
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A lot of half-truths here - is this spectator's balcony?
Dan, the Avro RJ100 has the same length as the 146-300.
RJ85=200
RJ75=100
AF, Tailstrike can happen in any situation if your tail is lower than your lowest gear, has nothing to do with OEI (one engine out). This can happen if you overrotate (pull too much), if you fly too slow or wrong configuration (need more angle to get enough lift to stay aloft).
LCY is an extreme approach with roughly double the approach angle as any normal ILS. You approach faster to the ground, you have to rotate faster, if you miss the right point, you get a hard landing or you flare too long. There are special installations and procedures in place to conteract those problems, but basically it is a tick more difficult to land there, especially in windy conditions.
Dani
Dan, the Avro RJ100 has the same length as the 146-300.
RJ85=200
RJ75=100
AF, Tailstrike can happen in any situation if your tail is lower than your lowest gear, has nothing to do with OEI (one engine out). This can happen if you overrotate (pull too much), if you fly too slow or wrong configuration (need more angle to get enough lift to stay aloft).
LCY is an extreme approach with roughly double the approach angle as any normal ILS. You approach faster to the ground, you have to rotate faster, if you miss the right point, you get a hard landing or you flare too long. There are special installations and procedures in place to conteract those problems, but basically it is a tick more difficult to land there, especially in windy conditions.
Dani
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Dani
A lot of half-truths here - is this spectator's balcony?
To back up Dani's point on approach angle - many years ago I recall a trial at RAF Leuchars on R09 (Phantoms and Lightnings) to fly (I think) a 3.5 degree ILS (normally 2.5) to improve the DH which was terrain driven. The BIG problem was the rotation required at the flare to arrest the higher rate of descent, and therein can lie the catch where a touch too much and bang. The Lightning was especially prone to tailscraping if rotated too much and a tailscrape used to sever the brake chute cables which would then fall in a neat pack onto the runway when deployed
.NB Some of the facts in that trial may have been clouded by time, but I recall it was not continued.
Dani, re your …”you have to rotate faster, …”
Not quite correct; in order to reduce the rate of descent the wings have to generate more lift, normally by increasing alpha. An aircraft’s flare characteristics are a combination of lift change for change in alpha and the ability to generate a change in alpha, the attitude (amongst other things).
The 146/RJ wing has excellent lift-change characteristics and responsive controls, thus these increase the lift quickly and enable the 146/RJ to be flared from relatively low altitudes.
The 146-300/RJ100 has a longer tail arm and therefore more responsive control (but offset by inertia and other complexities such higher operating weights and control friction (longer control run)); thus in theory the longer aircraft could flare at a lower altitude, but in practice the combination of increased pitch rate and lower tail position for the same attitude result in less capability (you can rotate to far, too fast). Note that the long aircraft are only cleared to 5.5 deg, vs the short aircraft 6 deg approach (AFM limitations), and have a zero tailwind limit. Steep approaches enable reduced landing distance from the combined effect of the GS geometry and reduced time during the flare.
RE … “There are special installations and procedures in place to counteract those problems, but basically it is a tick … “
You should justify these points. I do not know of any special installations or tricks associated with the 146/RJ at LCY. The aircraft has full certification for steep operations (first jet certification) and had to be demonstrated as not requiring exceptional skill or effort (perhaps a bit more concentration than normal). The only special aspects at LCY are the quality of the ILS GS beam to safeguard the obstacle clearance over Canary Warf, and the need to use a precision GS (ILS or visual PAPI). There are also the very sensible ‘fixed-distance’ landing markers which can be used to judge the safety margins during landing; these can be used by all aircraft types.
Not quite correct; in order to reduce the rate of descent the wings have to generate more lift, normally by increasing alpha. An aircraft’s flare characteristics are a combination of lift change for change in alpha and the ability to generate a change in alpha, the attitude (amongst other things).
The 146/RJ wing has excellent lift-change characteristics and responsive controls, thus these increase the lift quickly and enable the 146/RJ to be flared from relatively low altitudes.
The 146-300/RJ100 has a longer tail arm and therefore more responsive control (but offset by inertia and other complexities such higher operating weights and control friction (longer control run)); thus in theory the longer aircraft could flare at a lower altitude, but in practice the combination of increased pitch rate and lower tail position for the same attitude result in less capability (you can rotate to far, too fast). Note that the long aircraft are only cleared to 5.5 deg, vs the short aircraft 6 deg approach (AFM limitations), and have a zero tailwind limit. Steep approaches enable reduced landing distance from the combined effect of the GS geometry and reduced time during the flare.
RE … “There are special installations and procedures in place to counteract those problems, but basically it is a tick … “
You should justify these points. I do not know of any special installations or tricks associated with the 146/RJ at LCY. The aircraft has full certification for steep operations (first jet certification) and had to be demonstrated as not requiring exceptional skill or effort (perhaps a bit more concentration than normal). The only special aspects at LCY are the quality of the ILS GS beam to safeguard the obstacle clearance over Canary Warf, and the need to use a precision GS (ILS or visual PAPI). There are also the very sensible ‘fixed-distance’ landing markers which can be used to judge the safety margins during landing; these can be used by all aircraft types.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: at the edge of the alps
Posts: 447
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@Dani: I did not want to imply that you can't strike during take-off, it is just a lot less likely unless you really haul the house size controller way too quickly/far back.
Rumour has it that we'll also fly to LCY in the not too distant future, so I hope to be able to judge myself.
Rumour has it that we'll also fly to LCY in the not too distant future, so I hope to be able to judge myself.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: London
Age: 57
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Swiss to repair hard landing-damaged Avro RJ100
Victoria Moores, Zurich (21Sep07, 18:17 GMT, 240 words)
Swiss International Air Lines and its insurers have decided to repair the BAE Systems Avro RJ100 which was heavily damaged in a hard landing incident at London City airport last month.
The aircraft is a seven-year old example registered HB-IYU owned by Zurich-based Anson Aircraft. It was operating from Geneva with 93 passengers and crew when it made the hard landing on 18 August.
A Swiss International Air Lines spokesman says: “The final decision has been taken to repair it.”
Early evaluations suggest that the repair work will take approximately 14 weeks, says the spokesman, although he declines to comment on the cost of the work.
He says the aircraft suffered a tail scrape, cracks and severe damage during the landing, but declined to comment further on the cause which is subject to an ongoing investigation.
Due to space and maintenance constraints at London City airport, which is located on the river Thames, the aircraft must be moved off-airport to perform the repair work.
The spokesman says it will soon be towed onto a marine pontoon and floated a short distance along the river to the north Royal Dock area.
“Security-wise everything is being prepared. We are going to build a special hangar for the aircraft,” he says. “The exact date for the move is not yet known, but we will perform the repair on the spot. The aircraft has been released; we can do what we want with it.”
Source: Air Transport Intelligence news
Victoria Moores, Zurich (21Sep07, 18:17 GMT, 240 words)
Swiss International Air Lines and its insurers have decided to repair the BAE Systems Avro RJ100 which was heavily damaged in a hard landing incident at London City airport last month.
The aircraft is a seven-year old example registered HB-IYU owned by Zurich-based Anson Aircraft. It was operating from Geneva with 93 passengers and crew when it made the hard landing on 18 August.
A Swiss International Air Lines spokesman says: “The final decision has been taken to repair it.”
Early evaluations suggest that the repair work will take approximately 14 weeks, says the spokesman, although he declines to comment on the cost of the work.
He says the aircraft suffered a tail scrape, cracks and severe damage during the landing, but declined to comment further on the cause which is subject to an ongoing investigation.
Due to space and maintenance constraints at London City airport, which is located on the river Thames, the aircraft must be moved off-airport to perform the repair work.
The spokesman says it will soon be towed onto a marine pontoon and floated a short distance along the river to the north Royal Dock area.
“Security-wise everything is being prepared. We are going to build a special hangar for the aircraft,” he says. “The exact date for the move is not yet known, but we will perform the repair on the spot. The aircraft has been released; we can do what we want with it.”
Source: Air Transport Intelligence news
There have been several takeoff tail scrapes in the RJ100, noticeably associated with upgrade training from aircraft with markedly different rotation characteristics e.g. ATR transition to RJ.
Less experienced pilots may rotate ‘enthusiastically’ or not consider a takeoff check attitude, instead they aim for the FD which is really only valid when airborne (V2+10, or V2 [or whatever you have when the engine fails]). The RJ is possibly unique in that you can generate a high pitch rate which is sufficient to lift the wheels off and then scrape the tail when airborne!
Less experienced pilots may rotate ‘enthusiastically’ or not consider a takeoff check attitude, instead they aim for the FD which is really only valid when airborne (V2+10, or V2 [or whatever you have when the engine fails]). The RJ is possibly unique in that you can generate a high pitch rate which is sufficient to lift the wheels off and then scrape the tail when airborne!
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Swiss RJ100 - moved
they have now moved it off the airfield.
Apparently floated it across the dock on a barge.
It is now sitting on the Red Bull temporary airstrip.
Any pictures ? ?
Apparently floated it across the dock on a barge.
It is now sitting on the Red Bull temporary airstrip.
Any pictures ? ?
Just to correct several comments (including it appears official ones) that the aircraft has moved "across the river", it has not entered the River Thames at all. It has been barged across the Royal Albert Dock, which is the one to the north of the LCY runway. It is opposite approximately the midpoint of the runway.
I think you will find the 146 comes down the whole final approach with its rear fuselage airbrakes deployed. This is different to any other approach I have seen them do elsewhere where they are usually deployed just as coming over the threshhold.
Originally Posted by safetypee
I do not know of any special installations or tricks associated with the 146/RJ at LCY.