Sky News : you 'avin a larf ?
Thread Starter
Sky News : you 'avin a larf ?
On the 5pm bulletin today, their reporter live from Heathrow (Derek Someone) described how planes land automatically :
"As the planes approach the airport they fire out all these beams, sort of like lasers, which guide the plane down. Obviously, any plane ahead that's too close could get in the way of the plane's beams and interfere with them. That wouldn't be safe."
No. It wouldn't, Derek. Now - go and do some more googling before your next report.
"As the planes approach the airport they fire out all these beams, sort of like lasers, which guide the plane down. Obviously, any plane ahead that's too close could get in the way of the plane's beams and interfere with them. That wouldn't be safe."
No. It wouldn't, Derek. Now - go and do some more googling before your next report.
The Analog Kid
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Brecon Beacons National Park
Age: 57
Posts: 239
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now, who fancies a sweepstake on the first tree hugger complaint about all the lasers fired out by 'planes affecting their health, being lethal for cats, or something...
Rich.
(Clue to tree hugging fraternity: politically, I'm somewhat to the left of Tony Benn; when people like me are taking the piss, you've got a credibility problem.)
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: uk
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Enjoyed that. Priceless. What worries me is that every time something is in the news that I do know some thing about, the press have got it wrong. Does that mean that anything I know nothing about(and I don't know much) is also wrong? Wish I'd been a Journo, sit at home all day and spout rubbish!!
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: USA
Age: 66
Posts: 2,183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Did anyone hear Jeremy Vine this afternoon? I could not believe the way the discussion was going. A la "well they can land and take off at night...whats the big deal with fog?" or "it's all automatic why can't they land a couple of hundred yards apart?".....just lost my respect for him
Join Date: May 2002
Location: In a nice house
Posts: 981
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Almost as good as David Learmount's explanation for the cancellations at LHR on the bbc news website:-
When visibility is good an airport like Heathrow will always operate at about 98% capacity. It assumes you have a certain minimum amount of visibility, which is about five miles," he said.
"In good visibility the aeroplanes on their approach can be put close together because if anything goes wrong ahead the pilot can say 'I don't like this' and take action.
"The pilot can make the decision very easily if the visibility is very good ahead. He doesn't have to wait to be told by traffic control."
"People tend to think aviation is all technology, but no. Pilots rely far more than most people realise on their eyes. If you can't see the aeroplane ahead you can't slow down so you have to rely on traffic control so the decision time is slower."
Eh? Right, so I can only slow down if I can see the aircraft ahead. And er, let me get this straight, anything below 5000m vis is bad and I would have to wait for the control tower to tell me to go-around. Crikey, and I've been flying approaches in 75m visibility! Scary!!!!
When visibility is good an airport like Heathrow will always operate at about 98% capacity. It assumes you have a certain minimum amount of visibility, which is about five miles," he said.
"In good visibility the aeroplanes on their approach can be put close together because if anything goes wrong ahead the pilot can say 'I don't like this' and take action.
"The pilot can make the decision very easily if the visibility is very good ahead. He doesn't have to wait to be told by traffic control."
"People tend to think aviation is all technology, but no. Pilots rely far more than most people realise on their eyes. If you can't see the aeroplane ahead you can't slow down so you have to rely on traffic control so the decision time is slower."
Eh? Right, so I can only slow down if I can see the aircraft ahead. And er, let me get this straight, anything below 5000m vis is bad and I would have to wait for the control tower to tell me to go-around. Crikey, and I've been flying approaches in 75m visibility! Scary!!!!
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Surrounded by aluminum, and the great outdoors
Posts: 3,780
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It was before the computer age or i'd post it...but years back we had in my home town a 15-seat cessna 150 piper cub crash at the local airport seriously killing all onboard (it was in fact a beech-99) and they were seriously killed....makes it worse of course....this was from the "aviation correspondent" some things never change
Eastern Wiseguy; yes I heard JV today and like you, thought alot less of him as a result. As far as gerneral journalism goes, a long time ago I had personal experience of an incident (non-aviation related) which appeared in a local newspaper. Although the piece only filled half of one column, there were five factual errors. Hooray for the press!
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Hemel Hempstead
Age: 43
Posts: 121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I heard Joch Lowe (please excuse my spelling if I am incorrect) on bbc radio five live last night. His description of ILS, autolands, cat3 requirements and explanation of flow rates was very good, simple in lamens terms yet comprehensive and pretty much silenced the presenter. He answered everything in one go without the need of further questions.. So she moved on to the associated traffic problems with Heathrow and another commentator. So there are still some good commentators out there. Hats off to Joch Lowe.
Humus Motor
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: A little place called Samsonite
Posts: 201
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In a Surrey newspaper many years ago was a reference to the possibility of constructing a tarmac runway at Fairoaks (for those not over 'ere - a GA field not far from LHR)
"It will be another Heathrow ... at the moment, the largest plane (
) to land at Fairoaks is the British Island Normander ( ) - a twin-engined passenger carrying jet........."
"It will be another Heathrow ... at the moment, the largest plane (
) to land at Fairoaks is the British Island Normander ( ) - a twin-engined passenger carrying jet........."
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: London, UK
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My local radio station today interviewing an ‘aviation expert’.
“Jets always take off automatically so the pilot doesn’t need to look out, however for landing the pilot has to guide it in by hand”.
Give me strength, were really up against it.
“Jets always take off automatically so the pilot doesn’t need to look out, however for landing the pilot has to guide it in by hand”.
Give me strength, were really up against it.
Psychophysiological entity
But...But, everyone that was educated by the Beno and Dandy, knows full well that dotted lines come out of your eyes when you look at something. It's perfectly reasonable to think that planes do this as well.
A jolly roger
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: 5' 11 AGL
Age: 68
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mea Culpa
I guess us TV control room people are partly to blame - we tell the journo's so much bullsh*t about how TV works and they believe us.
But there is NO excuse for a lot of their aviation reporting - almost every network I have worked for has had a fair share of PPL and even a few GA around, so they could always ask and run their ideas past us ... but they never do.
I can remember babysitting one parliamentary Question Time broadcast (here in Oz) when a question was raised about a 4 engine freighter (DC8? was around 1990) enroute to SYD that declared a fuel emergency and had to divert to Williamtown and then flamed out on rollout. I asked the main reporter if he had heard that, but he didn't consider it a story.
And then they turn around and consider dicky gear landing on a light aircraft as something major - believe me, frustration ( & worse emotions) about journos is not confined to here!
But there is NO excuse for a lot of their aviation reporting - almost every network I have worked for has had a fair share of PPL and even a few GA around, so they could always ask and run their ideas past us ... but they never do.
I can remember babysitting one parliamentary Question Time broadcast (here in Oz) when a question was raised about a 4 engine freighter (DC8? was around 1990) enroute to SYD that declared a fuel emergency and had to divert to Williamtown and then flamed out on rollout. I asked the main reporter if he had heard that, but he didn't consider it a story.
And then they turn around and consider dicky gear landing on a light aircraft as something major
- believe me, frustration ( & worse emotions) about journos is not confined to here!
Last edited by Oceanz; 22nd Dec 2006 at 04:03. Reason: correcting Australian vernacular
Thought police antagonist
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Where I always have been...firmly in the real world
Posts: 1,372
Received 118 Likes
on
85 Posts
Watched La Kaplinsky make a rare excursion from the studio on last nights BBC News----Sheperds Bush to LHR not being too difficult even for her to find--and watched with amusement as the NATS guy patiently tried to explain the difference between NATS and the BAA / Airlines with regard to Operational responsibilities. It took a looooooong time before La K suddenly realised that her questions were being answered factually-- but that they were not actually relevant to the person answering them in terms of responsibility----
Amusing to watch though
Amusing to watch though
I can remember babysitting one parliamentary Question Time broadcast (here in Oz) when a question was raised about a 4 engine freighter (DC8? was around 1990) enroute to SYD that declared a fuel emergency and had to divert to Williamtown and then flamed out on rollout.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Garden shed
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The laser beam theory seems to have expanded and taken on more dimensions now....
An EXPERT explained that its actually the airport runway that has the main laser beam shooting out at the planes and that all the planes have a beam of their own that locks on to this beam....aha
....then, if one plane is too close to the other, you can imagine the interference of three beams !
Now imagine the scene with three, four, even hundreds of beams around....scenes from one of star wars epic battles spring to mind....definetly not safe !!!
So....the solution is to space planes far enough apart to avoid clashing beams....my Schwarz is bigger than yours....!
All makes perfect sense now....thank god noone has mentioned NDB's or VOR's to them.
An EXPERT explained that its actually the airport runway that has the main laser beam shooting out at the planes and that all the planes have a beam of their own that locks on to this beam....aha
....then, if one plane is too close to the other, you can imagine the interference of three beams !Now imagine the scene with three, four, even hundreds of beams around....scenes from one of star wars epic battles spring to mind....definetly not safe !!!
So....the solution is to space planes far enough apart to avoid clashing beams....my Schwarz is bigger than yours....!
All makes perfect sense now....thank god noone has mentioned NDB's or VOR's to them.
Lady Lexxington
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: The Manor House
Age: 43
Posts: 1,145
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Did anyone see Sky at about 10ish last night? They had ex-BA Captain Eric Moody speaking sense and they also had the ever relevant Transport 2000.
Just WTF has that got to do with the weather at LHR? Nothing, but it's a good excuse to say you should use your bike (yes really) instead of flying.
Just WTF has that got to do with the weather at LHR? Nothing, but it's a good excuse to say you should use your bike (yes really) instead of flying.