Planes at night and in the morning
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: London
Age: 58
Posts: 434
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Planes at night and in the morning
Evening all,
First off let me say I am enjoying a nice bottle of wine in the garden watching the aircraft go overhead, about 4 miles SE of runway 09 at EGLL. Whitton actually.
Be gentle cause I have had a drink or 2 but here is my question.
Why so many heavies go over between 2100 and about 2330 ?
I am guessing it is something to do with arrival time at the destination but can someone give more info.
The last 5 or so have all gone South East and most have 4 engines or the big 2 engine types.
By the way - BA if you are reading I love the 747 but my God they are noisy.
First off let me say I am enjoying a nice bottle of wine in the garden watching the aircraft go overhead, about 4 miles SE of runway 09 at EGLL. Whitton actually.
Be gentle cause I have had a drink or 2 but here is my question.
Why so many heavies go over between 2100 and about 2330 ?
I am guessing it is something to do with arrival time at the destination but can someone give more info.
The last 5 or so have all gone South East and most have 4 engines or the big 2 engine types.
By the way - BA if you are reading I love the 747 but my God they are noisy.
Last edited by ExRAFRadar; 30th Jun 2009 at 21:19. Reason: Wrong direction
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Bali H'ai
Posts: 427
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A great circle route to the far East, whether it be Hong Kong or Singapore will require a North East heading for the initial phase of flight. Passing over Northern Germany and Russia before heading South East over the Caspian Sea and Afghanistan.
Timing is correct, a 10pm departure from Heathrow will get you into Singapore at 6pm. Just in time for 'slings at the Long Bar.
Timing is correct, a 10pm departure from Heathrow will get you into Singapore at 6pm. Just in time for 'slings at the Long Bar.
Warning Toxic!
Disgusted of Tunbridge
Disgusted of Tunbridge
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hampshire, UK
Posts: 4,011
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They pass through India at lunchtime, and the long range ones get to the Far East for sunset next day. After turnaround and return, they get back in time to wake you up nice and early, leaving them available to epart again on the morning wave across the Atlantic. So that departure time fits in with sleep period travel both ways and convenient arrival and departure times. If you actually look at the flights on a clock scale, there's actually a very small 'window' that gives a departure time and arrival time at destination and return back at base, and ticks all the other boxes to maximise utilisation.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A number of flights to Africa and South America depart during the evening too - 12 hour flight means they get to arrive in the morning at those destinations. If you are 4 miles southeast of Heathrow and they are passing overhead, it is these flights that you are seeing as they turn right and leave the UK in the area of Seaford, near Brighton.
Far East-bound flights usually turn left after take-off and leave the UK over Clacton whilst others fly out over Dover. The exact routes used depend on the airway structure but also on the flow control restrictions at the time.
Far East-bound flights usually turn left after take-off and leave the UK over Clacton whilst others fly out over Dover. The exact routes used depend on the airway structure but also on the flow control restrictions at the time.
I notice the Springboks are now A340-600 instead of B747-400 nowadays. I live about 15nm SW of Heathrow so I get 'em too; one the other day was venting fuel from his wingtips at about 3000ft struggling to climb in +30 deg.
@ExRAFRadar,
I made the same observation when lodging in Whitton years ago; when EGLL is on easterlies, the stream of heavies after 2030 is quite something to behold.
I've often pondered if this particular SID is the most disruptive of all of Heathrow's in terms of overflying more residential areas than others.
The lodge next to "The Winning Post" on the A314 is timber-framed, and smack under the track, so the vibration and resonance is, errm, "special".
I made the same observation when lodging in Whitton years ago; when EGLL is on easterlies, the stream of heavies after 2030 is quite something to behold.
I've often pondered if this particular SID is the most disruptive of all of Heathrow's in terms of overflying more residential areas than others.
The lodge next to "The Winning Post" on the A314 is timber-framed, and smack under the track, so the vibration and resonance is, errm, "special".
one the other day was venting fuel from his wingtips at about 3000ft struggling to climb in +30 deg.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: DXB
Age: 43
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chevron. I know little of Airbus operations (or any heavy operations for that matter) but venting fuel on a departure at 3000Ft would certainly be cause for concern. I think.
Perhaps it was water vapour. If the Temp was +30C then by 3000 i think he might have been in air that was sufficiently humid / correct temp to turn to vapour over the winglets?
Or maybe you are entirely correct and i am talking absolute
K
Perhaps it was water vapour. If the Temp was +30C then by 3000 i think he might have been in air that was sufficiently humid / correct temp to turn to vapour over the winglets?
Or maybe you are entirely correct and i am talking absolute
K
Well I thought it might be condensation, but I also know that these long range guys, once at max ZFW, are tanked up until the fuel reaches the vents, so I'm inclined to think it was fuel in this instance!
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Surrey Hills
Posts: 1,478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When Pan Am first started the 747 between the USA and LHR I remember seeing a Very Low 747 near Reading. I think it was on 3 engines and heavy and the weather was Hot. 1969/70 time. Anyway all was sorted and I think it returned to LHR sometime later. As usual the press had a field day. They talked about the 747 following the Thames Valley to avoid crashing into hills etc.
Last edited by aviate1138; 2nd Jul 2009 at 12:44. Reason: typo
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
aviate1138. It was actually in 1972 and I was on the way to work along the M4 with some colleagues when it went past us heading west, almost level with the car!! I believe it eventually got to 1500 ft around Compton and then turned south to dump fuel over the sea.
Later, when it returned, my buddy who had been driving and I were working the approach sector. My buddy asked the pilot if all was well; it was. He then said something like "We drove past you on the way in and it frightened us to death". The 747 crew thought that was great fun but the "powers that be" didn't think so and my buddy had to stand on the boss's little bit of Axminster the next day!!
Later, when it returned, my buddy who had been driving and I were working the approach sector. My buddy asked the pilot if all was well; it was. He then said something like "We drove past you on the way in and it frightened us to death". The 747 crew thought that was great fun but the "powers that be" didn't think so and my buddy had to stand on the boss's little bit of Axminster the next day!!
I was Sector 6 radar monitor for the very first 747 departure from Heathrow; it was a demo flight carrying MPs and local councillors and not too much fuel. His first words to London Control after departing Heathrow were 'London I'm not gonna make four (thousand) by Woodley'!!
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: DXB
Age: 43
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by chevvron
Well I thought it might be condensation, but I also know that these long range guys, once at max ZFW, are tanked up until the fuel reaches the vents, so I'm inclined to think it was fuel in this instance!
K
once at max ZFW,
Also, after engine-start, taxi, take-off and climb to 3000ft quite a bit of fuel would have already been burnt off.
Finally, just to be (even more) pedantic, as it is an Airbus the term is ZFM ie Zero Fuel MASS. Kgs are units of mass, not weight. Airbus use the correct term in their FCOM, unlike Boeing who erronously (along with 99.99999% of the popultion) use "weight". The unit of weight is the Newton ie mass x gravity.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: DXB
Age: 43
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Groundloop:
So Is it Fuel or Vapour? (Sorry to take the thread off on this tangent. I just find it hard to beleive that Fuel would be Vented, especially on a takeoff).
Thanks
K
So Is it Fuel or Vapour? (Sorry to take the thread off on this tangent. I just find it hard to beleive that Fuel would be Vented, especially on a takeoff).
Thanks
K
ExRAFRadar.
What do you mean by 747s being noisy.
Were you around when the VC10s used to depart at that time of night for the middle and far east. Now that was loud.
I lived with my sister in Weybridge for a while, the plates would rattle and you could hardly hear the TV when one went by.
What do you mean by 747s being noisy.
Were you around when the VC10s used to depart at that time of night for the middle and far east. Now that was loud.
I lived with my sister in Weybridge for a while, the plates would rattle and you could hardly hear the TV when one went by.
Venting of fuel on takeoff was not unheard of on Comet 4c's. The one at Farnborough did it almost every takeoff just as it rotated. And it was definitely fuel not vapour; I inspected the runway a few times after a departure and you could smell it and see the remnants on the hard surface.