00.36hrs Barcelona Fly-Over, Why?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
00.36hrs Barcelona Fly-Over, Why?
At 00.36hrs (10 mins ago), a solitary plane flew over Barcelona city then banked right and landed in Prat. Why this one plane on this one night at this hour when all other planes fly down along the coast before landing?
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: world
Posts: 3,424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The a/c in question was coming from Santiago de Compostela. My guess because of the late hour and low traffic (thus no sequencing by ATC needed) the crew may have requested and received approval to make a visual approach. The shortest track to the runway from the direction they were coming from was likely to be over the city with a right turn into BCN. I have seen this before at BCN, generally at quiet times, even during the day.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nice reply, Hotel Tango, thank you.
Whilst accepting that visual approaches happen every now and again, I guess my interest is why on this particular occasion there was a visual approach.
Was it just an ad-hoc "hell, let's ask this time" from pilot and an ad-hoc "ah, sure, we'll allow it this time" response from tower?
OR, was there a specific reason why on this occasion it was allowed?
[Random (and admittedly extreme) things come to mind such as: woman-giving-birth, running-low-on-fuel, difficult-passenger-on-board, first-officer-wants-to-see-end-of-football-game, US-president-on-board-who-wants-to-see-city.]
It seems more unlikely to allow a visual approach at 00.36hrs (when people are asleep (acknowledging there is less traffic)) than during the day when a little extra noise wouldn't be so noticeable.
[Yeah, sure, it woke me up, but I'm not bothered as I like watching a beauty pass overhead.]
Likely, it won't do the same on tonight's scheduled flight (nor next week's scheduled flight), because it didn't two nights ago nor last week, so why last night's flight?.
Whilst accepting that visual approaches happen every now and again, I guess my interest is why on this particular occasion there was a visual approach.
Was it just an ad-hoc "hell, let's ask this time" from pilot and an ad-hoc "ah, sure, we'll allow it this time" response from tower?
OR, was there a specific reason why on this occasion it was allowed?
[Random (and admittedly extreme) things come to mind such as: woman-giving-birth, running-low-on-fuel, difficult-passenger-on-board, first-officer-wants-to-see-end-of-football-game, US-president-on-board-who-wants-to-see-city.]
It seems more unlikely to allow a visual approach at 00.36hrs (when people are asleep (acknowledging there is less traffic)) than during the day when a little extra noise wouldn't be so noticeable.
[Yeah, sure, it woke me up, but I'm not bothered as I like watching a beauty pass overhead.]
Likely, it won't do the same on tonight's scheduled flight (nor next week's scheduled flight), because it didn't two nights ago nor last week, so why last night's flight?.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Different airports have different noise regulations - some have none; others are more stringent. I flew from Raratonga once and all jet movements take place at night!
Exactly why an aircraft follows a particular procedure is up to ATC and there may be a million reasons. Visual approaches can be flown at night and ATC may well have asked the pilot if he wished to continue visually, to which the answer is frequently in the affirmative.
Exactly why an aircraft follows a particular procedure is up to ATC and there may be a million reasons. Visual approaches can be flown at night and ATC may well have asked the pilot if he wished to continue visually, to which the answer is frequently in the affirmative.
