Ground movement callsigns (including LHR)
 

Hi everyone,

I was wondering if someone could explain the callsigns that are used at LHR (and maybe all airports) for craft leaving stand and taxiing to the runway for take-off.

For example, what does Bealine refer to and also why are certain airlines seemingly referred to by their registration and others by their ATC callsign? I'm quite puzzled by all of this.

Thanks,
MM

Bealine is the callsign used for BA aircraft under tow. Similarly, callsigns such as Virgin Oscar tango and Singapore Mike Papa are towing aircraft too.

A/c taxying for departure either use the airline callsign with the flight number (Speedbird Two Eight Four), or in some cases airlines use alpha-numeric callsigns, such as Shuttle Six Tango, or Lufthansa Six Echo Mike.

Thanks Gonzo,

and in the case of Virgin OT or Singapore MP what are the OT and MP referring to - the registration or is it just a generic code for any Virgin / Singapore under tow? Presumably there could be two or three Virgins under tow at any one time?

MM

Sorry, should have said. These will be the last two letters of the a/c registration. JAL towers will use "JAL xxx" where xxx is the last three numbers of the reg, and United and American will use "American xxx" Where xxx is the three numbers in the reg. (i.e. N778AN will be American 778)

I've only ever come across identical towing callsigns on my frequency once: "Bealine ES" (B757 G-CPES) and "Bealine ES" (B777 G-RAES).

I'm sure others are old enough too to remember that Bealine is a hangover from those days of British European Airways when it was used for flying. Anyone now if BA retain the right to use Northeast, Albion or Cambrian.

Talking of towing, there was once a push to improve engineer's R/T in order to speed things up a bit at EGLL. I seem to recall that this was one of Michael Bishop's gripes with operations at Heathrow, and he suggested tuition for them, citing slow or non-existent readbacks, and misunderstood instructions as a cause of delay.

Would it have made a difference, and did anything ever change? I seem to recall their R/T was clunky, and must have made things interesting if they were crossing an active runway with stuff on short-ish finals. Did they have to hold an R/T license?

r

During 22 years at Heathrow Tower, during which I did Ground a million times, I can honestly say that no tug driver ever gave me cause for concern and their R/T was always fine.

During that 22 years I don't recall Michael Bishop (whoever he is/was) doing ground control...??

>During that 22 years I don't recall Michael Bishop (whoever he is/was) doing ground control...??

Michael (now Sir Michael) Bishop - chairman of British Midland. Agreed, probably not seen in the VCR that much.

You may have noticed DC9s arriving from GLA/EDI/BFS in increasing numbers in the early 'eighties. It was his fault. Probably the first airline to successfully break the BA grip on UK competition. And he turned the airline into a major international operation from being a marginally-profitable regional Viscount operator. Apart from that, he's not that significant in UK aviation history...

His "let's improve Heathrow" campaign involved raising movement levels. and other devices to free up his much-sought-after slots for British Midland expansion. The phrase "slot auction" was bandied about. The mind boggles. I guess that this was via sealed bids, not in the style of eBay.

I always thought it a bit odd that he mentioned tug drivers in with other, loftier ideas, and wondered if there was anything to back up his theory.

r

OK. In a similar vein... din't some other "expert" recently advocate using tugs to take aircraft to the holding point. What happened to that idea?

Did I hear that Virgin were going to try it at Gatwick?

Some US carriers were also investigating it for huge and congested places like DFW/ATL/ORD.

Oh, and I think I read in industry magazine "Air Transport World" that another wheeze was to slow traffic down 100-200 miles out to avoid holding. "In search of perpetual motion", I guess.

From an engineering point of view, I'm not sure I'd like to be inside an aircraft that had its engines treated akin to "on-off white goods".

r

Don't suppose there's ever been a situation where confusion was caused because the registration number was similar to a flight number?

JAS

Virgin tried the towing to the holding point once at LHR. They will not be trying it again.:rolleyes:

Towers using the R/T do cause concern. Perhaps it's more down to the noisy environment in the tug and poorly maintained radios, but they are far more likely to miss a call than a live a/c. Some particular tug operators' R/T is so heavily accented as to be almost incomprehensible.

I misread the first word of that sentence Gonzo and for just a second thought you meant ATC... :}

<<Virgin tried the towing to the holding point once at LHR. They will not be trying it again.>>

Well, well, well..... I am soooooo surprised!!!

I'm sure Apron try their best to confuse controllers and pilots alike. You can be sure that AZA209 will always park on stand 209, and EY303 on 303! S'pose it makes it easier in a way as there's only one number for the pilots to remember (you'd think that was easy wouldn't you :ugh: !)

Earlier this week SAS515 was followed in trail by SAS1515 down the approach. This stuff happens all the time.

Cheers!

Back to towing for a quick anecdote. I was taxiing out at Gatwick and heard:

"Tug 34 request position to the south side"
ATC "Roger tug 34 proceed via the perimeter road and call me holding short in the undershoot"
"Tug 34 roger"

a little later:

"Tug 34 holding shoot in the undershort"

On-MarkBob.. All quite simple.. you were really at Airwick Gatport!