LAHSO - British Airways
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Playing Golf!
Age: 46
Posts: 1,037
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LAHSO - British Airways
I notice that BA NEVER takes part in LAHSO operations, I have heard them state they are unable.
Is this a company policy or is there another reason?
For the most part I think it is a good thing, so many things can go wrong causing a landing to be "long"
PT6
Is this a company policy or is there another reason?
For the most part I think it is a good thing, so many things can go wrong causing a landing to be "long"
PT6
Yeah either that or they don't like putting the safety of their aircraft/pax into the hands of the spotty faced 400hr CPL driving a cheiften, who is the other half of the LAHSO equation.
Junior trash
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,025
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe its actually JAR-OPS policy and no European carrier will accept it. The number of near misses on intersecting runways in the US recently, you'd think they would think twice too!
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Europe
Posts: 716
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Believe it's not a JAR-OPS requirement. We did one the other day in Stavanger, neither captain nor me had any problem with it...but on the other hand no operational problem, LDA still 3-4 times more than required and the other traffic was a helicopter departing.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: EGKK
Age: 42
Posts: 599
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LAHSO must be permitted by your national aviation authority, in this case the UK CAA, who do not approve UK operators to participate in LAHSO and therefore all UK airlines will decline a LAHSO clearance.
So "company policy" it may be, but I believe it is the only policy open to them.
So "company policy" it may be, but I believe it is the only policy open to them.
At the risk of sounding offensive, it doesn't matter what the CAA or FAA say; if it says I can't do it in my company Ops manual, then I can't do it.
ergo.....company policy.
ergo.....company policy.
Couldonlyaffordafiver
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: The Twilight Zone near 30W
Posts: 1,934
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Equally, that includes "active" and "passive" LAHSO. We are not permitted to Land and Hold Short for anyone else. Neither are we permitted to land when someone else is landing and holding short for us. The second option is a bit more complicated but just as valid.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Playing Golf!
Age: 46
Posts: 1,037
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for the information guys!
I was just curious, I see that an air carrier can not take part in LAHSO ops unless the other aircraft in the operation is also an air carrier... but still so many things can go wrong.
Good on BA for having it on their flight plan that they will decline!
PT6
I was just curious, I see that an air carrier can not take part in LAHSO ops unless the other aircraft in the operation is also an air carrier... but still so many things can go wrong.
Good on BA for having it on their flight plan that they will decline!
PT6
Wasn't some sort of modified LAHSO operation brought into Stansted at the time of the Afhgan hijacking in Feb 2000 - I remember landing on 23 the next day and braking very hard to make the first RET due reduced runway length.
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wonder how we all manage to operate into Las Vegas then - it is in use constantly
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: 30 West
Age: 65
Posts: 926
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm sorry guys.......
If you have operated in LAS and think that ATC even have a clue whether you are or aren't LAHSO non compliant, you are being nieve.
Personally, I don't care because in that instance, the crossing is so far down the runway as not to be a concern.
Now SFB, they also operate LAHSO and we don't get the option - they do put a/c onto the cross runway and get them to hold short for us.
If you have operated in LAS and think that ATC even have a clue whether you are or aren't LAHSO non compliant, you are being nieve.
Personally, I don't care because in that instance, the crossing is so far down the runway as not to be a concern.
Now SFB, they also operate LAHSO and we don't get the option - they do put a/c onto the cross runway and get them to hold short for us.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hotel this week, hotel next week, home whenever...
Posts: 1,492
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Quote:
Different against LAHSO
Well effectively the same as the whole runway was there but half of it was closed......"
Surely not....
A LAHSO operation involves traffic landing/departing on a runway that is crossing the runway you've been cleared for. You accept the LAHSO on condition that you can stop in the distance before the clearance limit so as to facilitate smooth airport ops for the other traffic in the LAHSO.
Landing on a 'shorter' runway due to other factors = entirely different as no possible conflict with crossing traffic.
Different against LAHSO
Well effectively the same as the whole runway was there but half of it was closed......"
Surely not....
A LAHSO operation involves traffic landing/departing on a runway that is crossing the runway you've been cleared for. You accept the LAHSO on condition that you can stop in the distance before the clearance limit so as to facilitate smooth airport ops for the other traffic in the LAHSO.
Landing on a 'shorter' runway due to other factors = entirely different as no possible conflict with crossing traffic.
