Don't do this!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Don't do this!
A lot of PPruners who operate in the states will be familiar with Land and Hold Short (LAHSO) clearances, where a modified LDA is used to allow an intersecting runway to be used at the same time you are on yours. (This was the subject of a recent PPrune thread). The procedure is not without some risk, and US ALPA had recommended their members reject LAHSO clearances. BA and the RAF have prohibited the use of LAHSO when offered, and put RMK/UNABLE LAHSO in section 18 of the flight plan.
Now the Canadians have their version - called Simultaneous Intersecting Runway Operations (SIRO). It is essentially the same.
I noticed it on the taxi chart for Goose Bay earlier in the week, it was also referred to in the ATIS.
Like LAHSO, I would advise pilots to reject SIRO clearances.
Now the Canadians have their version - called Simultaneous Intersecting Runway Operations (SIRO). It is essentially the same.
I noticed it on the taxi chart for Goose Bay earlier in the week, it was also referred to in the ATIS.
Like LAHSO, I would advise pilots to reject SIRO clearances.
Guest
Posts: n/a
We often have SIRO at my local field. Traffic is principally training aircraft which are well capable of holding short of the intersection, but pilots are principally students who may land long, fail to understand the clearance, or forget it in all the excitement of landing an airplane. There are MANY incursions.
There was also a commercial student at YYC who was cleared to backtrack a runway, during SIRO. The student then interpreted the takeoff clearance issued to an Air Canada flight on the intersecting runway as his own. He didn't respond to ATC instructions to abort, so the jet had to abort.
There was also a commercial student at YYC who was cleared to backtrack a runway, during SIRO. The student then interpreted the takeoff clearance issued to an Air Canada flight on the intersecting runway as his own. He didn't respond to ATC instructions to abort, so the jet had to abort.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Of course the best way of avoiding SIRO at Goose Bay is to avoid the damn place in the first place - eh? And what can possibly be so important abooot Goose that they need this dangerous procedure in the first place?
[This message has been edited by BEagle (edited 10 September 2000).]
[This message has been edited by BEagle (edited 10 September 2000).]
Guest
Posts: n/a
BEagle. Not so easy to avoid Goose these days - not pilot leader anymore!
Just remembering that delightful weekend we had stuck at Goose a couple of years back. Summer, golf course closed, Blackfly season, everything else shut. I hope RB doesn't decide to start flying there!
Just remembering that delightful weekend we had stuck at Goose a couple of years back. Summer, golf course closed, Blackfly season, everything else shut. I hope RB doesn't decide to start flying there!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Even worse was a little jaunt there some years ago. Non-stop 8 hours to Cold Lake, then back the next day to Goose with some Harriers. But then we were ordered to stay there over Easter because the shiny-ar$es had organised themselves a works outing and wouldn't let us do our own thing with the Canucks - because then the world would realise that we don't need the RAFU!!. No food, no bar, no transport.......and on the Monday when we came to leave they still weren't back at work so we just b*ggered off anyway across the pond for another 5 1/2 hours home!!
