"Growth of VLJs adds a significant extra dimension to the complexity of air traffic in Europe," says Eurocontrol's deputy director of air traffic management strategies, Alex Hendriks.
He says the different performance characteristics of VLJs compared with regular commercial aircraft, particularly in the departure and en-route phases of flight, are likely to have a "considerable impact" on the air transport network.
These VLJs are likely to create problems because they will typically operate between flight levels 330 and 350 - within the most heavily populated band of European cruise altitudes - but will travel at speeds of only 340-380kt (630-700km/h), about 20% slower than larger transports.
There are also concerns over a broad disparity between the climb rates of VLJs against those of regular jets. Eurocontrol's airspace network planning chief, Joe Sultana, told a VLJ workshop last year that aircraft performance differences, in both en-route and terminal airspace, could lead to a significant impact on controller workload. He also warned that wake vortex could pose a hazard if VLJs needed to climb or descend through occupied flight levels.
Possible strategies to cope with VLJs could include airspace redesign, with dedicated departure and arrival patterns, as well as parallel offset procedures.
Esteemed tinpushers of A.net, what say you?
Will the more congested regions of the US experience such a degree of complications? If so, what should be done to alleviate these issues?
IAHFLYR From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 4790 posts, RR: 22
Reply 2, posted (6 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 2238 times:
A great topic 2H4, only problem I have with the VLJ is that until the airplanes actually are in the system and we learn of them all a controller has to rely on is what the manufacture gives for performance numbers.
As a terminal rat, my issue on departures will be when you hit 10,000' what speed will you reduce to? And worse, if they want to climb at something less than 300 KIAS the term stone in the road will apply.
So as I see it with my limited and narrow minded approach, there are or should be, 2 lines of traffic, those who fly in the climb like a real airplane, 290 KIAS +, those who climb at a speed less than 290 KIAS............AND, those who cruise at Mach .75 and slower. Now we will have another group, and those will have to be evaluated once they start to be more prevalent and the ATC folks start to understand the performance numbers.
Any views shared are strictly my own and do not a represent those of any former employer.
Deltamike172 From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 67 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (6 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 1902 times:
"Eclipse 123 flight level two three zero will be your final."
I fully concur with this statement anywhere on the east coast between the hours of 7am and 9pm. We already have occasional issues with TBMs and PC12s and P180s in the mid to high flight levels going 150 knots slower than everyone else. There are going to places where these VLJs are gonna cuase quite a headache, and at some point, we're gonna learn to just slow them to minimum speed and fit them in with the props.
As far as a general statement though, I think if they climb really crappy (less than 1000 fpm above FL180) that'll be more of a problem, not so much to ground speeds.
Jhooper From United States of America, joined Dec 2001, 6206 posts, RR: 12
Reply 7, posted (6 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 1895 times:
Traffic in Europe is too crammed as it is. Yes I think it'll be a pain in the arse for everyone. I'm not a controller, but from his perspective, you're a blip on the radar screen using up the same resources whether you're an A-380 or a Mustang. Of course, a 747 isn't a "roadblock in the sky" unlike these baby jets. As for the states, if VLJs become very popular, I can see the airlines winning the "user fee" battle.
Last year 1,944 New Yorkers saw something and said something.
2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8956 posts, RR: 60
Reply 8, posted (6 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 1888 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW DATABASE EDITOR
Quoting Deltamike172 (Reply 6): As far as a general statement though, I think if they climb really crappy (less than 1000 fpm
above FL180) that'll be more of a problem, not so much to ground speeds.
Don't many "regional" jets already do this?
Quoting IAHFLYR (Reply 2): only problem I have with the VLJ is that until the airplanes actually are in the system and we learn of them all a controller has to rely on is what the manufacture gives for performance numbers.
Quoting P3Orion (Reply 3): If I was still at ZDC my reply to this dilemma would be this:"Eclipse 123 flight level two three zero will be your final."
Seems that perhaps the best solution will be to buy an efficient turboprop and zip along in the high teens or low twenties all by yourself.
Quoting SlamClick: Several years ago I was flying a BAe-146 over fairly short routes, say an hour and twenty minutes on average. One month in the springtime, it was really windy and above about twenty thousand it was really turbulent.
Well, the 146 we'd noticed did not show much reduction in fuel flow from maybe 6-7 thousand feet on up. We reckoned that the only thing we gained going higher was some improvement in True Airspeed but the ride was rougher than hell up there, so two of us, blocked together all month long just decided to go back and forth at 16 and 17 thousand feet on the Victor Airways. We did that for a full three weeks of flying. Never got ourselves up to two-nine-nine-two.
Our fuel burns were just about what they always were. We burned more per hour but there was NO trafffic. Even the turboprops were up in the low twenties. We had the altitudes to ourselves, so we constantly got left or right turn on course -direct-direct-direct.
One day we took off out of one airport just behind a DC-10 going the same place we were. Even though it went much faster than we did, we were headed toward our destination while they were still flying some big loop departure procedures. On descent we were below the DC-10 and got sequenced in ahead of it. We landed short and they rolled to the end. Net result, we parked, went in and had a frozen yogurt and were standing at the terminal windows looking out at the -10 still stuck in traffic and not to the gate yet. We beat him by twenty minutes.