NYC777
Topic Author
Posts: 5083
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2004 3:00 am

Willie Walsh : A380 May Reduce LHR Capacity

Tue Nov 14, 2006 5:00 am

From BA head honcho himself:

Fair Use Excerpt:

The A380 was supposed to have provided effectively the capacity of three airport landing slots for the price of two, Walsh said. ''That was the sales talk,'' he said. ''We know the outcome has been rather different.''

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...=conews&tkr=BA:US&sid=alRzsJ5zx89Q
That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
 
BoomBoom
Posts: 2459
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 2:26 am

RE: Willie Walsh : A380 May Reduce LHR Capacity

Tue Nov 14, 2006 5:13 am

Quote:
Turbulence from the jumbo jet's wake will require a separation between planes of an extra two nautical miles ''for at least the first couple of years of operation,'' cutting the number of flights at Heathrow, Walsh said...

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...=conews&tkr=BA:US&sid=alRzsJ5zx89Q
Our eyes are open, our eyes are open--wide, wide, wide...
 
Poitin
Posts: 2651
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 6:32 am

RE: Willie Walsh : A380 May Reduce LHR Capacity

Tue Nov 14, 2006 5:34 am

Now so, have ye time fer a pint?
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23459
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Willie Walsh : A380 May Reduce LHR Capacity

Tue Nov 14, 2006 5:37 am

Well it looks like Airbus is trying to gather more data to see if a more refined seperation ruling is possible - Airbus To Re-Test A380 Separations (by Leelaw Nov 13 2006 in Civil Aviation)
 
PITrules
Posts: 2109
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2000 11:27 am

RE: Willie Walsh : A380 May Reduce LHR Capacity

Tue Nov 14, 2006 6:31 am

I think Heathrow should take the blame on this one. A simple way to increase the airport's capacity would be to allow one or two departures from the same runway in between an A-380 arrival and the next arrival.

However, their refusal to adopt mixed mode operations would prohibit this.
FLYi
 
Poitin
Posts: 2651
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 6:32 am

RE: Willie Walsh : A380 May Reduce LHR Capacity

Tue Nov 14, 2006 6:48 am

Quoting PITrules (Reply 4):
However, their refusal to adopt mixed mode operations would prohibit this.

From what I've been told you really don't want somebody taxing onto a runway with another airplane on short final. Scares the hell out of the pax when the pilot has to do a go around if the plane doesn't take off quickly enough.

Perhaps some tower operators might have something to say about this.
Now so, have ye time fer a pint?
 
scouseflyer
Posts: 2167
Joined: Wed Apr 26, 2006 7:02 pm

RE: Willie Walsh : A380 May Reduce LHR Capacity

Tue Nov 14, 2006 8:02 am

Quoting PITrules (Reply 4):
wever, their refusal to adopt mixed mode operations would prohibit this

They have applied for permission to do it from 2010 IIRC but there may have to be (yet another) public enquiry
 
ebbuk
Posts: 844
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 6:47 am

RE: Willie Walsh : A380 May Reduce LHR Capacity

Tue Nov 14, 2006 8:14 am

BA is not likely to be affected by reduced LHR capacity.

Could this be sales neogiations by big Willie? Is the 380 heading in a BA direction?
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13807
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Willie Walsh : A380 May Reduce LHR Capacity

Tue Nov 14, 2006 8:55 am

Quoting PITrules (Reply 4):
I think Heathrow should take the blame on this one.

Sorry, but this argument doesn't hold water.

If mixed mode is the answer for capacity, it can be done for 747s as well, and still increase capacity at the airport. If mixed mode is required for the A380 to live up to promises, then those are empty promises.

After all, Boeing could start advertising right now: "Our entire fleet can increase capacity at any airport if you force your airport to change procedures to acomodate us..."

This is a similar false argument made by diet plan companies. Buy our food and lose weight*!! (*as long as you also exercise way more than you do now and stop snacking as well, otherwise you might as well just keep eating pizza...)

If the A380 reduces "fat" by forcing you to change your behavior, it's not really doing much at all that changing your behavior couldn't have done on it's own...
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
Poitin
Posts: 2651
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 6:32 am

RE: Willie Walsh : A380 May Reduce LHR Capacity

Tue Nov 14, 2006 9:33 am

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 8):
If mixed mode is the answer for capacity, it can be done for 747s as well, and still increase capacity at the airport. If mixed mode is required for the A380 to live up to promises, then those are empty promises.

This argument can be made for any class of aircraft. The issue is what happens if a outgoing aircraft taxis into the runway and has a minor problem? If there if a line of planes trying to take off behind it, then very little.

But in this so-called dual-mode mode you have a big problem:

IF there is a plane on final with the runway blocked, you have a go-a-round. The pax do not like this. In fact, they hate it. They fear that they are almost going to die! "Oh, MY GOD, THE PILOT COULDN'T LAND. I ALMOST HAD A HEART ATTACK!" Yada, yada, yada.

No, there is a real reason why airplanes take off on one runway and land on another if at all possible. It is call bloody terrible experience.
Now so, have ye time fer a pint?
 
vv701
Posts: 5805
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 10:54 am

RE: Willie Walsh : A380 May Reduce LHR Capacity

Tue Nov 14, 2006 9:48 am

Quoting PITrules (Reply 4):
I think Heathrow should take the blame on this one. A simple way to increase the airport's capacity would be to allow one or two departures from the same runway in between an A-380 arrival and the next arrival.

However, their refusal to adopt mixed mode operations would prohibit this.

Departures from 09L at LHR would be illegal. This was known before the 380 was even a twinkle in Airbus's eye.

As far as operating in mixed mode on 27L and 27R there is a very strong and well organised NIMBY lobby that is well organised and has become very vocal since the UK government indicated the possibility of mixed mode operations at LHR in the spring of last year. (If you want to see how well organised and vocal google 'Heathrow mixed mode'.)

So there is a simple question. If mixed mode is introduced on 27L and 27R to accommodate the 380 what happens when there is an easterly wind and departures from 09L cannot take place?

So one thing is clear. Neither BAA or Heathrow Airport Ltd are law makers so clearly they

Quoting PITrules (Reply 4):
take the blame on this one
 
dank
Posts: 928
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 11:35 am

RE: Willie Walsh : A380 May Reduce LHR Capacity

Tue Nov 14, 2006 9:57 am

Quoting Poitin (Reply 9):
No, there is a real reason why airplanes take off on one runway and land on another if at all possible. It is call bloody terrible experience.

RDU does this, even though they have parallel runways (I assume to shorten taxi times because of the location of the terminals) (and CDG must have done this before they had two sets of parallel runways also due to terminal location).
The only time I have had a concern at RDU was the time that my flight had permission to land reverse the direction of traffic to shorten taxi time (delayed departure). Nothing like seeing the lights of incoming aircraft coming toward you for the same runway as your plane makes it's final turn on approach.

cheers.
 
Rj111
Posts: 3007
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:02 am

RE: Willie Walsh : A380 May Reduce LHR Capacity

Tue Nov 14, 2006 10:04 am

Quoting PITrules (Reply 4):
I think Heathrow should take the blame on this one. A simple way to increase the airport's capacity would be to allow one or two departures from the same runway in between an A-380 arrival and the next arrival.

However, their refusal to adopt mixed mode operations would prohibit this.

I'd imagine that would be quite tricky to implement effectively in practise.

Quoting VV701 (Reply 10):
Departures from 09L at LHR would be illegal. This was known before the 380 was even a twinkle in Airbus's eye.

One rather special plane used to get away with it after the A380 was launched.

[Edited 2006-11-14 02:11:45]
 
planesarecool
Posts: 3211
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2001 12:37 am

RE: Willie Walsh : A380 May Reduce LHR Capacity

Tue Nov 14, 2006 10:49 am

Actually, LHR do operate mixed mode operations on the 27's, to an extent. Currently all departures use 27L, due to work on the taxiways near 27R, however to reduce the amount of runway crossings, various aircraft bound for the south side (T4, Cargo, Royal Suites) use 27L to land throughout the day, and not just in the early morning.

Quoting Poitin (Reply 9):
IF there is a plane on final with the runway blocked, you have a go-a-round. The pax do not like this. In fact, they hate it. They fear that they are almost going to die! "Oh, MY GOD, THE PILOT COULDN'T LAND. I ALMOST HAD A HEART ATTACK!" Yada, yada, yada.

But this can also happen with an arriving aircraft, if it misses an exit, or just takes longer to slow down. I've seen many instances in just one day at LHR where aircraft have been over the perimeter road before receiving landing clearance. Even at somewhere like Gatwick in the height of the summer, where only one runway is used for it's vast amount of arrivals and departures, aborted landings are very rare.
 
dw747400
Posts: 1091
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2001 8:24 am

RE: Willie Walsh : A380 May Reduce LHR Capacity

Tue Nov 14, 2006 10:57 am

Quoting EbbUK (Reply 7):
Could this be sales neogiations by big Willie? Is the 380 heading in a BA direction?

My guess is that any arm-twisting is aimed at an expansion of LHR rather than at getting the A380.
CFI--Certfied Freakin Idiot
 
PITrules
Posts: 2109
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2000 11:27 am

RE: Willie Walsh : A380 May Reduce LHR Capacity

Tue Nov 14, 2006 12:17 pm

Quoting Poitin (Reply 5):
From what I've been told you really don't want somebody taxing onto a runway with another airplane on short final.

Why would there be an aircraft taxiing onto the runway when someone is on short final??? The departing aircraft would taxi onto the runway after the A-380 on short final lands. The next arriving aircraft would be on a long final due to the wake turbulence separation.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 8):
Sorry, but this argument doesn't hold water.

Yes, it does.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 8):
If mixed mode is the answer for capacity, it can be done for 747s as well, and still increase capacity at the airport.

Exactly. But LHR won't do it. Many other airports around the world do.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 8):
If mixed mode is required for the A380 to live up to promises, then those are empty promises.

I agree. I am not making excuses for Airbus's empty promises. My point is that LHR may improve the situation by going to dual mode operations, but refuses to.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 8):
After all, Boeing could start advertising right now: "Our entire fleet can increase capacity at any airport if you force your airport to change procedures to acomodate us..."

As stated, most airports, from JFK to SYD, operate in a dual mode when it benefits them, so Boeing doesn't need to make such a claim, although it would be valid at LHR.

Quoting Poitin (Reply 9):
But in this so-called dual-mode mode you have a big problem:

IF there is a plane on final with the runway blocked, you have a go-a-round.

Which happens less than one percent of the time. A go-around is a normal maneuver, it happens every day.

Quoting RJ111 (Reply 12):
I'd imagine that would be quite tricky to implement effectively in practise.

Why? LGW and SAN do it just fine. Ever been to ORD?


My point is very simple. Dozens of airports take advantage of the wake turbulence separation on arriving aircraft to launch departing aircraft. If LHR doesn't want to take advantage of the extra space, that's their business, but other airports certainly will.

[Edited 2006-11-14 04:26:54]
FLYi
 
khobar
Posts: 1336
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 4:12 am

RE: Willie Walsh : A380 May Reduce LHR Capacity

Tue Nov 14, 2006 3:08 pm

Quoting PITrules (Reply 15):
My point is very simple. Dozens of airports take advantage of the wake turbulence separation on arriving aircraft to launch departing aircraft. If LHR doesn't want to take advantage of the extra space, that's their business, but other airports certainly will.

LHR, as the world's busiest international airport expecting 1 in 8 ops to be A380 is THE most important A380 hub. What any other airport decides to do is kinda beside the point.
 
Tangowhisky
Posts: 667
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 2:26 am

RE: Willie Walsh : A380 May Reduce LHR Capacity

Tue Nov 14, 2006 4:31 pm

So is Walsh negotiating for A380s, putting pressure on BAA to improve thruput, or is his mind made up for something else (747-8?)?
Only the paranoid survive
 
slz396
Posts: 1883
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2001 7:01 am

RE: Willie Walsh : A380 May Reduce LHR Capacity

Tue Nov 14, 2006 6:03 pm

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 17):
So is Walsh negotiating for A380s, putting pressure on BAA to improve thruput, or is his mind made up for something else (747-8?)?

Given the fact there is a second thread on this forum in which BA's CEO openly praises the A380 and even speculates himself about an upcoming order (including a number), I think it is indeed a hint BA are in talks with Airbus on A380s.... whether or not it leads to an order, remains to be seen of course, but they are definitely talking in my view.

Besides, even if BA doesn't,they might still want to set some pressure on BAA to come up with a solution or have the UK CAA relax the rules, since the new separation rules for 'supers' as they are called will also apply for the 748I if I am not mistaken? As I understand it, the lower margin for 'super' is set at 'anything bigger than a 747-400', so the alternative to the A380 for BA, i.e 747-8i falls in it too and would suffer even more from the same "problem"...

[Edited 2006-11-14 10:25:14]
 
SailorOrion
Posts: 1959
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2001 5:56 pm

RE: Willie Walsh : A380 May Reduce LHR Capacity

Tue Nov 14, 2006 6:18 pm

It somehow sounds as if "mixed mode" operations are a new idea. In fact, many many airports use mixed mode as a normal mode of operations (single runway airports anyone?)....

SailorOrion
 
anstar
Posts: 2882
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2003 3:49 am

RE: Willie Walsh : A380 May Reduce LHR Capacity

Tue Nov 14, 2006 6:32 pm

Quoting Poitin (Reply 5):
From what I've been told you really don't want somebody taxing onto a runway with another airplane on short final. Scares the hell out of the pax when the pilot has to do a go around if the plane doesn't take off quickly enough.

Isn;t this how Gatwick already operate?
 
abc9
Posts: 165
Joined: Tue May 09, 2006 1:20 am

RE: Willie Walsh : A380 May Reduce LHR Capacity

Tue Nov 14, 2006 9:44 pm

Quoting ANstar (Reply 20):
Isn;t this how Gatwick already operate?

Yes it is, and another example is DUB which handles 20m+ passengers per annum with just one runway
 
theginge
Posts: 496
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 1:53 am

RE: Willie Walsh : A380 May Reduce LHR Capacity

Tue Nov 14, 2006 9:55 pm

09L Departures at LHR are not 'Illegal'. There is the Cranford Agreement that when on easteriles only 09R is used for take off to avoid low flying aircraft over Cranford, but departures can be made from 09L, for example if 09R was out of action for a short time.

Go to the ATC forum of another well known Aviation Discussion site, there is currently a thread discussing the pros and cons of mixed mode.
 
vv701
Posts: 5805
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 10:54 am

RE: Willie Walsh : A380 May Reduce LHR Capacity

Wed Nov 15, 2006 12:45 am

It is not clear to me whether everyone participating in this thread is clear as to why LHR does not in general operate mixed mode.

As I have already stated mixed mode operations and all departures are banned from 09L and this ban is legally enforceable as it came about to protect a community adjacent to the west end of the runway from the noise of departing aircraft when granting planning permission under the 1948 Town & Country Planning Act.

Mixed mode operation does occur from time to time on 09R, the only runway at LHR where there is no legal or other reason restricting mixed mode operation.

A switch system is operated when 27R and 27L are in use. This involves a change in runway use at 1500 hours local time from arrivals to departures and vice-versa. There is also a switch early on Monday morning - when the airport is effectively closed - when the arrival runway for the previous 7 days becomes the departure runway for the next 7 days.

The system operated on 27R and 27L is not legally enforceable. It is done for environmental reasons. The approach path is from the City of London and more or less follows the path of the Thames over Battersea, Wandsworth, Putney, Fulham, Hammersmith, Richmond and Hounslow that, apart from Putney Heath/Wimbledom Common and Richmond Park are all heavily built up primarily residential areas. The system is operated to give those living under the flight path respite from an aircraft passing overhead every 90 seconds.

In the spring of 2005 the UK government announced it would look into mixed mode operation at LHR and report back by Easter 2006. Easter has come and gone and as far as I am aware nothing has been said or done which is pretty much par for the course. However in their spring 2005 announcement the government said that no changes would be made 'without full consultation' and - as I pointed out earlier - the NIMBYs are well organised and vocal.

The first point to note is that London Heathrow Airport Ltd, BAA plc and the LHR ATC are totally powerless to implement mixed mode operation. Such a change can only be made by the British government.

But whatever happens next it seems to me there is one major problem. With no mixed mode operation currently legally possible on 09L (and therefore in any approach from the west) how could you put a timetable together based on mixed mode operation in the (more frequent) approaches from the east? Further it is my view that the British government would find it almost impossible with thew current strength of the European environmental lobby o allow mixed mode operation on approach from the east let alone overthrow a condition of planning through a new Act of Parliament. After all they have just agreed to pay compensation to jailed users of illegal drugs for infringing their rights under the European Human Rights Law by not supplying them with their drugs or methadone while in prison and making them go cold turkey.
 
Poitin
Posts: 2651
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 6:32 am

RE: Willie Walsh : A380 May Reduce LHR Capacity

Wed Nov 15, 2006 12:53 am

Quoting ABC9 (Reply 21):
Quoting ANstar (Reply 20):
Isn;t this how Gatwick already operate?

Yes it is, and another example is DUB which handles 20m+ passengers per annum with just one runway

That is because it has only one runway that can handle airliners.
Now so, have ye time fer a pint?
 
OldAeroGuy
Posts: 3223
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 6:50 am

RE: Willie Walsh : A380 May Reduce LHR Capacity

Wed Nov 15, 2006 12:54 am

Thanks VV701

Your comments would have been welcome when the issue was being discussed on this thread.
UK - New "super" Wake Vortex Sep For A380 (by Mptpa Nov 6 2006 in Civil Aviation)
Airplane design is easy, the difficulty is getting them to fly - Barnes Wallis
 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: Willie Walsh : A380 May Reduce LHR Capacity

Wed Nov 15, 2006 12:54 am

Quoting VV701 (Reply 23):
under the 1948 Town & Country Planning Act.

Britain needs to change antiquated laws...

Quoting VV701 (Reply 23):
After all they have just agreed to pay compensation to jailed users of illegal drugs for infringing their rights under the European Human Rights Law by not supplying them with their drugs or methadone while in prison and making them go cold turkey.

Britain needs to change a lot of laws....
"Up the Irons!"
 
flydreamliner
Posts: 1928
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 7:05 am

RE: Willie Walsh : A380 May Reduce LHR Capacity

Wed Nov 15, 2006 2:17 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 3):
Well it looks like Airbus is trying to gather more data to see if a more refined seperation ruling is possible

It was tested twice officially, I'm not entirely sure what Airbus hopes to do testing it a third time by itself. Quite frankly, its largely wake vortex makes sense, and additional separation makes sense. Airbus would really like, and probably needs things to be different, but that isn't so well reality.

Quoting PITrules (Reply 15):
Why? LGW and SAN do it just fine. Ever been to ORD?

I have been to all three. SAN can be very scary. I've been in aircraft that have done go-arounds at both ORD and SAN. I wouldn't call either a shining example... ORD has delays like crazy, SAN has its own issues.

Quoting SailorOrion (Reply 19):
It somehow sounds as if "mixed mode" operations are a new idea. In fact, many many airports use mixed mode as a normal mode of operations (single runway airports anyone?)....

LHR works very well with one runway facilitating takeoffs, the other landings, their ATC is extremely efficient, and they need to be handle their traffic. They have reasons for not operating mixed mode. They are not going to change around their system that works to facilitate the A380.


Because of the longer spacing requirements for A380, airports could very easily and justifiably charge 1.5 slots or so, because the A380's longer separation decreases the amount of traffic they can push through. If this happens, then per slot, a 747-8 could carry more traffic in, which is not what Airbus wants. So they are doing everything they can to avoid getting penalized for greater seperations.
"Let the world change you, and you can change the world"
 
astuteman
Posts: 6406
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

RE: Willie Walsh : A380 May Reduce LHR Capacity

Wed Nov 15, 2006 2:21 am

Quoting FlyDreamliner (Reply 27):
If this happens, then per slot, a 747-8 could carry more traffic in,

Provided it doesn't get snarled up in the same wake-vortex issues that the A380 has .........

Regards
 
threepoint
Posts: 1292
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2005 10:49 am

RE: Willie Walsh : A380 May Reduce LHR Capacity

Wed Nov 15, 2006 3:31 am

Quoting FlyDreamliner (Reply 27):
per slot, a 747-8 could carry more traffic in



Quoting Astuteman (Reply 28):
Provided it doesn't get snarled up in the same wake-vortex issues that the A380 has .........

It appears the 748 may be held to the same separation rules as the A380:

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 18):
the new separation rules for 'supers' as they are called will also apply for the 748I if I am not mistaken? As I understand it, the lower margin for 'super' is set at 'anything bigger than a 747-400'
The nice thing about a mistake is the pleasure it gives others.
 
PITrules
Posts: 2109
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2000 11:27 am

RE: Willie Walsh : A380 May Reduce LHR Capacity

Wed Nov 15, 2006 3:50 am

Quoting Khobar (Reply 16):
LHR, as the world's busiest international airport

Here we go again. LHR is not the world's busiest international airport. That title goes to ATL. ATL is an international airport. It is busier than LHR. Therefore, it is a busier international airport.

Yes, we all know LHR processes more international passengers than anyone else. Semantics

Quoting Khobar (Reply 16):
What any other airport decides to do is kinda beside the point.

That's fine, because the other airports have long ago figured it out.

Quoting FlyDreamliner (Reply 27):
I have been to all three. SAN can be very scary. I've been in aircraft that have done go-arounds at both ORD and SAN. I wouldn't call either a shining example... ORD has delays like crazy, SAN has its own issues.

There is nothing scary about SAN from an ATC standpoint. I fly there all the time. They follow the same ATC rules as everyone else. They simply do a great job maximizing the few resources they have. ORD's delays are not related to our topic. Their delays are primarily due to weather and an antiquated layout. On a good weather day, they move an incredible amount of metal through there with little delay, using MIXED MODE when it benefits them.

Quoting VV701 (Reply 23):
It is not clear to me whether everyone participating in this thread is clear as to why LHR does not in general operate mixed mode.

Antiquated laws, as you have very thoroughly explained. That's why it is hypocritical of the British authorities to complain about possible increased delays when they have done it to themselves.

Does it make sense to build a third runway at LHR when the current two are not used to full potential? In the long run, LHR will need both a new runway, and these antiquated laws removed.

It boggles my mind that London can build a new commercial runway in the heart of the city on an old dock, and continually push the limits of that runway, with A-318s soon landing there. But at the same time the city's primary international gateway continues to be plagued by artificial constraints.

[Edited 2006-11-14 20:11:13]
FLYi
 
cobra27
Posts: 939
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:57 pm

RE: Willie Walsh : A380 May Reduce LHR Capacity

Wed Nov 15, 2006 4:03 am

Dream on Willie. Just wait and see
 
iRISH251
Posts: 635
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2004 3:56 am

RE: Willie Walsh : A380 May Reduce LHR Capacity

Wed Nov 15, 2006 4:58 am

Quoting Poitin (Reply 24):
Quoting ABC9 (Reply 21):
Quoting ANstar (Reply 20):
Isn;t this how Gatwick already operate?

Yes it is, and another example is DUB which handles 20m+ passengers per annum with just one runway

That is because it has only one runway that can handle airliners.

Not strictly true regarding Dublin. The secondary runway, 16/34, is 6,500 ft long and is pretty OK for most operations except for heavies departing on long-range flights. Runway 11/29 can handle types up to BAe 146 size and is generally used when 10/28 is active.
 
Poitin
Posts: 2651
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 6:32 am

RE: Willie Walsh : A380 May Reduce LHR Capacity

Wed Nov 15, 2006 5:00 am

Quoting PITrules (Reply 30):
Yes, we all know LHR processes more international passengers than anyone else. Semantics

I am curious what the "international" pax count for LHR would be if they collapsed the counts for people going EU countries and hangers on like Switzerland into a common pool, much like most of ATL's pax go to the USA.
Now so, have ye time fer a pint?
 
Poitin
Posts: 2651
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 6:32 am

RE: Willie Walsh : A380 May Reduce LHR Capacity

Wed Nov 15, 2006 5:21 am

Quoting Irish251 (Reply 32):
Not strictly true regarding Dublin. The secondary runway, 16/34, is 6,500 ft long and is pretty OK for most operations except for heavies departing on long-range flights. Runway 11/29 can handle types up to BAe 146 size and is generally used when 10/28 is active.

Yes, the Piper Cub runway, 11/29 is 1,356 m long and can handle smaller aircraft, but anything the FR or EI uses would have to use 10/28 or 16/34, which are at 60 degrees to each other and hence unlikely to be both usable except in very calm days. Effectively, DUB is a one runway airport. It needs a new 11/29 at least twice as long (the same as today's 10/28) and a 10/28 of about 3500 m (not that that is going to happen)
Now so, have ye time fer a pint?
 
rtfm
Posts: 421
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2004 5:35 pm

RE: Willie Walsh : A380 May Reduce LHR Capacity

Wed Nov 15, 2006 5:53 am

Quoting VV701 (Reply 10):
Departures from 09L at LHR would be illegal



Quoting VV701 (Reply 23):
As I have already stated mixed mode operations and all departures are banned from 09L and this ban is legally enforceable as it came about to protect a community adjacent to the west end of the runway from the noise of departing aircraft when granting planning permission under the 1948 Town & Country Planning Act.

Not strictly true..... the following is a quote from a letter (published on the DfT website) written by the DfT in 2005 in response to a Freedom of Information query about the continued use of the Cranford Agreement:

'...there is no Cranford Agreement document. The noise mitigation measure commonly referred to as the Cranford Agreement, was an undertaking given on 31 July 1952. This was a Ministerially approved undertaking by a senior official, given at a meeting of the Cranford Residents' and District Amenities Association. The undertaking was a statement of best endeavour that, as far as practicable, No. 1 runway (northern runway) would not be used for landings or take-offs to the east, but it was accepted that there would be occasions when, for traffic reasons, both the No. 1 and No. 5 runway (parallel southern runway) would have to be used.' (my italics).

A verbal statement of intent would hardly make it 'legally enforceable' as you state.
 
P3Orion
Posts: 378
Joined: Tue May 30, 2006 10:53 am

RE: Willie Walsh : A380 May Reduce LHR Capacity

Wed Nov 15, 2006 6:53 am

Quoting Khobar (Reply 16):
LHR, as the world's busiest international airport



Quoting PITrules (Reply 30):
LHR is not the world's busiest international airport. That title goes to ATL. ATL is an international airport. It is busier than LHR. Therefore, it is a busier international airport

Actually, in terms of aircraft operations, ORD is the world's busiest airport. And, when we are on Plan X with a trip, we land and depart RWY 09L.
I will have a Manhattan.
 
Poitin
Posts: 2651
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 6:32 am

RE: Willie Walsh : A380 May Reduce LHR Capacity

Wed Nov 15, 2006 7:01 am

Quoting RTFM (Reply 35):
A verbal statement of intent would hardly make it 'legally enforceable' as you state.

It can be considered a "verbal contract" which can be enforced in both US and British law, although difficult. And such a verbal statement would be usable in a court case to show intent. While not "illegal," improper use of the runway under the conditions of this "undertaking" could result in court action and a legally enforcable court decision.

In addition, this may actually be a written document. Your quotation does not indicate if it was or not. However, it appears to be well documented.
Now so, have ye time fer a pint?
 
rtfm
Posts: 421
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2004 5:35 pm

RE: Willie Walsh : A380 May Reduce LHR Capacity

Wed Nov 15, 2006 7:18 am

Quoting Poitin (Reply 37):
In addition, this may actually be a written document. Your quotation does not indicate if it was or not. However, it appears to be well documented.

Err.... the reference I quoted from the letter starts off by quite explicitly stating '...there is no Cranford Agreement document.'

The existence of the agreement is well documented and is not in doubt; however it was verbal undertaking and was not in itself commited to paper by the party making that undertaking.

I am no lawyer, which is why I started my first response by 'not strictly true' in reference to an explicit statement that taking off from 09L is 'illegal'. Hoever, it cannot be illegal as I have seen it done (for a while, towards the end of its life, Concorde regularly used to take off from 09L - if anything would have prompted the people in Cranford taking legal action I would have thought it would have been 4 Olympuses on full take off thrust roaring over the rooftops...).
 
khobar
Posts: 1336
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 4:12 am

RE: Willie Walsh : A380 May Reduce LHR Capacity

Wed Nov 15, 2006 8:13 am

Quoting PITrules (Reply 30):
Here we go again. LHR is not the world's busiest international airport. That title goes to ATL. ATL is an international airport. It is busier than LHR. Therefore, it is a busier international airport.

 Wink

Or are you not trying to be funny?

Quoting P3Orion (Reply 36):
Actually, in terms of aircraft operations, ORD is the world's busiest airport.

As an international airport, Atlanta is actually ranked...wow, Atlanta doesn't even make it into the top 30. For that matter, Chicago doesn't either.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World%2...by_international_passenger_traffic

Quoting PITrules (Reply 30):
That's fine, because the other airports have long ago figured it out.

As I said, what other airports are doing, will be doing, have figured out, etc. doesn't matter. It's like Atlanta's announcement that they will not spend the money to be A380 compatible. While some a.netters jumped all over the announcement, it was completely irrelevant in the grand scheme of things.
 
planesarecool
Posts: 3211
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2001 12:37 am

RE: Willie Walsh : A380 May Reduce LHR Capacity

Wed Nov 15, 2006 8:52 am

Quoting VV701 (Reply 23):
A switch system is operated when 27R and 27L are in use. This involves a change in runway use at 1500 hours local time from arrivals to departures and vice-versa. There is also a switch early on Monday morning - when the airport is effectively closed - when the arrival runway for the previous 7 days becomes the departure runway for the next 7 days

Normally, yes, however at the moment, and for a few weeks to come, all departures are using 27L due to taxiway maintenance around the entrance to 27R. Arrivals use both runways all day, but 27L only gets the odd few, and only aircraft that are heading for the South side, to minimize taxiing times and congestion due to aircraft crossing the runway.

Quoting PITrules (Reply 30):
Does it make sense to build a third runway at LHR when the current two are not used to full potential? In the long run, LHR will need both a new runway, and these antiquated laws removed.

The location of the new runway to the north of the airfield, would mean approach and departure paths wouldn't fly over urban areas until you're getting out as far east as Heston, which is a good 2 miles out, and further out than the nearest urban area to 27L/09R, so the new runway would be the most unrestricted of the 3 runways. They could quite easily have dual mode operations on all 3 while on the 27's and 2 of the 3 while on the 9's.

So a new runway would be an easy way to get around the ancient laws currently restricting departures on 9L and possibly even the 23:29-6:00 night curfew (although i wouldn't hold my breath on that one).
 
SailorOrion
Posts: 1959
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2001 5:56 pm

RE: Willie Walsh : A380 May Reduce LHR Capacity

Wed Nov 15, 2006 5:42 pm

MUC has the same layout as LHR has and of course operates both runways in mixed mode. They accomodate (slot coordination) 90 operations per hour, with a max of 58 take-offs and 58 landings. Real figures are much higher (maximum were 107 operations per hour).

SailorOrion
 
iRISH251
Posts: 635
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2004 3:56 am

RE: Willie Walsh : A380 May Reduce LHR Capacity

Tue Nov 21, 2006 5:20 am

Quoting Poitin (Reply 34):
Yes, the Piper Cub runway, 11/29 is 1,356 m long and can handle smaller aircraft, but anything the FR or EI uses would have to use 10/28 or 16/34, which are at 60 degrees to each other and hence unlikely to be both usable except in very calm days. Effectively, DUB is a one runway airport. It needs a new 11/29 at least twice as long (the same as today's 10/28) and a 10/28 of about 3500 m (not that that is going to happen)

Plans for DUB provide for an additional runway, 10L/28R, replacing 11/29 and, at 3,110m, longer than the present 10/28. Planning permission was granted in April 2006 and target date for completion is 2012 - subject of course to the usual appeals etc. by disgruntled parties.
 
Rj111
Posts: 3007
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:02 am

RE: Willie Walsh : A380 May Reduce LHR Capacity

Tue Nov 21, 2006 5:37 am

Quoting Planesarecool (Reply 40):
Normally, yes, however at the moment, and for a few weeks to come, all departures are using 27L due to taxiway maintenance around the entrance to 27R. Arrivals use both runways all day, but 27L only gets the odd few, and only aircraft that are heading for the South side, to minimize taxiing times and congestion due to aircraft crossing the runway.

They are using 27R for takeoffs again now but I think they are taxiing down 23/05.
 
SJCRRPAX
Posts: 961
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2005 2:29 am

RE: Willie Walsh : A380 May Reduce LHR Capacity

Tue Nov 21, 2006 6:06 am

Quoting Khobar (Reply 39):



Quoting Khobar (Reply 39):
As an international airport, Atlanta is actually ranked...wow, Atlanta doesn't even make it into the top 30. For that matter, Chicago doesn't either.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World%2...affic

I think you are the one trying to be funny  Yeah sure

You quote a list titled,
"World's busiest airports by international passenger traffic"

OK, Atlanta does not make the list for International passenger traffic, but if you just look at Traffic it's #1, and OHare is #2

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World's_busiest_airport
 
khobar
Posts: 1336
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 4:12 am

RE: Willie Walsh : A380 May Reduce LHR Capacity

Tue Nov 21, 2006 7:20 am

Quoting SJCRRPAX (Reply 44):
You quote a list titled,
"World's busiest airports by international passenger traffic"

Would seem logical in a thread about international passenger traffic potentially being reduced at the most important hub for A380 operations.

Quoting SJCRRPAX (Reply 44):
OK, Atlanta does not make the list for International passenger traffic, but if you just look at Traffic it's #1, and OHare is #2

In the context of the thread it doesn't matter where Atlanta is on what list.
 
threepoint
Posts: 1292
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2005 10:49 am

RE: Willie Walsh : A380 May Reduce LHR Capacity

Tue Nov 21, 2006 8:20 am

Quoting SJCRRPAX (Reply 44):
OK, Atlanta does not make the list for International passenger traffic, but if you just look at Traffic it's #1, and OHare is #2

And you see that the "world's busiest" title is interchangeable between the two, with each airport swapping places every couple years or so as of late. So if you are not content to be #2, just wait a year until you regain the title...and then lose it...and then regain it...and then.....
The nice thing about a mistake is the pleasure it gives others.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos