Air Traffic, ILS & Navigation Aids

[oldendays]

As far as I know, the standard missed approach procedure for both LBA runways directs a straight ahead climb to 3000 ft QNH. However, ATC invariably amend this to 4000 ft. This being so, does anyone know why the procedure hasn't been formally amended to what always happens? Thankyou.

 

[radar]

As far as I know, the standard missed approach procedure for both LBA runways directs a straight ahead climb to 3000 ft QNH. However, ATC invariably amend this to 4000 ft. This being so, does anyone know why the procedure hasn't been formally amended to what always happens? Thankyou.

The standard missed approach is a climbing RH turn to hold at the LBA at 3000’. This is a very old procedure which, while it is terrain safe, is less than useful in other respects for the current-day operation.

Many modern jets find the standard MAP tricky to fly (high energy state approaching a relatively low levelling-off, combined with a turn and hold entry). Turning back toward the overhead at 3000’ also conflicts with following traffic on final, hence ATC will usually amend it to ‘Straight ahead, climb to altitude 4000’ in circumstances when missed approaches are more likely (LVPs, high crosswinds etc.).

The reason for using 4000’ is that it gives the crew more time to configure the aircraft and level off in time, but also that it is a terrain-safe level to the NW, where 3000’ wouldn’t be.

You ask why the standard MAP is still the standard MAP if it’s problematic, which is a fair question. The answer is that to change it takes a full airspace change process (ACP), so it is combined with the broader ACP which is ongoing.

 

[oldendays]

Thankyou for that detailed reply, radar. I've been meaning to ask the question for years. I guessed the stop-altitude of 3000 ft would be impractical for modern fast-climbing aircraft. Also, following runway heading provides for horizontal separation.

 

[The Pole]

I've mentioned this several times before when I have witnessed a flight take off from 14 over horsforth, with some deviate from the SID.
Someone on here stated that no changes to them but deviations can occur due to other factors which we all know about.
Just seen Ryanair to Bratislava turn left just before overhead Leeds City and then back right onto normal route. KLM was the first one i recall doing this and a few others.
Clear sky no traffic and CAV OK
Check play back on flight radar if interested.
Anyone in ATC on here? And on shift just now?
Thanks

 

[LeedsPilot]

It is due to differing navigation database providers that airlines use. If you look at the charts from the UK AIP, the LAMIX departures off RW14 are straight ahead to 2 miles, then intercept 146 degrees inbound to Gamston VOR.

Some navigation providers must interpret this as continuing to fly straight ahead beyond the 2 miles to intercept it, whilst others interpret it as to intercept it promptly after 2 miles by turning slightly left and then right. Hope this helps.

 

[EX9]

I've played this back and it doesn't appear to be anything that Leeds would have instructed the aircraft to do.

The aircrafts height is around the time they would be handed over to Scottish control.
At a guess, Its either the aircraft/crew not flying the SID in a straight line or its FR24 making it look more significant than it was. The crew could have been manually flying the departure?

I certainly wouldn't believe everything FR24 shows as it can show predicted tracks from reading all their small print.

I'm not sure what you mean by returning to the "morning" route.

 

[The Pole]

I've played this back and it doesn't appear to be anything that Leeds would have instructed the aircraft to do.

The aircrafts height is around the time they would be handed over to Scottish control.
At a guess, Its either the aircraft/crew not flying the SID in a straight line or its FR24 making it look more significant than it was. The crew could have been manually flying the departure?

I certainly wouldn't believe everything FR24 shows as it can show predicted tracks from reading all their small print.

I'm not sure what you mean by returning to the "morning" route.

I actually witnessed the slight left turn myself. So FR 24 was spot on.
I am just right of the flight path and get a great view of aircraft. Can even see arrivals as far aware as before Doncaster on a night and over Manchester from attic bedroom.
Didn't think they handed to Scottish so early? But it was high compared to normal as were a couple more that left last night.
Also thought auto pilot flew sid?
Maybe dialled frequency change into burn pilot in error

I've played this back and it doesn't appear to be anything that Leeds would have instructed the aircraft to do.

The aircrafts height is around the time they would be handed over to Scottish control.
At a guess, Its either the aircraft/crew not flying the SID in a straight line or its FR24 making it look more significant than it was. The crew could have been manually flying the departure?

I certainly wouldn't believe everything FR24 shows as it can show predicted tracks from reading all their small print.

I'm not sure what you mean by returning to the "morning" route.

Normal route! Predictive text and my error not checking before sending!

 

[The Pole]

Eastern on behalf of KLM departed 14 and took a definite left turn around Leeds City centre then back on course. See FR24

 

[The Pole]

Same route again just now

 

[oldendays]

Perhaps Eastern is participating in a revised SID trial for eastbound departures. Or just coincidence that the same flight on both occasions needed radar separation from other traffic. If I were to guess, I'd go for the former.

 

[EX9]

There is no trial or amendments to the SIDs.

 

[radar]

The reason is as stated by @LeedsPilot above. Different providers of navigation databases interpreting the same data in a slightly different way.

 

[The Pole]

Hope my sat nav doesn't interpret data differently. May end up going down M1 on northbound carriageway!

 

[Len Fish]

I must admit I find it odd that different navigation databases process the same information differently and that a standard departure is not enforced.

 

[The Pole]

I must admit I find it odd that different navigation databases process the same information differently and that a standard departure is not enforced.

Exactly but what do we know! I have seen a Ryanair take this route also (see post 2/4/25) and I bet the 737 has a different NAV system to the Embraers

 

[LeedsPilot]

I must admit I find it odd that different navigation databases process the same information differently and that a standard departure is not enforced.

If you look at the charts from the UK AIP they are no clearer. They denote the 2 mile point but the line just continues straight ahead beyond this. A standard "intercept" when routing towards a VOR is 30 degrees, which is what the text (not the diagram) on the very same chart instructs...

 

[The Pole]

Anyone see Eastern off 14 at 1758?

 

[The Pole]

Anyone see Eastern off 14 at 1758?

And again tonight.
I sound like @LBA4EVER on his tdz rant

Ryanair to Bratislava just taken same route around Leeds City centre
18.49
Can someone from ATC help

 

[radar]

I'm not sure what you're hoping to hear! As long as they fly straight ahead for 2nm after departing RWY14, they are complying with noise abatement procedures.

 

[lbaspotter]

Is the ILS currently out of use?