Not seen much on here lately (maybe not looked in the right place) about the revised 32 threshold. I thought there were plans a foot to move it back to nearer the start of the 32 threshold to stop the planes floating in the TDZ then banging the planes down due to the down slope of 32, or did I dream this? Obviously this would mean relocation of ILS and lighting revisions but would also give longer runway length!
Air Traffic, ILS & Navigation Aids
- Thread starter The Pole
- Start date
White Heather
Well-Known Member
Re: 32 ILS
You didn't dream it, no, but I do think that it is 'parked' for now as the airport (hopefully) concentratres on other issues and other expenditure. Hopefully it will re-surface in due course as it will certainly enhance safety be increasing the stopping distance available. I think also that, like all things to do with the ILS at LBA, it will be complicated and expensive.
You didn't dream it, no, but I do think that it is 'parked' for now as the airport (hopefully) concentratres on other issues and other expenditure. Hopefully it will re-surface in due course as it will certainly enhance safety be increasing the stopping distance available. I think also that, like all things to do with the ILS at LBA, it will be complicated and expensive.
CAT II / CAT III Ops at LBA
Would I be right in thinking that the inbound positioning flight from Luton actually made use of the CATIII on 32 or have I had too much sherry over Christmas?
Can't be, its Thomsonfly after all!
Would I be right in thinking that the inbound positioning flight from Luton actually made use of the CATIII on 32 or have I had too much sherry over Christmas?
Can't be, its Thomsonfly after all!
- Moderator
- #5
Re: Thomson Airways
So that proves they have no issues with the system and the runway landing distance available is the problem when they are operationaly heavier as is the problem Jet 2 have with the B757. Lets hope when the new managers have finished building new terminals etc they have a few bob to find a solution to this situation before Dsa gets all the long haul business in Yorkshire.
So that proves they have no issues with the system and the runway landing distance available is the problem when they are operationaly heavier as is the problem Jet 2 have with the B757. Lets hope when the new managers have finished building new terminals etc they have a few bob to find a solution to this situation before Dsa gets all the long haul business in Yorkshire.
- Moderator
- #6
Re: Thomson Airways
Yep last nights empty positioning B737-800, G-CDZL did in fact make a CATIII approach to 32 last night and Landed.
I just wonder if this happen due to the fact that there were no pax onboard as it was a positioning sector so the aircraft was empty and light. Now then let’s see what happens tonight, when it’s inbound from Sharm el Sheikh with pax onboard the aircraft and it will be a bit heavier.
Yep last nights empty positioning B737-800, G-CDZL did in fact make a CATIII approach to 32 last night and Landed.
I just wonder if this happen due to the fact that there were no pax onboard as it was a positioning sector so the aircraft was empty and light. Now then let’s see what happens tonight, when it’s inbound from Sharm el Sheikh with pax onboard the aircraft and it will be a bit heavier.
- Admin
- #7
Re: Thomson Airways
Well the FR 737-800's hardly ever seem to have a problem, even with a slight tail wind so hopefully the airline is onto a winner.
Well the FR 737-800's hardly ever seem to have a problem, even with a slight tail wind so hopefully the airline is onto a winner.
- Jan 14, 2009
- 16,739
- 343
- IMPORTANT!! To reduce spam, we request that you make a post soon after completing your registration. We request you keep your account active by posting regularly. Inactive accounts risk being deleted.
- Yes
- Admin
- #8
Re: Thomson Airways
I've noticed that on occasions when BRS is on full Cat 3b operations some Ryanair 738s divert whilst easyJet 319s and other airlines' 757s land.
I asked about this elsewhere on the net and was told that either the 738s have slightly more demanding criteria for landing under such circumstances or the airline does - I forget which and don't know for certain whether this is true.
I doubt that it's a case of individual crews not being 'current' with Cat 3 as when it has happened a group of Ryanair aircraft has diverted elsewhere (usually to BHX).
I've noticed that on occasions when BRS is on full Cat 3b operations some Ryanair 738s divert whilst easyJet 319s and other airlines' 757s land.
I asked about this elsewhere on the net and was told that either the 738s have slightly more demanding criteria for landing under such circumstances or the airline does - I forget which and don't know for certain whether this is true.
I doubt that it's a case of individual crews not being 'current' with Cat 3 as when it has happened a group of Ryanair aircraft has diverted elsewhere (usually to BHX).
- Moderator
- #9
Re: Thomson Airways
Individual european states have different regulations with the Uk normally having the most restrictive hence the difference. Our A300s are Irish registered having been Belgian registered before and we now have Cat3A certification which we used at 0400 at Ema this morning (Rvrs 400m all the way down the runway)
Individual european states have different regulations with the Uk normally having the most restrictive hence the difference. Our A300s are Irish registered having been Belgian registered before and we now have Cat3A certification which we used at 0400 at Ema this morning (Rvrs 400m all the way down the runway)
Re: Thomson Airways
The 737-800 was initially designed for CAT3A only at the request of Southwest Airlines to save on crew training. I am lead to believe that a 737-800 CAT3B option is now available and has been taken up by Air Berlin. Ryanair unfortunately like Southwest have opted to stick with the 3A version, again for crew type rating.
The Airbus 319 and 757 are CAT3B equipped aircraft so can operate at lower RVR's (75m minimum) as the aircraft tracks the centre line.
The 737-800 was initially designed for CAT3A only at the request of Southwest Airlines to save on crew training. I am lead to believe that a 737-800 CAT3B option is now available and has been taken up by Air Berlin. Ryanair unfortunately like Southwest have opted to stick with the 3A version, again for crew type rating.
The Airbus 319 and 757 are CAT3B equipped aircraft so can operate at lower RVR's (75m minimum) as the aircraft tracks the centre line.
- Moderator
- #11
Re: Thomson Airways
Yep Cat 3B has no decision height and an rvr of 75m so one can see to taxi off the runway at least. Some of the new B737s have the roll out facility you refer to as a function so would be Cat 3b The Cat 3a minima are normally 50ft decision height and 200m rvr at touchdown position. It costs money to keep the aircraft equipment at Cat 3 status as special proceedures have to be implemented as well as 2hrs in the Simulator being dedicated to Cat 3 operations every 6 months during our base checks.
Yep Cat 3B has no decision height and an rvr of 75m so one can see to taxi off the runway at least. Some of the new B737s have the roll out facility you refer to as a function so would be Cat 3b The Cat 3a minima are normally 50ft decision height and 200m rvr at touchdown position. It costs money to keep the aircraft equipment at Cat 3 status as special proceedures have to be implemented as well as 2hrs in the Simulator being dedicated to Cat 3 operations every 6 months during our base checks.
- Moderator
- #13
Re: Thomson Airways
Your opinion is no less humble than mine !
I hope I am not one of those aircrew members that thinks otherwise.
The A319 seems to be capable of Cat 3B here at the Lba as you say, BMI certainly used Cat 3B on occasions, a long term friend who is a captain with them confirmed this to me. It will be interesting to see if Easyjet use it and what minima they use to do so. Does anyone know what Thomas Cook use ie: Cat 2 or Cat 3. The other strange thing is that under Uk rules if you are Cat 3 approved you can only do Cat 3 approaches with an autoland which is what prevents the 757 or other aircraft ,depending on weight, using the system due to landing distance issues at Leeds. We however can elect to carry out a Cat 2 approach if it is above 300m rvr or a Cat 3A if it is below 300m rvr but at or above 200m rvr so if we had a landing distance issue we could operate to Cat 2 minima with a manual landing. If Jet 2 could do the same with the 757 they could at least make an approach at 300m rvr. I am told the problem is a training issue and potential out of trim situation when you disconnect the autopilot to land manually.
Your opinion is no less humble than mine !
I hope I am not one of those aircrew members that thinks otherwise.
The A319 seems to be capable of Cat 3B here at the Lba as you say, BMI certainly used Cat 3B on occasions, a long term friend who is a captain with them confirmed this to me. It will be interesting to see if Easyjet use it and what minima they use to do so. Does anyone know what Thomas Cook use ie: Cat 2 or Cat 3. The other strange thing is that under Uk rules if you are Cat 3 approved you can only do Cat 3 approaches with an autoland which is what prevents the 757 or other aircraft ,depending on weight, using the system due to landing distance issues at Leeds. We however can elect to carry out a Cat 2 approach if it is above 300m rvr or a Cat 3A if it is below 300m rvr but at or above 200m rvr so if we had a landing distance issue we could operate to Cat 2 minima with a manual landing. If Jet 2 could do the same with the 757 they could at least make an approach at 300m rvr. I am told the problem is a training issue and potential out of trim situation when you disconnect the autopilot to land manually.
johnrgowan
New Member
- Sep 20, 2009
- 10
- 0
Re: Thomson Airways
Historically Boeing products have always been more successful using LBA's ILS for CatIII ops than Airbus. bmi had to do alot of work to get the A319 to autoland on 32. Thomas Cook are, I believe CatI only at LBA - indeed I don't think any other Airbus operator historically has performed CatIII approaches at LBA. Experience shows it is the 737-300 which has the best track recored at Leeds with more CatIII approaches than any other type, though this is now being challenged by Ryanair and the 737-800.
When I heard that a TOM 738 had landed CatIII I nearly fell off my chair!!! But it's all a function of landing weight with TOM.
Historically Boeing products have always been more successful using LBA's ILS for CatIII ops than Airbus. bmi had to do alot of work to get the A319 to autoland on 32. Thomas Cook are, I believe CatI only at LBA - indeed I don't think any other Airbus operator historically has performed CatIII approaches at LBA. Experience shows it is the 737-300 which has the best track recored at Leeds with more CatIII approaches than any other type, though this is now being challenged by Ryanair and the 737-800.
When I heard that a TOM 738 had landed CatIII I nearly fell off my chair!!! But it's all a function of landing weight with TOM.
CAT II / CAT III Ops
As the Thomson Thread has moved more towards Leeds Low Vis Procedures, I thought it was about time this sometimes complex subject had it's own thread.
The relevant posts from the Thomson thread have been merged into the "Air Traffic, ILS & Navigation Aids" thread.
Aviador
As the Thomson Thread has moved more towards Leeds Low Vis Procedures, I thought it was about time this sometimes complex subject had it's own thread.
The relevant posts from the Thomson thread have been merged into the "Air Traffic, ILS & Navigation Aids" thread.
Aviador
- Moderator
- #16
Hi
It looks like the ILS is out off action at LBA as for some reasons all inbound aircraft are making DME approaches to Runway 32 this afternoon.
It looks like the ILS is out off action at LBA as for some reasons all inbound aircraft are making DME approaches to Runway 32 this afternoon.
DME visual?
