Jumbodriver

Only if they're cruising below normal levels.

johan rebel

How are incoming flights prioritzed?

On the short hop from AMS, the plane sometimes slows down about halfway into the flight, sometimes goes into a holding pattern. When circling on clear days, I can sometimes see other aircraft coming from behind (i.e. from the continent) that seem to descend straight into LHR, without going into a holding pattern.

The other day I was checking some flights on Flightstats.com, and happened to notice that two AMS-LHR flights had departed within minutes of each other, yet the plane that took off first arrived over half an hour later than the other one.

So, how does it work?

Johan

Jumbodriver

London ATC (almost) never change the order of arrivals, you're probably seeing aircraft going into other airports. As for the time, was one a turboprop, was there a delay for a stand, or, did one have a slot and remote hold? There's lots of reasons but it won't be queue jumping, this isn't CDG! A 30 min delay in the air would be getting towards causing a diversion and is pretty unusual anyway.

Jumbodriver

While I'm here, if you're flying overnight in northern latitudes over the next few days then get a window seat on the northern side of the aircraft. There's a solar storm and the aurora are pretty special apparently.

Heathrow Tower

As Jumbodriver says, essentially UK ATC, especially for inbounds to an airfield such as LHR, work on a 'first come first served' principle, with some tweaks to provide the most expeditious landing order.

These tweaks can take place at different stages of flight....for inbounds across the Atlantic, speed adjustments may be made before they even cross the west coast of Ireland. There are few options to adjust a flight from AMS to LHR because of the short flight time and the fact that for half the flight it's not under control of UK ATC.

The are a series of interlinked technologies and initiatives such as Arrival Manager, Collaborative Decision Management, Functional Airspace Blocks etc which at some point make everything far more efficient!

johan rebel

I regularly fly JNB-LHR. Quite often, the arrival time is adjusted on the evening of departure (according to the Flightstats and Flight Tracker updates I get) to arrive 15 minutes or so early. Invariably, we then go into a holding pattern and arrive on schedule, at best. Why do these flights not slow down slightly? Surely flying a holding pattern is less fuel efficient?

KL1001 and BA423, so no, neither was a turboprop. Both were slightly delayed out of AMS, should I succeed in remembering the date I shall look op the exact runway times.

Your professional insights and comments are much appreciated, by the way.

Johan

Globaliser

Are you sure you're comparing like with like? Some of the sites report planned/actual takeoff and landing times, which of course are earlier than planned/actual departure and arrival times.

Jumbodriver

Its first come first served, all that would be achieved is arriving further down the queue and therefore land even later. I believe there will shortly be a trial with some European airports where the holding delay will be taken on the ground at the airport of origin and the aircraft will avoid airborne holding at LHR. On Longhaul flights though it's difficult to second guess what the traffic situation will be at LHR in 11 hrs time. So we'll make a decision on speed based on our experience for the time of day at LHR and aim to get ourselves in a position to land on time if possible, aiming for a landing time around 20 mins early normally works but at some times of day all bets are off.

0600-0700 is a very difficult time to judge, because so much depends on the atlantic jetstream, if its strong all the E coast flights will be early and there'll be loads in the hold at 0600 but it will be relatively quiet by 0630 if there isnt much of one then everyone arrives later and 0600 is quiet(ish) and 0630 is manic. Joburg will rarely have any head/tailwind to speak of so assuming an on time departure will generally be pretty regular itself but then subject to delays from traffic arriving from elsewhere.

onaswan

A-ha that may have already answered my question before my asking it, however, on this subject, couldn't / shouldn't AMS / BRU take-offs be planned (held) to coincide with landing slots? ie the 'holding' is done on the ground at the origin rather than in the air at the destination, thus saving fuel (and the crowded skies above Kent and Essex)?

golfmad

This was done very effectively on the cross channel ferry routes many years ago when GPS and centralised tracking first became a practical option. In previous years, ferries would steam as fast as possible to their destination and then sometimes have to sit for ages before accessing the port. This was changed so that speeds could be optimised en route to arrive just-in-time for port access. The savings in fuel costs were significant.

Scott Pilgrim

You need/want a pool of around 10 minutes worth off traffic in the inner holds to ensure that the final approach is kept topped up and that you have enough traffic around to get the best landing order.

Ground holding prior to departure has been trialled on occasion but is not used currently on a routine basis. Whilst it works for the occasional flight, at the moment the airspace is not set up very well for it to be used at LHR regularly. If you had a number of aircraft in the holds having to be correctly sequenced with traffic meant to come through the holds with no delay along with other traffic such as Northolt arrivals that come through the LHR stacks, throw in some TEAM etc and it all gets quite complicated in the very small bit of airspace that LHR has to play with. You could actually end up making the overall operation less efficient.

That said there's an ongoing medium term airspace project that will see the London area airspace totally redesigned. Expect the current style of operation to basically continue until it comes to fruition. Thereafter expect some significant changes to what happens today.

As regards the landing order, first come first served is basically it with a certain amount of order changing to gain the over all best landing order, make TEAM work better, accommodate stack swaps and certain other variables that occur.

Heathrow Tower

At the moment there are just too many variables to make this practical. To ensure maximum efficiency, there needs to be a certain level of holding to ensure there is no wasted capacity. I.e. if you aim for aircraft to turn up 'just in time' for them to join the final approach with no delay, then if for any one of tens of reasons it's not there right when it should be, that is wasted capacity.

Flight plans at the moment operate to +/- 15 minutes. This is the 'off blocks time'. You take somewhere large like CDG or AMS and think how variable this could make the arrival time into LHR. Pushback direction, whether the aircraft had to give way to others on pushback or taxi, taxi route, aircraft moving slow ahead, delays at the holding point, etc etc. it could push at off blocks -15 and be taking off even before the flight plan timings had it starting got taxi. On the other hand, it might push back at of blocks time +15 and take ages getting to the runway,be stuck in a big queue, get airborne significantly late on the flight plan. If aircraft have an ATC slot time, then this is the take off time in the window -5 to +10 mins, so this is more predictable. A programme called CDM is being developed acros Europe to make these times more accurate.

dunk

Do BA (still) have their own engineers at outstations or is this now outsourced to other organisations, e.g. partners or 3rd parties ?

And do they hold spares, or rely on suppliers or friendly partners for the usual bits that go wrong ? I can just picture someone ringing around to see if someone has an alternator for a '96 744 ? "RR engine ? Sorry mate, no call for 'em"

I was fascinated to watch a tyre being changed on a TAM 777 at FRA before Xmas, whilst the aircraft was at the gate. It seemed that they just jacked it up and replaced the entire wheel.

HarryHolden68

What do CC think of the New First design? On my list trip, my only negative is the lack of individual control of the calf rest, which was available in the previous cabin.

There appeared to be less available surface space for drinks, snacks, books, iPads, headphones and all the other rubbish I insist on having. This culminated with my refreshed wine glass ending up horizontal - a position the glass was not designed for unless it was either empty or against my mouth, neither of which was the case.

Several napkins and a plethora of humble apologies later, the conversation ensued about this being an ongoing problem in NF. I must add that this was a genuine accident, and that in the aftermath, the actions of the CC and the CSD were exemplary in every respect.

However, are there any other design issues CC have to deal with that suggest the new cabin was not road tested as fully as would be desired and rolled out prematurely?

Jumbodriver

Most longhaul destinations have BA engineers either locals or Brits on medium term secondments. They often do work for other companies too. A few stations have contracted engineers, SAA in S Africa and VS in LAS for example.

All stations have a spares kit of regularly changed stuff like wheels etc and some more major stuff. Less frequently used bits can be bought from other airlines if available or the manufacturers have spares warehouses all over the world.