Buried below your new tower!
Excellent….we’ll move back to the old one while we dig it up….everyone wins!
As for one person owning aeroplanes, I seem to remember that I read somewhere that bmi and bmiBaby aircraft are all owned by Sir Michael Bishop’s holding company (owned totally by him) and then leased to bmi and Baby.
Where’s the prize? 😀
This the person you were thinking of?……
But LHR will be seeing almost double the A380 traffic then any US airport IMO , so its a pretty decent investment for them as most of the airlines that have ordered this airacraft will atleast use some for comming into LHR . LHR is probably the most suitable airport for the A380 .
That may well be, but there are still going to be many restrictions on traffic when an A380 is in; only certain taxiways and stands will be used, and there will be restrictions on which a/c can pass abeam an A380 on another taxiway. In fact, with the current wake vortex considerations, and the airfield restrictions, it might well prove to be the case that it will cause more disruption and delay than the extra passenger numbers warrant.
I’ve heard that although SIA will bring one in on the inaugural revenue earning A380 flight (rumour is that it’s in the contract with Airbus), they will immediately switch their 380s to Singapore-Australia.
interesting article..
US airports plan ground restrictions for A380
The US airports are not special in that regard, LHR is going to be the same.
It’s great working at Heathrow, certainly, and if all goes well tonight, then we’ll have an even better view than before.
A pity it’s a retrograde step in many ways.
The lighting system at LHR (follow the greens) is used at night or during the day when the viz is less than 1000m.
The system is easy to follow from a flight crew point of view, however it requires us, the ATCOs, to co-ordinate constantly with our lighting operators to set up the correct routes, so actually increases our workload.
Listening to those JFK clips make me cringe. If that sort of thing was happening at LHR, the ATCO concerned would be in the sim pretty sharpish for remedial training!
medium/ short long haul flights
You what? 😀
And there I was thinking Antonov was Ukrainian……..
That’s Farnborough.
http://www.ais.org.uk/aes/pubs/aip/pdf/aerodromes/32LF0201.PDF
ATFS,
I’m the unit Representative for GATCO at Heathrow Tower, and I promise you it was on the cover. If I can find a copy of the mag, I’ll scan it and email it to you.
BTW, the mag is called ‘Transmit’.
Aha! Handily it’s still the current issue, therefore the cover is on the website. Here, have a look at http://www.gatco.org/transmit.html
I don’t believe this is fake.
It’s a Predator UAV, I believe, and an Ariana A300 in Afghanistan.
It was used recently as the cover picture of the magazine of the Guild of Air Traffic Controllers (GATCO) to highlight ATC issues with UAVs.
Phantom,
No, I don’t have any inside information.
I was just curious.
Maybe the consensus with the Europeans taking part of with those who simply like Airbus, but for the rest of us, the KC-767 makes perfect sense. I don’t deny the KC-30 is a better tanker plane for plane, but for the USAF’s needs, the KC-767 is the better solution……
…..This is especially true when you consider the fact that more KC-767’s will be purchased than KC-30’s (if the latter was chosen in lieu of the KC-767 that is)…….
…..You guys can have the fact that plane for plane the KC-30 is better performing, but in this case, and for the USAF, the KC-767 is the better solution, and like it or not, it will be the airplane that is selected….
Phantom, hypothetically, if the KC-30 was offered at the same price as (or even cheaper than) the KC-767, what then?
Why a purpose built rig? As has been said, it combines many characteristics of different a/c (doubled deck, tail engine etc). Also, it has a very complicated fire system with fuel lines and nozzles so that many different types of fire (location, intensity etc) can be closely controlled.