Jump to content

Airport.


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, snowman said:

If the population was 100,000 plus, things would be more feasible. But with 84,000 this stuff is just pie in the sky. 

The money would be better spent on improving the runway and it's lights to allow aircraft to land in low visibility conditions. For an airport that is so prone to sea fog, it's unbelievable that the systems aren't in place.

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, madmanxpilot said:

The money would be better spent on improving the runway and it's lights to allow aircraft to land in low visibility conditions. For an airport that is so prone to sea fog, it's unbelievable that the systems aren't in place.

Move the prison and reinstate Jurby, only one fog event in thirty years I believe.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, madmanxpilot said:

The money would be better spent on improving the runway and it's lights to allow aircraft to land in low visibility conditions. For an airport that is so prone to sea fog, it's unbelievable that the systems aren't in place.

Do you mean make IOM CATIII ? Are the regional aircraft that come in here (or EZY for that matter) equipped? Getting down is one thing, but taxiing in the fog is another isn’t it ? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, cheesypeas said:

Do you mean make IOM CATIII ? Are the regional aircraft that come in here (or EZY for that matter) equipped? Getting down is one thing, but taxiing in the fog is another isn’t it ? 

Cat 2 - you need less lights for Cat 2 than Cat 1 as you are closer to the ground when the decision is made. You don't need approach lights that are behind you at decision height.

The main difference between Cat 2 and Cat 3 is aircraft capability not ground equipment, so of the airfield was Cat 2 capable, it would likely be Cat 3 too. 

If you have landed in minimum conditions for Cat 2 the visibility will be between 300 and 125 metres, plenty good enough for taxiing in.

 

Edited by madmanxpilot
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, madmanxpilot said:

The money would be better spent on improving the runway and it's lights to allow aircraft to land in low visibility conditions. For an airport that is so prone to sea fog, it's unbelievable that the systems aren't in place.

Well as you know the runway "extension" and removing the gantry worsened the minima ! but they never asked anyone who knew.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, asitis said:

Well as you know the runway "extension" and removing the gantry worsened the minima ! but they never asked anyone who knew.

 

Nothing ever changes. Rather than asking the people who land planes there what they need to get the job done more often, they rely on people who have appeared on reality TV shows to make the decisions for us. They did comission a report from NATS to find out what improvements could be made to landing minima without spending any money, and as expected, NATS said you can't. The key issue is the airfield lighting system. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, madmanxpilot said:

Nothing ever changes. Rather than asking the people who land planes there what they need to get the job done more often, they rely on people who have appeared on reality TV shows to make the decisions for us. They did comission a report from NATS to find out what improvements could be made to landing minima without spending any money, and as expected, NATS said you can't. The key issue is the airfield lighting system. 

Yup an unnecessary longer runway and a trashed lighting system ! way to go!

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
On 3/27/2021 at 1:19 PM, madmanxpilot said:

Nothing ever changes. Rather than asking the people who land planes there what they need to get the job done more often, they rely on people who have appeared on reality TV shows to make the decisions for us. They did comission a report from NATS to find out what improvements could be made to landing minima without spending any money, and as expected, NATS said you can't. The key issue is the airfield lighting system. 

In fairness, this was long before the arrival of that chap.

An unforgiveable oversight. They just won't have costed in the lighting extension. Remember it was already £2m in the red as they screwed up the exchange rate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Busy role? How? The place has been a virtual ghost town the last year. I don't understand how busy it can be with almost zero flights. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Amadeus said:

Busy role? How? The place has been a virtual ghost town the last year. I don't understand how busy it can be with almost zero flights. 

It takes a lot of effort to balls everything up constantly !

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I only heard it briefly on MR but unless I'm much mistaken, Paul Quine appeared to be ripping into the airport improvement plans in Tynwald last week, describing much of it as an utter waste of money, as an ex-pilot he may have a qualified opinion?

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Non-Believer said:

I only heard it briefly on MR but unless I'm much mistaken, Paul Quine appeared to be ripping into the airport improvement plans in Tynwald last week, describing much of it as an utter waste of money, as an ex-pilot he may have a qualified opinion?

£9m vanity project apparently 

https://www.manxradio.com/news/isle-of-man-news/parts-of-9-million-ronaldsway-project-dubbed-cosmetic-vanity/

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...