Airport.

[madmanxpilot]

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.

[finlo]

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.

[madmanxpilot]

Just now, finlo said:

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

It has been suggested before! And if one was starting for scratch, the northern plain would be a better site for sure.

[cheesypeas]

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 ? 

[madmanxpilot]

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 March 27, 2021 by madmanxpilot

[asitis]

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.

 

[madmanxpilot]

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. 

[asitis]

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!

[Non-Believer]

[Derek Flint]

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.

[madmanxpilot]

54 minutes ago, Derek Flint said:

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

 

As I said - nothing ever changes.

[Amadeus]

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. 

[asitis]

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 !

[Non-Believer]

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?

[Banker]

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/