FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1974
1974 - 0005.PDF
FLIGHT International, 3 January 1974 Help the pilot THE ALLOCATION OF RBSOURCES has become one of the great concerns of our civilisation. It is only now, when conservation has become both essential and fashionable, that we pay attention to voices that have long hoped for a hearing. Such voices have been raised by many pilots in the past on another, but related, sub ject—that of airport aids, their provision, development and, above all, their maintenance. As a pilot I look upon a serviceable runway as an aid to arrival, of equal importance to the safety of the flight as any aid to alignment before touchdown. For years we have suffered from the inadequate provision of runways in Britain. The cost in diversions, holding fuel and other related expenses would surely be enough to build several new runways, or perhaps to ensure that enough runways were kept serviceable for regular operation. One day re cently, during a spell of bad weather, the following situa tion pertained: one runway only was available for landing and take-off at Heathrow; Manchester ILS on runway 06 was unserviceable and the one on 24 of doubtful status: Prestwick 31 ILS and VOR were unserviceable. Take-off delays due to the single runway and slow move ments at Heathrow resulted in many aircraft leaving an hour late but, more seriously, there were many aircraft holding and diverting. The fuel thus squandered would have run many a transatlantic service, or paid for more spares and engineers. It might even have bought time for some committee to consider what needs to be done. Produce the goods Why should an airline operator pay full landing fees when the airport authority, or those responsible for plan ning airport facilities and maintenance, have failed to produce the goods? All this talk about Maplin amuses me when we cannot keep the current airports fully service able. Furthermore, safety is related to the provision of reasonable landing aids for use in the poor weather of European winters. A statement on the prolonged single-runway situation at Heathrow is needed to allay rumours that a mistake has been made in the recarpeting technique, and efforts are needed to ensure that we use Britain's main airport as effectively as possible. But there is more to it than a witch hunt, for the disease is not merely national in character, but is almost endemic in other supposedly advanced lands. We seem to be doomed to be asked to use the worst equipped runway for landing at many US airports because of the vagaries of traffic flow, often caused by local noise- abatement groups. Neither the public nor the FAA seems to realise that they are insufficiently safe. For in- 5 Pilot's point of view stance, at Boston the other night we were vectored on to the approach to a short, aidless runway with no Vasis, no approach lights and a typical black hole before the poorly lit threshold. When we asked for an approach on to the long 33 runway with ILS and everything else we needed we were told that this would cause landing delays. Having been badly served by the wind forecast, which was only 70kt out in its estimate of headwind intensity, we were short of fuel (we had succumbed to our em ployer's plea to minimise fuel uplift on departure to avoid the cost of carrying excess reserves across the ocean). What next? Sometimes, when we are given an EAT of an hour ahead, as at Heathrow recently, and we hear all those other aircraft diverting to various airports, we are tempted to wonder what it will be like in ten years' time. Ten years ago I read a lot about automatic landing being the answer to the problems of the airman, board member and passenger alike, but it all depends on having some where to land. Are we beginning to make a fundamental mistake in that we assume that aircraft can be safely and regularly moved from one airport to another despite a decline in the expenditure on airports? Another anomaly that is. in my opinion, beginning to threaten air safety is the arbitrary way in which some non-state-controlled airports are shortening their hours of opening to reduce noise and also introducing noise requirements which are totally un realistic given their current traffic densities. A high-handed political aspect is apparent. My message is that there are enough silly problems caused by artificial deficiencies in my working day without adding to them. The relatively simple business of flying the aircraft safely around the world is becoming subsidiary to the effort needed to deal with such problems as the alloca tion of arrival slot times into Heathrow when sitting at an alternate airport after diverting. The usual rate of depar ture is about one every half an hour, and I leave you to imagine the chaos this causes, the money it costs and. eventually, the kerosene it wastes. Personally I find it hard to envisage an SST operating under these conditions without landing priority or much- increased fuel reserves. How can we be sure that the record of navigational-aid and landing-aid serviceability will improve? MAINLINER The first of Air Zaire's three Boeing 73,1-lQQCs will be used to supplement Caravelles and F.27s on domestic and regional services
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
