For those who like Aircraft pictures

[KeithMacdonald]

3 hours ago, PMP said:

I’d have a fiver they stopped and a marshaller gave follow me guidance to ensure no wheels in the dirt.

 

Unlike this Kalitta Air cargo 747... cue Ground Force theme music?

 

Quote

N401KZ slid off the runway at Ningbo, emergency vehicles were around her.

 

[PMP]

In my experience it takes about a day to dig a 747 out 🙂

[rob D2]

12 hours ago, Jeff Smith said:

Surely that's the job of Ground Control?

If they sent him the wrong way they made a mistake, but once the captain signs the tech log he is responsible for every aspect of the aircraft’s safety .

 

Not helped by the reams of notes at an average airport about where you can go and what you can do.

Edited August 12, 2023 by rob D2

[5944]

https://m.facebook.com/groups/CrazyFunnyWeird/permalink/1752539855168348/?sfnsn=scwspmo&ref=share

 

 

G-BOAD under the Brooklyn Bridge this week, while being moved for a makeover over the winter.

[J. S. Bach]

When I first saw this photo, I thought "Just how in the merry h311 did that thing get under the bridge?". Then I saw the barge! 🙄

[The Pilotman]

On 11/08/2023 at 11:06, Kris said:

On return the pilot took us down a taxiway (F) that apparently is not rated for the 737. As I was leaving the aircraft I overheard him saying to a member of cabin crew that they had caused a little bit of chaos! The aircraft ended up being escorted by airport operations cars to the stand. 

There is a note on the airfield chart that states “Aircraft landing on runway 27 must proceed to the end to vacate, unless otherwise instructed by ATC”. For a 737-800 to land on runway 27 and vacate at taxiway Foxtrot, I would imagine the braking would have had to have been on the aggressive side 😳

Edited August 12, 2023 by The Pilotman

[jjb1970]

24 minutes ago, J. S. Bach said:

When I first saw this photo, I thought "Just how in the merry h311 did that thing get under the bridge?". Then I saw the barge! 🙄

 

I did wonder whether Alan Pollock had fancied a go in a Concorde 🤣

[Ron Ron Ron]

Here's another photo of Concorde G-BOAD taking to the air, for the first time in years........

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

[Ron Ron Ron]

Like a scene from Thunderbirds....

You can see the strings.

 

 

 

Ta Boom !

 

 

.

[Kris]

4 hours ago, The Pilotman said:

There is a note on the airfield chart that states “Aircraft landing on runway 27 must proceed to the end to vacate, unless otherwise instructed by ATC”. For a 737-800 to land on runway 27 and vacate at taxiway Foxtrot, I would imagine the braking would have had to have been on the aggressive side 😳

It certainly felt aggressive. The video I shot of the landing does not show the aggressiveness. The last minute of the video shows the landing and exit off the runway at F. https://youtu.be/WQRoGGIJDXo

 

[PMP]

I’d guess it’s a crew unfamiliar with the airport (not that that’s an excuse), and they vacated first right once slow enough following the taxi lane turn off markings. 

I’ll guess there was possibly a call from the tower controller to stop immediately once they’d seen the aircraft turn onto F. 

 

It was interesting to watch how the edge marker gets ‘eaten up’ by the wheelbase as the aircraft turns right, you get a clear indication why they restrict the aircraft size on that taxiway. The follow me vehicle would have then provided oversteer guidance that ensure the undercarriage track remained on the paved area. I’ve seen it happen with a 747 once, it needed the aircraft shut down, a tug to push the aircraft back out onto the runway, and tow it to its stand accompanied by much potty mouthed analysis. To be fair the engine driver got it further up the taxiway than we thought possible!

[Ron Ron Ron]

There has been a relatively huge increase in air passenger numbers and aircraft movements at Bristol, over the last 20+ years.

Mostly due to the heavy presence of LoCo operators Ryanair and EasyJet.

Considering that there's been a lot of investment in the terminal capacity and a large increase in the size of the aprons and number of parking stands, they haven't similarly invested in upgrading Taxiway F, which is clearly a remnant of earlier times, nor have they provided an additional turn off to accommodate most of the jet traffic landing on r/w 27.

Landing on 27 invariably means continuing the landing roll out, to vacate the runway at the end.

Clearly there's no money to be made in providing such facilities.

 

The Twy F runway turn off, is the only bit of taxiway infrastructure on the terminal (north) side of the airport that isn't suitable for 90% + of all of Bristol's commercial passenger movements.

 

Aerial view of the airport....

 

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.3827177,-2.7154189,1360m/data=!3m1!1e3?entry=ttu

 

 

 

.

 

[KeithMacdonald]

Rehearsing my excuses in advance of any complaints. 

 

Technically, UFOs are "aircraft", aren't they?  In my part of the world (Wiltshire) we quite regularly meet people coming here to view the crop circles. I have learned that these people also tend to have a genuine belief in the (cough) purity of the alleged UFO sightings often associated with the crop circles. My Managing Director has forbidden me to tell them the stories of 1960s/1970s "first generation" drones being test flown from Boscombe Down that were often mistaken for UFOs. Often by well--meaning people who in all innocence asked the MoD if these these strange aircraft were anything to do with them. Then jumped to conclusions when MoD denied these aircraft were anything to do with them. Mostly because of the MoD's deeply-embedded culture of not telling the public anything that was not in "the public interest".

 

No, I don't have any pictures of UFOs. Neither do I have any pictures of the latest generations of drones being flown from Boscombe Down. You might have to go to remote airfields like Upavon and Netheravon to get your own. Also, I'm putting the sudden flurry of mainstream "news" about UFOs in the "Hey, Look, Squirrels!" category.

 

 

 

[Ron Ron Ron]

3 minutes ago, KeithMacdonald said:

.........Also, I'm putting the sudden flurry of mainstream "news" about UFOs in the "Hey, Look, Squirrels!" category.

 

 

 

Really a subject for another thread.

Maybe your post should be moved to be the first in such a new thread?

 

The "sudden flurry of mainstream "news" " is a result of the hearings in the US congress and the fact that the whole topic has opened up at the highest level of government discussion, in public view.

 

 

.

[rob D2]

UFOs is so old skool.

UAP is more modern . The fact that USA has begun a " forced " drip feed of information on them is not by chance .

 

We should start a new thread . I could bore you to death about these sort of phenomena , Im quite well read on it 

[Ron Ron Ron]

54 minutes ago, rob D2 said:

UFOs is so old skool.

UAP is more modern . The fact that USA has begun a " forced " drip feed of information on them is not by chance .

 

We should start a new thread . I could bore you to death about these sort of phenomena , Im quite well read on it 

 

An existing thread has been "bumped".

Maybe the title should be changed though.

 

Hopefully this is the last reference to this topic in this thread.

 

 

 

.

[KeithMacdonald]

5 hours ago, Ron Ron Ron said:

Really a subject for another thread.

 

I agree, perhaps I should have started a new thread called "For those who like UFOs"?

[PMP]

6 hours ago, Ron Ron Ron said:

There has been a relatively huge increase in air passenger numbers and aircraft movements at Bristol, over the last 20+ years.

Mostly due to the heavy presence of LoCo operators Ryanair and EasyJet.

Considering that there's been a lot of investment in the terminal capacity and a large increase in the size of the aprons and number of parking stands, they haven't similarly invested in upgrading Taxiway F, which is clearly a remnant of earlier times, nor have they provided an additional turn off to accommodate most of the jet traffic landing on r/w 27.

Landing on 27 invariably means continuing the landing roll out, to vacate the runway at the end.

Clearly there's no money to be made in providing such facilities.

 

The Twy F runway turn off, is the only bit of taxiway infrastructure on the terminal (north) side of the airport that isn't suitable for 90% + of all of Bristol's commercial passenger movements.

 

Aerial view of the airport....

 

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.3827177,-2.7154189,1360m/data=!3m1!1e3?entry=ttu

 

 

 

.

 

I doubt there’s an viable operational return on up grading F, regardless of the millions of pounds it would cost too. Declared distances of ASDA TORA of 1300m for 09 from F, means that it’s pretty tight under normal conditions to guarantee that their core 737/A320 types would make that intersection on a high percentile of rwy 27 landings. Add a contaminated runway and you almost certainly will pass it every time. Aiming for 1300m every time in the dry will increase brake use, tyre wear and potential reverse thrust noise pollution.  If an aircraft passes F it’s then traveling very slowly for either vacating at the end or a turn and backtrack, that reduces runway capacity at busy periods. It looks more practical with only 2000m to run full length as it will be operationally more efficient.

[Ron Ron Ron]

2 hours ago, PMP said:

I doubt there’s any viable operational return on up grading F .......

 

I agree. 

I was thinking more about an additional (and more useful) exit off 27 midway between F and the end (G), which would be somewhere around 1500 to 1600M from the threshold, but as you say the cost today would make it difficult to justify, unless the movement rate eventually rises to a level that increased runway occupancy time hindered operations.

Bristol is a long way off that.

 

 

.

[St Enodoc]

3 hours ago, PMP said:

I doubt there’s an viable operational return on up grading F, regardless of the millions of pounds it would cost too. Declared distances of ASDA TORA of 1300m for 09 from F, means that it’s pretty tight under normal conditions to guarantee that their core 737/A320 types would make that intersection on a high percentile of rwy 27 landings. Add a contaminated runway and you almost certainly will pass it every time. Aiming for 1300m every time in the dry will increase brake use, tyre wear and potential reverse thrust noise pollution.  If an aircraft passes F it’s then traveling very slowly for either vacating at the end or a turn and backtrack, that reduces runway capacity at busy periods. It looks more practical with only 2000m to run full length as it will be operationally more efficient.

 

1 hour ago, Ron Ron Ron said:

 

I agree. 

I was thinking more about an additional (and more useful) exit off 27 midway between F and the end (G), which would be somewhere around 1500 to 1600M from the threshold, but as you say the cost today would make it difficult to justify, unless the movement rate eventually rises to a level that increased runway occupancy time hindered operations.

Bristol is a long way off that.

 

 

.

In which case, would it make sense to close F altogether?

[KeithMacdonald]

2 hours ago, Ron Ron Ron said:

as you say the cost today would make it difficult to justify

 

Even more prohibitive (in the Bristol area) is the adverse PR from any hint or whisper of "upgrading the airport", even upgrading F would be a trigger. They got away with upgrading the terminals as "passenger facilities". Look at Manchester Runway 2 for a case study,

[jjb1970]

10 minutes ago, KeithMacdonald said:

 

Even more prohibitive (in the Bristol area) is the adverse PR from any hint or whisper of "upgrading the airport", even upgrading F would be a trigger. They got away with upgrading the terminals as "passenger facilities". Look at Manchester Runway 2 for a case study,

 

Quite right, people should use the train, oh hang on, we have a capacity problem and the same people who campaign against airport expansion and roads also object to HS2🤨

[jjb1970]

Being slightly less cynical I do think rail should be pushed for shorter journeys and don't object to governments using the levers available to them to push modal shift from air to alternatives where alternatives do have a lower environmental impact (though I stop short of supporting compulsion) but we now live in a global world and it's important to maintain global connectivity. And whether people like it or not that means maintaining air transport. Oddly, some airports do not object to expanding high speed railways as they can plug into them and it frees capacity for more lucrative longer flights.

[britishcolumbian]

I waited too long and tickets for the Abbotsford Air Show sold out before I could get one, but on a whim I decided to go down to the airport today and see if I could see anything from outside the fences, and watch some of the flying displays (USAF F-35, USAF P-51, RCAF CF-18, RCAF P40... nothing quite like *feeling* a CF-18 fly over you just a couple hundred feet up!). So with apologies for the quality, I'd like to share a few shots I got through the fence that I think are decent...

 

USAF C-17

 

USAF F-35 and RCAF Snowbirds Canadair CT-114 Tutor... my first time seeing an F-35 in the flesh. Can't wait to see one with RCAF roundels on!

 

Two USAF P-51s and an RCAF P-40... the P-40 sounds lovely too, when it buzzes you low overhead.

 

USAF C-5 Galaxy with Mount Baker behind (Mt Baker is across the border, in the States). I went inside one at the USAF 50th Anniversary airshow at Nellis AFB in 1998...thing is massive.

 

 

[sandwich station]

3 hours ago, britishcolumbian said:

Two USAF P-51s and an RCAF P-40... the P-40 sounds lovely too, when it buzzes you low overhead.

 

Not as nice as 2 Packard Merlins though. :)