Aviation Nostalgia Thread

[oldendays]

As in Inclusive Tour, bucket and spade etc.

 

[lbaspotter]

Biggest, If I remember correctly Monarch Airlines actually brought the 757-200 in before the runway extension opened, surely that was operating a IT charter flight?

 

[oldendays]

Yes, G-MOND, I think in Marcu 1984. It was substituting for the regular 737 so wasn't carrying a full load. It drew quite a crowd.

 

[BarnsleyHolidays]

Yes, G-MOND, I think in Marcu 1984. It was substituting for the regular 737 so wasn't carrying a full load. It drew quite a crowd.

Yes, November Delta operated the first Boeing 757 Inclusive Tour flight on 23 February 1984.

BH

 

[LBA4EVER]

Before the runway was extended a B757 unless fully loaded would not have a problem with the runway length, in fact it would probably perform better than the B737 200s. Also pre 1984 the touchdown zone was further back at the start of the runway, i guess takeoff length would generally be more an issue before it was extended.

 

[tonysmith]

The lancaster bomber is due back over Howarth twice this weekend

 

[LBA4EVER]

The lancaster bomber is due back over Howarth twice this weekend

Looking for GALBA property again!

 

[White Heather]

Looking for GALBA property again!

Then they need to head for Headingley

 

[The Pole]

I

Before the runway was extended a B757 unless fully loaded would not have a problem with the runway length, in fact it would probably perform better than the B737 200s. Also pre 1984 the touchdown zone was further back at the start of the runway, i guess takeoff length would generally be more an issue before it was extended.

I was young back then and may have been addressed addressed before but why was the TDZ moved further down 33/32 back then? If left as was wouldn't be the float issues!

 

[LBA4EVER]

I

I was young back then and may have been addressed addressed before but why was the TDZ moved further down 33/32 back then? If left as was wouldn't be the float issues!

Believe it was a deal to shut up the nimbys, if the runway32 touchdown zone was left as it originally was then we would have roughly an extra 200-300metres of LDA available and yes landing on the flat section of runway.

 

[a300boy]

The rules changed to prevent an undershoot landing.

 

[LBA4EVER]

The rules changed to prevent an undershoot landing.

Undershoot landing?

 

[LBAYORKIE]

Landing short of the runway.

 

[LBA4EVER]

Landing short of the runway.

Is that actually possible esp with all the approach lighting? I guess due to the land dropping away at each end of the runway rather than flat this has to be taken into consideration but still if the touchdown points were at the start of runway 32 pre 1984 then surely now with more advanced aircraft undershoots would be even less likely today.

 

[LBAYORKIE]

Cant see elevated thresholds having anything to do with it really Its a safety feature you see at most commercial airfields. Where the TDZ is located will I assume follow a set formula dependant on various factors. Remember weather is unpredictable so things like wind-shear will be taken into account.

 

[LBA4EVER]

Cant see elevated thresholds having anything to do with it really Its a safety feature you see at most commercial airfields. Where the TDZ is located will I assume follow a set formula dependant on various factors. Remember weather is unpredictable so things like wind-shear will be taken into account.

Remember that the old TDZ was within the flat section of runway, this would of helped pilots in the past. Personally i feel its crazy them moving the TDZ to where it is now.

 

[LBAYORKIE]

This should be chapter and verse. Looks like standards changed in 1999.

Runway End Safety Area

Definition An area symmetrical about the extended runway centre line and adjacent to the end of the strip primarily intended to reduce the risk of damage to an aeroplane undershooting or overrunning the runway [Source: ICAO Annex 14] Description Runway End Safety Areas (RESAs) are a formal means...

skybrary.aero

 

[blotbuc1]

The rules changed to prevent an undershoot landing.

Yes, at the time of the public inquiry into the runway extension I had access to the evidence given in support of the proposal. One of the reasons for the need for the extension was the requirement for a runway end safety area (RESA - an area free of obstruction at the end of a runway provided to minimise the risks when an aircraft overruns or undershoots a runway) in the event of an undershoot on 33 (now 32). The airport had been only able to handle certain operations because of a dispensation by the CAA. There was no RESA and the CAA had announced that if the runway was not extended it would enforce the provision of a RESA. The status quo would not exist, the short runway would effectively be shortened and the commercial viability of operating larger aircraft already using the airport would be called into question.

The extension would allow the threshold to be displaced and the RESA provided. In addition it would allow the installation of full Cat 3 approach lighting and upgrading of the ILS, thus improving operational reliability in poor weather. As a bonus aircraft landing further down the runway would mean that they would be higher over the populated areas on approach!

No doubt at great expense it would be feasible to return the threshold to its original position- RESA built on stilts (eg Madeira), approach lighting encroaching into the Scotland Lane estate, aircraft lower on approach. Probably get it approved in a couple of weeks just like the state of the art eco-friendly terminal!

 

[LBAYORKIE]

Anyone else got one of these tucked away?

 

[White Heather]

Erm, no. Not my style, but it's really nice though.
Air Anglia F28? I remember those doing some flights at LBA.