White Heather
Elite Pro-Member
They need to install a seriously good hot air curtain then overhead those doors for use when it is cold.
Leeds Bradford: Infrastructure & Construction Updates
- Thread starter Aviador
- Start date
Use this prefix for new threads for Leeds Bradford Airport
- Moderator
- #2,002
I see the airport are now openly advertising on and taking bookings for the 3 new lounges that have been built in the terminal extension area
https://book.leedsbradfordairport.co.uk/book/LBA/MultiPurchase
https://book.leedsbradfordairport.co.uk/book/LBA/MultiPurchase
- Thread starter
- Admin
- #2,003
And the third lounge the "1432" has made to order hot food. TheLocalYokel will be impressed. All we need now is a full service airline to make full use of it!
- Moderator
- #2,004
I'm thinking of trying out the Yorkshire Lounge in May.
Hello all, thought i would join forums4airports as ive been following the lba forums for years but never joined! my names craig and im a big lba fan. was brought up in yeadon before i finally got my own place in guiseley. i now live on baildon moor, underneath the common flight path during runway 32 takeoffs. Just following on from your comments on here, Just 300metres more runway at the horsforth end and move the touch down point back to where it originally was and all problems solved! It would open the airport up to most of the us,middle east etc
a300boy
Well-Known Member
We don’t have anyone who wants to pay to do this so it is unlikely to happen.
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- Admin
- #2,007
Unless the penny drops. (plus a few million quid to go with it!)
Sherburnflyer92
Elite-Member
Welcome to the forum fight2win and a very valid point. However just to add some realism to this if they were to push the 32 threshold back 300 metres this would lower the aircraft on final approach thus probably increasing the complaints.
The increased height when overflying Horsforth created by moving the threshold was one of the 'selling points' when the runway extension was proposed. Extending the runway and moving the threshold would also entail resiting/extending the approach lighting which would probably encroach into the housing off Scotland Lane.
So even though the runway was extended by 600metre because the touchdown zone was placed further down the runway i reacon your looking at only around 100/200metres more landing distance! If the touchdown point was taken back to its original point i cant imagine they been much height difference on approach?
Does anyone know whether any airports exist with 2 touchdown areas? All hypothetical and highly unlikely I know but could it work to have landing rules whereby in 'average/normal/good' weather conditions a plane that could land without any issues where they do now has to use the existing touchdown area. However, if weather conditions or size of aircraft dictates the new touchdown area on the newly extended bit of runway could be used.
Doing this would keep the majority of flights at their existing height and approach angle over Horsforth however the option would be there if required. Or would it cause confusion and be an accident waiting to happen??
Doing this would keep the majority of flights at their existing height and approach angle over Horsforth however the option would be there if required. Or would it cause confusion and be an accident waiting to happen??
White Heather
Elite Pro-Member
I suppose that if they increased the glide slope from the current 3 degrees, to 3.5 degrees (same as on runway 14), that would remove the issue of aircraft being lower on approach, although I am not sure if it would have any impact on Cat 3? You are correct though - the good folk of Horsforth (especially those on Scotland Lane) would have a right hissy fit if aircraft suddenly started landing a few hundred metres closer to them. Many will not recall that they did exactly that until the runway extension in 1984.
I totally agree that finding a few hundred metres of extra runway and moving the touch down point to provide more usable runway, is exactly what LBA needs. It would resolve so many problems. I live in hope that AMP capital have a somewhat different outlook on this issue to that held by Bridgepoint captial. What annoys me most is that the Government White Paper on Aviation, some years ago, effectively gave LBA encouragement to extend the runway and they didn't want to do it! Ironic given that for many years the airport were desperate to extend the old runway 15/33 and the Government would never give it approval!
- Thread starter
- Admin
- #2,017
I don't believe it would be possible simply because you'd need two sets of ILS equipment and associated lighting to go with it. It would be possible to move the current equipment to enable more of the paved area to be used but this would mean moving recessed runway lighting, runway approach lighting columns and the PAPIS as well as moving the ILS equipment.
If the main touchdown markers were the same distances as those at Luton LBAs touchdown markers would be where the current piano keys are. This would offer an additional 300m landing distance without any requirement for more concrete.
I've personally chuntered on about this idea for over a decade now and I know it must drive some people insane reading it over and over again but the advantages would be huge for LBA.
- 300m additional Landing Distance
- Significant improvement in autoland performance
- Significant improvement in autoland usage
- Greater usage of the airport during LVPs
- Better public perception of LBA due to fewer diversions
- More commitment by airlines particularly during the winter months.
- Airlines more willing to use larger aircraft because of longer LDA
Farnborough has 2 thresholds to accommodate large aircraft for the Air Show!
The driving force for the runway extension at LBA was the need to provide a Runway End Safety Area at the Horsforth end. The CAA was threatening to remove the dispensation to operate without one, effectively shortening the runway. Extending towards the North West enabled the RESA to be provided and by further displacing the threshold full CAT3 lighting was installed. As a bonus for the nimbys aircraft would also be higher on approach.
If you look closely on Google Earth, or drive along Scotland Lane you will see how near the start of the approach lighting is to the houses. Moving it would be contentious to say the least!
Perhaps the solution to the threshold issues lies in advances/changes in ILS/lighting technology for CAT3 operations. The airport Masterplan paragraph 3.3.2 states 'with enhancements to the existing navigation infrastructure, the runway offers sufficient length to serve short and long haul destinations'. Perhaps the management knows best after all!
.
The driving force for the runway extension at LBA was the need to provide a Runway End Safety Area at the Horsforth end. The CAA was threatening to remove the dispensation to operate without one, effectively shortening the runway. Extending towards the North West enabled the RESA to be provided and by further displacing the threshold full CAT3 lighting was installed. As a bonus for the nimbys aircraft would also be higher on approach.
If you look closely on Google Earth, or drive along Scotland Lane you will see how near the start of the approach lighting is to the houses. Moving it would be contentious to say the least!
Perhaps the solution to the threshold issues lies in advances/changes in ILS/lighting technology for CAT3 operations. The airport Masterplan paragraph 3.3.2 states 'with enhancements to the existing navigation infrastructure, the runway offers sufficient length to serve short and long haul destinations'. Perhaps the management knows best after all!
.
- Thread starter
- Admin
- #2,019
Is there any evidence of this in literature anywhere?
In respect of Farnborough, the threshold is normally displaced some way down the runway. However I noticed during the Air Show that aircraft were landing at a different point and was advised that this only took place when the Show was in progress. Presumably there are special rules in place at that time. I can't point you to the literature.
The CAA's stance on the RESA requirement at LBA and the threshold displacement to accommodate CAT3 lighting formed part of the evidence at the Public Inquiry into the planning application for the runway extension.
The CAA's stance on the RESA requirement at LBA and the threshold displacement to accommodate CAT3 lighting formed part of the evidence at the Public Inquiry into the planning application for the runway extension.
Similar threads
