|
|
Post by viscount on Apr 18, 2011 10:04:37 GMT 1
In my experience, this rule has been in force at Manchester for well over a year (indeed only days after the Glasgow ram-raid bomb). In December 2009 and December 2010 I tried dropping off disabled outside Terminal 3, and got issued with an unfriendly and immediate 'move-on' into the designated (fee-paying) area on the ground floor of the multi-storey adjacent.
I was puzzled by the post that started this debate, as I knew Manchester already had the scheme in place - which only left Blackpool or IoM, hardly worth a concealed reference here!
|
|
|
|
Post by LPL on Apr 18, 2011 10:24:51 GMT 1
They have had bye-laws in place since 1954 and are now going to apply for more to close loop holes.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2011 10:44:13 GMT 1
Perhaps I shouldn't say this, but I am going to anyway. I was at a presentation by Peel about two years ago in which the presenter stated quite clearly that car parking and retail outlets were 'clear revenue streams' for airport operators. That's no surprise to anyone, but what they clearly said later in the presentation was that this would balance the decreased revenue from landing fees, because the Locos expected to pay next to nothing for using the facilities of major airports. The Glasgow business fell right into their hands and they took full advantage of it.
On the subject of the terminal expansion, if the plan is to take over the existing hangar space, then the taxiway which passes its southern end will always be restricted, and we shall never have aircraft of any size, because if I remember correctly, once you reach the wingspan of a 757, you cannot pass the hangars using that taxiway. (Sorry, I don't have the precise locations any longer, but I think people will know what I mean).
I could never understand why those hangars were built in the first place, especially in that area. Why were they were built so close to a main taxiway?
|
|
|
|
Post by LPL on Apr 18, 2011 10:58:08 GMT 1
Re 757 wingspan (approx 125').
Didnt a A330 (wingspan approx 198') taxi past the hangars a couple of weeks ago?
|
|
|
|
Post by vanguard on Apr 18, 2011 11:10:24 GMT 1
Don't forget Garstonboy all the 747's that have passed them!!
vanguard.
|
|
|
|
Post by LPL on Apr 18, 2011 11:42:04 GMT 1
Don't forget Garstonboy all the 747's that have passed them!! 747-400 approx 212' wingspan. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2011 12:13:20 GMT 1
OK, but I was told a couple of years ago by the ops people there that there was a problem with anything bigger than a 757, and that an ops vehicle had to be in attendance whenever an aircraft with a big wingspan had to pass there.
It looks pretty tight on Google.
Perhaps someone in/ex ATC can clarify the position?
|
|
|
|
Post by tonyspeke on Apr 18, 2011 12:36:20 GMT 1
The resticted wingspan is along the main ramp between the 'U' and 'V' entrances/exits.
|
|
|
|
Post by maverick on Apr 18, 2011 12:55:47 GMT 1
Re 757 wingspan (approx 125'). Didnt a A330 (wingspan approx 198') taxi past the hangars a couple of weeks ago? Yes, but I know they had concerns/problems when it (Virgin A330) was here. |
|
|
|
Post by LPL on Apr 18, 2011 13:07:34 GMT 1
The concerns must have been unfounded as it came back a few times.
|
|
|
|
Post by viscount on Apr 18, 2011 13:22:20 GMT 1
The concerns of the crew of the A.330 were, from what I overheard, were to do with not being able to leave the apron stand allocated without a pushback (which they did not want). The wide-body stand allocated is a self-manouvering stand, so there was no problem. While the concern of the ATC was an observation of venting 'smoke' from the engine cowl. Never aware of any issue over wing span clearance.
Not as though the airport has't handled A.330s before - there have even been previous visits by the A.330 series 300 (Aer Lingus (x3) and Brussels International(x2)). All the visits to Liverpool by A.330s (and A.340s) are outlined on a recent post in the 'Airport Memories and History' section of this forum. The two types combined amount to around 20 visits involving 10 operators.
The comment that sparked this reply is worthy of a Manchester wind-up merchant than a staunch LJLA supporter.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2011 23:31:04 GMT 1
I was simply making a statement which I believed to be true, by repeating something I was told by the ops people a few years ago, actually at the time of Liverpool's game in Istanbul in 2005, and to the best of my knowledge, neither the hangar nor the taxiway has been moved since then. It's not anti- or pro- anything or anyone, it's a matter of fact.
This is what the UK AIP textual data has to say for EGGP -
2. Ground Movement
a. All aircraft are to enter the main apron through Taxiway Victor (unless otherwise directed by ATC) except B767 and above which will enter through Taxiway Whiskey [color=Red]under follow-me guidance[/color].[my colouring - see my original post]. Aircraft for stands 1 to 8 and 32 to 37 turn right. Aircraft for stands 9 to 14A and 39 to 41 turn left. B767 aircraft and above can expect to taxi in through Taxiway Whiskey and park on stand 12, 14 and 14A.
d. Aircraft on stands 1 to 8 and 32 to 37 will exit apron via Taxiway Uniform.
e. Aircraft on stands 10 to 14A and 39 to 41 will exit apron via Taxiway Whiskey.
Yes, I know I said 757 in my OP, but it was six years ago, and I've slept a few times since then...
Anyone care to comment further?
|
|
|
|
Post by baldyman26 on Apr 19, 2011 9:25:20 GMT 1
Anyone care to comment further
Errr yes - where is this going, this thread is about expansion updates, not what aircraft fit where.
We know liverpool can fit the big aircraft in, there are photo's to prove it, now back to the main subject please.
|
|
|
|
Post by LPL on Apr 19, 2011 9:50:52 GMT 1
I was simply making a statement which I believed to be true, by repeating something I was told by the ops people a few years ago, actually at the time of Liverpool's game in Istanbul in 2005, and to the best of my knowledge, neither the hangar nor the taxiway has been moved since then. It's not anti- or pro- anything or anyone, it's a matter of fact. This is what the UK AIP textual data has to say for EGGP - 2. Ground Movement a. All aircraft are to enter the main apron through Taxiway Victor (unless otherwise directed by ATC) except B767 and above which will enter through Taxiway Whiskey [color=Red] under follow-me guidance[/color].[my colouring - see my original post]. Aircraft for stands 1 to 8 and 32 to 37 turn right. Aircraft for stands 9 to 14A and 39 to 41 turn left. B767 aircraft and above can expect to taxi in through Taxiway Whiskey and park on stand 12, 14 and 14A. d. Aircraft on stands 1 to 8 and 32 to 37 will exit apron via Taxiway Uniform.
e. Aircraft on stands 10 to 14A and 39 to 41 will exit apron via Taxiway Whiskey.
Yes, I know I said 757 in my OP, but it was six years ago, and I've slept a few times since then...
Anyone care to comment further?[/quote] Yes you did mention the 757 and the hangar and now you mention the taxiway! My reading of the above (2 Ground Movement) refers to getting into and out of the apron only. |
|
|
|
Post by andyh on Apr 19, 2011 18:45:59 GMT 1
It partly relates to the layout of the stands and the general presumption that wide bodies (including '767s) will park on stand 14 and self manouvre off stand - i.e. not park nose in and require push back. To achieve that comfortably it makes more sense for the aircraft to enter via Whiskey. There used to be a restriction on the wing span of aircraft using Alpha taxiway but this was removed at the back end of last year and inpractice never made any difference anyway as aircraft such as B744 and A330 used the taxiway full length with no reported problems.
|
|
