December 1989 IIRC then commissioned early in 1990. I think we'd only find the Watchman still in use at non-NATS airfields now, having largely been succeeded by Raytheon and Thales machines.
 
Whilst looking at the Aerodrome Manual I've come across this.

"2.5 Aircraft equipped with Enhanced Vision Systems
2.5.1. Runway 14 suitable for EVS operations to a minimum RVR of 350m.
2.5.2. Runway 32 suitable for EVS operations to a minimum RVR of 350m.
2.6 Lower than Standard Category I
2.6.1 Runway 14 suitable for Lower Than Standard Category I operations to a minimum RVR of 400m.
2.6.2 Runway 14 suitable for Lower Than Standard Category I operations to a minimum RVR of 450m with runway centreline lights unserviceable."

I've never come across EVS before and I'm not aware of any aircraft using it at LBA. Is EVS new technology that effectively enables CAT II equivalent landings?
 
Here you go Aviador, Here's what I found after a simple Google search. Looks like its connected to the upgraded LED Lighting systems that the airport has installed and the head ups display on the aircraft.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enhanced_flight_vision_system

Enhanced flight vision system

An Enhanced flight vision system (EFVS, sometimes EVS) is a system for imaging the external world from an aircraft, and to provide an image in which objects can be better detected. In other words, an EFVS is a system to provide an image which is better than unaided human vision. An EFVS includes sensors (one or many) such as a color camera, infrared camera or radar, and typically a display for the pilot, which can be a head-up display or head-down display. An EFVS may be combined with a synthetic vision system to create a combined vision system.

Airport LED transition and multispectral EFVS
EVSs are traditionally based on a Forward looking infrared camera which gives a thermal image of the world, and shows up heat released from airport approach lights. Most airports use incandescent Parabolic aluminized reflector lights,[2] though energy efficiency standards (such as the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007) have caused some airports to switch to LED lighting, which as a lower thermal signature.

However, since 2007 airports are switching to the more energy efficient LED lighting, which has a lower thermal profile. The new EVS designs are multispectral, to capture both visual light from LED lights and the thermal image of previous EVS generations. Future EVS designs focus on all-weather vision, which can be accomplished by intelligently fusing images and data from cameras operating in visible light, infrared, and millimeter-wave.
 
Last edited:
Yeh, I've read that already. Has anybody every known it being used at LBA, runway 14 in particular at 350m RVR?
 
Just checked and the Aerodrome Manual and it was last updated on September 12th 2017?

So this must have be recent amendment which surely will hopefully be beneficial to all airlines/operators using LBA during low visibility procedures.
 
Last edited:
The airport hasn't installed any LED Lighting systems yet (correction, not sure about the Southside, I think they may have put some in as a trial). There is an ongoing project to replace the AGL system with LEDs but at the moment they are still installing ducting and pits to allow the new cabling to be put in. So no change so far!

Here you go Aviador, Here's what I found after a simple Google search. Looks like its connected to the upgraded LED Lighting systems that the airport has installed and the head ups display on the aircraft.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enhanced_flight_vision_system
 
Reception on Radar 134.575 is a little below par this morning. I'm in Yeadon so not quite line of sight with the airport. I use an Icom receiver and loft antenna.
Tower indicates 7/7 bars and comes through with full squelch. Radar is 6/7 bars and is lost at about 2/3 squelch. There appears to be some white noise partly masking the transmissions. With squelch fully open, some data TX noises (I think) can be heard faintly but clearly.

I haven't heard any pilot reports but as they are direct line of sight, I'm not likely to.
 
Aircraft receivers are less likely to be affected as they are usually line of sight with the airfield transmitter aerials and the resultant strength of the controller's TX would usually overcome all but the strongest interference. The other thing that puzzled me was the stronger signal on the Tower frequency; the DOC of the Radar frequency is greater than that of Tower and therefore should have more transmit power.
 
I've noticed there are still some pilots requesting ATC clearance with Tower rather than Delivery and it's the usual offending airlines most of the time. I'm starting to suspect there are some pilots who simply can't be bothered with speaking to Delivery and hope Tower will provide. More often than not it's pointless as Tower dutifully redirects the pilots to the correct frequency !
 
That should (hopefully) change when the 8.33kHz channels come in at the end of the month. At the same time, the ATIS message will change to sound less like calling Delivery is optional.

However, you’ll still hear an increased number of requests for clearances on Tower as aircraft which are unable to fly a SID without reference to Polehill VOR/DME, which is out of service for the next few months, are required to ask for an alternative clearance from Tower.
 
Thanks radar. It's usually Eastern who need to request the non-standard clearances.

Can I infer from your post that LBA is to gain some additional/replacement frequencies with 8.33khz spacing ?
 
No additional freqs, just replacing the current ones with 8.33kHz equivalents. Required to do it during 2018, like all other ground stations.
 
It's progress but a slight personal nuisance for me as I don't own a single airband receiver with 8.33khz spacing ! I'm old school. Have the frequencies been published yet and will the UHF frequencies be affected ?
 
That should (hopefully) change when the 8.33kHz channels come in at the end of the month. At the same time, the ATIS message will change to sound less like calling Delivery is optional.

However, you’ll still hear an increased number of requests for clearances on Tower as aircraft which are unable to fly a SID without reference to Polehill VOR/DME, which is out of service for the next few months, are required to ask for an alternative clearance from Tower.

Why is Pole Hill VOR out of service for a couple of months?
 

Upload Media

Upgrade Your Account

Subscribe to help support your favourite forum and in return we'll remove all our advertisements. Your contribution will help to pay for things like site maintenance, domain name renewals and annual server charges.



Forums4aiports
Subscribe

NEW - Profile Posts

9 trips in 9 days done 70 miles walked and over 23-00 photos taken with a large number taken at 20mph or above. Heavy rain on 1 day only
5 trips done and 45 miles walked,. Also the RAF has had 4 F35B Lightning follow me yesterday and today....
My plans got altered slightly as one of the minibus companies had to cancel 3 trips and refunded me but will be getting nice discount when I rebook them.
wondering why on my "holidays" I choose to get up 2 hours earlier than when going to work. 6 trips in 6 days soon coming up with 3 more days to sort out

Trending Hashtags

Advertisement

Back
Top Bottom
AdBlock Detected

We get it, advertisements are annoying!

Sure, ad-blocking software does a great job at blocking ads, but it also blocks useful features of our website. For the best site experience please disable your AdBlocker.

I've Disabled AdBlock