Why do aircraft leave the cruising altitude long before landing just to circle?Are runways booked by airlines to land their planes?What are the negative associations with Continuous Descent Approach?What makes intentional low or missed approaches legal?Was this Gulfstream way below the glideslope?In an emergency, how much runway does an A320 need to stop safely?Why would a copilot's window be shaded/covered?Why would a commercial flight make banked turns five minutes before landing / low altitude?How do planes descend for landing?Why do I get a severe headache just before landing?Why wouldn't KJFK offer the ILS for 22L?Did Kai Tak have a straight-in approach to runway 13 for higher-performance aircraft?
Inset Square From a Rectangular Face
Why doesn't mathematics collapse down, even though humans quite often make mistakes in their proofs?
Why is the name Bergson pronounced like Berksonne?
Killer Neighbors
Which basis does the wavefunction collapse to?
From France west coast to Portugal via ship?
Land Registry Clause
Show two plots together: a two dimensional curve tangent to the maxima of a three dimensional plot
How do we test and determine if a USB cable+connector is version 2, 3.0 or 3.1?
Independence of Mean and Variance of Discrete Uniform Distributions
Installing the original OS X version onto a Mac?
How can I differentiate a eusocial organism from a hive mind collective?
Metal that glows when near pieces of itself
Can I check a small array of bools in one go?
Chess software to analyze games
Can 'in-' mean both 'in' and 'no'?
Is there such a thing as too inconvenient?
Are there reliable, formulaic ways to form chords on the guitar?
Quick destruction of a helium filled airship?
How best to join tables, which have different lengths on the same column values which exist in both tables?
Where is this New York City Broadway location from Fall 1958?
Hiker's Cabin Mystery | Pt. XV
Lazy brainfuck programmer
What is the evidence on the danger of feeding whole blueberries and grapes to infants and toddlers?
Why do aircraft leave the cruising altitude long before landing just to circle?
Are runways booked by airlines to land their planes?What are the negative associations with Continuous Descent Approach?What makes intentional low or missed approaches legal?Was this Gulfstream way below the glideslope?In an emergency, how much runway does an A320 need to stop safely?Why would a copilot's window be shaded/covered?Why would a commercial flight make banked turns five minutes before landing / low altitude?How do planes descend for landing?Why do I get a severe headache just before landing?Why wouldn't KJFK offer the ILS for 22L?Did Kai Tak have a straight-in approach to runway 13 for higher-performance aircraft?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
$begingroup$
Often flights will leave the cruising altitude long before the actual landing. They will go down to a couple of thousand feet and stay at that altitude and circle for quite a while in waiting loops before it's actually their turn to land. It can be seen basically all the time at Heathrow Airport (LHR). But also for example in Munich Airport (MUC), where flights often come far down over the city and then make wide turns towards the airport.
So I'm wondering: if it's already clear ahead of time (and I'm sure mostly it is) that it's not their time to land yet, why not circle at higher altitudes? Often those waiting loops occur over dense populations and thus create quite some noise on the ground.
landing commercial-aviation approach
edited 3 hours ago
Peter Mortensen
3292 silver badges7 bronze badges
asked 2 days ago
silentsilent
1785 bronze badges
New contributor
silent is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
|
show 6 more comments
$begingroup$
Often flights will leave the cruising altitude long before the actual landing. They will go down to a couple of thousand feet and stay at that altitude and circle for quite a while in waiting loops before it's actually their turn to land. It can be seen basically all the time at Heathrow Airport (LHR). But also for example in Munich Airport (MUC), where flights often come far down over the city and then make wide turns towards the airport.
So I'm wondering: if it's already clear ahead of time (and I'm sure mostly it is) that it's not their time to land yet, why not circle at higher altitudes? Often those waiting loops occur over dense populations and thus create quite some noise on the ground.
landing commercial-aviation approach
edited 3 hours ago
Peter Mortensen
3292 silver badges7 bronze badges
asked 2 days ago
silentsilent
1785 bronze badges
New contributor
silent is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
4
$begingroup$
A couple of thousand feet? The lowest level for Heathrow's stacks is 7000ft, and aircraft will enter higher than that. See Heathrow arrival paths
$endgroup$
– Redd Herring
2 days ago
1
$begingroup$
It’s still an altitude at which you can clearly hear the planes on the ground
$endgroup$
– silent
2 days ago
11
$begingroup$
"creating quite some noise" Username checks out :)
$endgroup$
– Bianfable
2 days ago
7
$begingroup$
@silent Noise intensity falls off with the square of distance. An aircraft at 7000ft is already about one tenth as noisy as one at 'a couple of thousand feet'. Having lived near Biggin Hill for many years I can tell you that the traffic noise from the M25 was far more intrusive than the passing jets.
$endgroup$
– Redd Herring
2 days ago
4
$begingroup$
@sean We're not talking about traffic visiting the airfield, but traffic using the Biggin hold while en route to Heathrow.
$endgroup$
– Redd Herring
2 days ago
|
show 6 more comments
$begingroup$
Often flights will leave the cruising altitude long before the actual landing. They will go down to a couple of thousand feet and stay at that altitude and circle for quite a while in waiting loops before it's actually their turn to land. It can be seen basically all the time at Heathrow Airport (LHR). But also for example in Munich Airport (MUC), where flights often come far down over the city and then make wide turns towards the airport.
So I'm wondering: if it's already clear ahead of time (and I'm sure mostly it is) that it's not their time to land yet, why not circle at higher altitudes? Often those waiting loops occur over dense populations and thus create quite some noise on the ground.
landing commercial-aviation approach
edited 3 hours ago
Peter Mortensen
3292 silver badges7 bronze badges
asked 2 days ago
silentsilent
1785 bronze badges
New contributor
silent is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
Often flights will leave the cruising altitude long before the actual landing. They will go down to a couple of thousand feet and stay at that altitude and circle for quite a while in waiting loops before it's actually their turn to land. It can be seen basically all the time at Heathrow Airport (LHR). But also for example in Munich Airport (MUC), where flights often come far down over the city and then make wide turns towards the airport.
So I'm wondering: if it's already clear ahead of time (and I'm sure mostly it is) that it's not their time to land yet, why not circle at higher altitudes? Often those waiting loops occur over dense populations and thus create quite some noise on the ground.
landing commercial-aviation approach
landing commercial-aviation approach
edited 3 hours ago
Peter Mortensen
3292 silver badges7 bronze badges
asked 2 days ago
silentsilent
1785 bronze badges
New contributor
silent is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
edited 3 hours ago
Peter Mortensen
3292 silver badges7 bronze badges
asked 2 days ago
silentsilent
1785 bronze badges
New contributor
silent is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
edited 3 hours ago
Peter Mortensen
3292 silver badges7 bronze badges
edited 3 hours ago
Peter Mortensen
3292 silver badges7 bronze badges
edited 3 hours ago
Peter Mortensen
3292 silver badges7 bronze badges
3292 silver badges7 bronze badges
asked 2 days ago
silentsilent
1785 bronze badges
New contributor
silent is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 2 days ago
silentsilent
1785 bronze badges
asked 2 days ago
silentsilent
1785 bronze badges
1785 bronze badges
New contributor
silent is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
silent is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
4
$begingroup$
A couple of thousand feet? The lowest level for Heathrow's stacks is 7000ft, and aircraft will enter higher than that. See Heathrow arrival paths
$endgroup$
– Redd Herring
2 days ago
1
$begingroup$
It’s still an altitude at which you can clearly hear the planes on the ground
$endgroup$
– silent
2 days ago
11
$begingroup$
"creating quite some noise" Username checks out :)
$endgroup$
– Bianfable
2 days ago
7
$begingroup$
@silent Noise intensity falls off with the square of distance. An aircraft at 7000ft is already about one tenth as noisy as one at 'a couple of thousand feet'. Having lived near Biggin Hill for many years I can tell you that the traffic noise from the M25 was far more intrusive than the passing jets.
$endgroup$
– Redd Herring
2 days ago
4
$begingroup$
@sean We're not talking about traffic visiting the airfield, but traffic using the Biggin hold while en route to Heathrow.
$endgroup$
– Redd Herring
2 days ago
|
show 6 more comments
4
$begingroup$
A couple of thousand feet? The lowest level for Heathrow's stacks is 7000ft, and aircraft will enter higher than that. See Heathrow arrival paths
$endgroup$
– Redd Herring
2 days ago
1
$begingroup$
It’s still an altitude at which you can clearly hear the planes on the ground
$endgroup$
– silent
2 days ago
11
$begingroup$
"creating quite some noise" Username checks out :)
$endgroup$
– Bianfable
2 days ago
7
$begingroup$
@silent Noise intensity falls off with the square of distance. An aircraft at 7000ft is already about one tenth as noisy as one at 'a couple of thousand feet'. Having lived near Biggin Hill for many years I can tell you that the traffic noise from the M25 was far more intrusive than the passing jets.
$endgroup$
– Redd Herring
2 days ago
4
$begingroup$
@sean We're not talking about traffic visiting the airfield, but traffic using the Biggin hold while en route to Heathrow.
$endgroup$
– Redd Herring
2 days ago
4
4
$begingroup$
A couple of thousand feet? The lowest level for Heathrow's stacks is 7000ft, and aircraft will enter higher than that. See Heathrow arrival paths
$endgroup$
– Redd Herring
2 days ago
$begingroup$
A couple of thousand feet? The lowest level for Heathrow's stacks is 7000ft, and aircraft will enter higher than that. See Heathrow arrival paths
$endgroup$
– Redd Herring
2 days ago
1
1
$begingroup$
It’s still an altitude at which you can clearly hear the planes on the ground
$endgroup$
– silent
2 days ago
$begingroup$
It’s still an altitude at which you can clearly hear the planes on the ground
$endgroup$
– silent
2 days ago
11
11
$begingroup$
"creating quite some noise" Username checks out :)
$endgroup$
– Bianfable
2 days ago
$begingroup$
"creating quite some noise" Username checks out :)
$endgroup$
– Bianfable
2 days ago
7
7
$begingroup$
@silent Noise intensity falls off with the square of distance. An aircraft at 7000ft is already about one tenth as noisy as one at 'a couple of thousand feet'. Having lived near Biggin Hill for many years I can tell you that the traffic noise from the M25 was far more intrusive than the passing jets.
$endgroup$
– Redd Herring
2 days ago
$begingroup$
@silent Noise intensity falls off with the square of distance. An aircraft at 7000ft is already about one tenth as noisy as one at 'a couple of thousand feet'. Having lived near Biggin Hill for many years I can tell you that the traffic noise from the M25 was far more intrusive than the passing jets.
$endgroup$
– Redd Herring
2 days ago
4
4
$begingroup$
@sean We're not talking about traffic visiting the airfield, but traffic using the Biggin hold while en route to Heathrow.
$endgroup$
– Redd Herring
2 days ago
$begingroup$
@sean We're not talking about traffic visiting the airfield, but traffic using the Biggin hold while en route to Heathrow.
$endgroup$
– Redd Herring
2 days ago
|
show 6 more comments
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
It's better to be low(-ish) and ready for a spot to open, than high and far from that spot. As to why, for busy international airports the answer is really simple:
► There isn't a way to manage it near perfectly (yet).
To understand that statement, requires some prerequisites, so I'll try to simplify and summarize the basics:
There is the concertina effect: it's when fast vehicles slow down, the spacing between them go down. So the nearer the airport for landing, the more squeezing happens.
Add to that that the arriving planes come from all or most directions, and the same low-ish airspace is being used by departures as well.
The trajectory of each plane depends on each plane's load and performance, and the wind it experiences. While wind is forecast, the forecasts aren't perfect.
A solution to that is for all planes to send their estimated trajectories to the air traffic management (ATM). That is one of the projects being worked on in Europe, but it's at least a decade from full deployment. One part of it is the extended arrival management (E-AMAN).
Why wasn't it worked on decades ago has to do with the history of data communication in aviation. And it boils down to money and return of investment. Initially some of the users, like the airlines, didn't see a benefit of the high cost of the high tech solutions they'd have to add to their planes.
Seasonal adverse weather en route or in the terminal area complicates matters even more.
Busy international airports with multiple runways land planes every 30 seconds or so, so you can imagine the impact of the slightest delay one plane headed to that airport experiences. So arrival management is first come, first served.
Related: What are the negative associations with Continuous Descent Approach?
answered 2 days ago
ymb1ymb1
78.4k9 gold badges254 silver badges423 bronze badges
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
"Perfectly managed" would be to slow down their cruise before reaching the destination if there was a landing backlog, and have planes (nearly) never circle in holding patterns? But still land 1 plane / 30 sec.
$endgroup$
– Peter Cordes
yesterday
$begingroup$
@PeterCordes: Sure, and to do that you need to know each plane's estimated trajectory, hence one of the paragraphs and the link.
$endgroup$
– ymb1
yesterday
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Airports can accept landing aircraft at a (mostly) fixed, constant rate. However, inbound aircraft arrive at different times and rates based on weather and other factors, regardless of the schedules. This means, at times, aircraft will be coming in faster than the airport can accept them, from many different directions. And airplanes can't just stop mid-air to wait their turn.
The answer is to put aircraft in a "holding pattern", which is a racetrack (not circle) shape that repeatedly passes over the same fixed point, to delay them. When you do this at multiple altitudes, it becomes a "holding stack".
Arriving aircraft are directed into the top of the stack, 1000ft above the previous one. Aircraft at the bottom of the stack are released at a fixed rate to continue toward the airport, and all the aircraft above them are shifted down 1000ft.
The depth of the stack will vary depending on numerous factors, but at congested airports like Heathrow, every arriving plane is pretty much guaranteed to do at least a few turns in holding. And yes, this can mean a lot of noise on the ground for those who live under the stacks. That is the price of airports not being able to expand to increase their arrival rate.
answered 2 days ago
StephenSStephenS
7,6081 gold badge12 silver badges39 bronze badges
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
Thank you for your answer. However my question was more about why the holding pattern occurs on rather low altitudes. Why need often need to wait in line (or in stacks...) is clear to me
$endgroup$
– silent
yesterday
2
$begingroup$
@silent It depends how close the stack is to the airport. In general, the bottom of the stack will be how high airplanes should be if the stack isn't in use. The standard descent angle is 3° (about 1000ft per 1.5nmi), so if the bottom of the Heathrow stacks is at 7000ft, I'd expect them to be about 10nmi from the airport.
$endgroup$
– StephenS
yesterday
add a comment |
$begingroup$
As an aside to the hold explanations furnished above: to save on fuel, an airliner will reduce power to commence descent at a distance from the airport which will place it at either 1) its anticipated hold altitude, or 2) the landing pattern entry altitude, subject to ATC's instructions, upon arrival in the vicinity of the airport.
While at reduced power, the pilot will trim the aircraft for the optimum power-on glide angle that lets him or her make best use of the plane's gravitational potential energy during the descent and approach, and thereby minimize fuel burn during that phase of the flight. The pilot will adjust this to conform to ATC instructions by adding power or deploying spoilers, flaps, or gear as required.
answered 2 days ago
niels nielsenniels nielsen
3,3211 gold badge5 silver badges17 bronze badges
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
Useful information, but the question seems to be about holding patterns.
$endgroup$
– David K
2 days ago
1
$begingroup$
understand, will edit.
$endgroup$
– niels nielsen
2 days ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "528"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
silent is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2faviation.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f67775%2fwhy-do-aircraft-leave-the-cruising-altitude-long-before-landing-just-to-circle%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
It's better to be low(-ish) and ready for a spot to open, than high and far from that spot. As to why, for busy international airports the answer is really simple:
► There isn't a way to manage it near perfectly (yet).
To understand that statement, requires some prerequisites, so I'll try to simplify and summarize the basics:
There is the concertina effect: it's when fast vehicles slow down, the spacing between them go down. So the nearer the airport for landing, the more squeezing happens.
Add to that that the arriving planes come from all or most directions, and the same low-ish airspace is being used by departures as well.
The trajectory of each plane depends on each plane's load and performance, and the wind it experiences. While wind is forecast, the forecasts aren't perfect.
A solution to that is for all planes to send their estimated trajectories to the air traffic management (ATM). That is one of the projects being worked on in Europe, but it's at least a decade from full deployment. One part of it is the extended arrival management (E-AMAN).
Why wasn't it worked on decades ago has to do with the history of data communication in aviation. And it boils down to money and return of investment. Initially some of the users, like the airlines, didn't see a benefit of the high cost of the high tech solutions they'd have to add to their planes.
Seasonal adverse weather en route or in the terminal area complicates matters even more.
Busy international airports with multiple runways land planes every 30 seconds or so, so you can imagine the impact of the slightest delay one plane headed to that airport experiences. So arrival management is first come, first served.
Related: What are the negative associations with Continuous Descent Approach?
answered 2 days ago
ymb1ymb1
78.4k9 gold badges254 silver badges423 bronze badges
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
"Perfectly managed" would be to slow down their cruise before reaching the destination if there was a landing backlog, and have planes (nearly) never circle in holding patterns? But still land 1 plane / 30 sec.
$endgroup$
– Peter Cordes
yesterday
$begingroup$
@PeterCordes: Sure, and to do that you need to know each plane's estimated trajectory, hence one of the paragraphs and the link.
$endgroup$
– ymb1
yesterday
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It's better to be low(-ish) and ready for a spot to open, than high and far from that spot. As to why, for busy international airports the answer is really simple:
► There isn't a way to manage it near perfectly (yet).
To understand that statement, requires some prerequisites, so I'll try to simplify and summarize the basics:
There is the concertina effect: it's when fast vehicles slow down, the spacing between them go down. So the nearer the airport for landing, the more squeezing happens.
Add to that that the arriving planes come from all or most directions, and the same low-ish airspace is being used by departures as well.
The trajectory of each plane depends on each plane's load and performance, and the wind it experiences. While wind is forecast, the forecasts aren't perfect.
A solution to that is for all planes to send their estimated trajectories to the air traffic management (ATM). That is one of the projects being worked on in Europe, but it's at least a decade from full deployment. One part of it is the extended arrival management (E-AMAN).
Why wasn't it worked on decades ago has to do with the history of data communication in aviation. And it boils down to money and return of investment. Initially some of the users, like the airlines, didn't see a benefit of the high cost of the high tech solutions they'd have to add to their planes.
Seasonal adverse weather en route or in the terminal area complicates matters even more.
Busy international airports with multiple runways land planes every 30 seconds or so, so you can imagine the impact of the slightest delay one plane headed to that airport experiences. So arrival management is first come, first served.
Related: What are the negative associations with Continuous Descent Approach?
answered 2 days ago
ymb1ymb1
78.4k9 gold badges254 silver badges423 bronze badges
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
"Perfectly managed" would be to slow down their cruise before reaching the destination if there was a landing backlog, and have planes (nearly) never circle in holding patterns? But still land 1 plane / 30 sec.
$endgroup$
– Peter Cordes
yesterday
$begingroup$
@PeterCordes: Sure, and to do that you need to know each plane's estimated trajectory, hence one of the paragraphs and the link.
$endgroup$
– ymb1
yesterday
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It's better to be low(-ish) and ready for a spot to open, than high and far from that spot. As to why, for busy international airports the answer is really simple:
► There isn't a way to manage it near perfectly (yet).
To understand that statement, requires some prerequisites, so I'll try to simplify and summarize the basics:
There is the concertina effect: it's when fast vehicles slow down, the spacing between them go down. So the nearer the airport for landing, the more squeezing happens.
Add to that that the arriving planes come from all or most directions, and the same low-ish airspace is being used by departures as well.
The trajectory of each plane depends on each plane's load and performance, and the wind it experiences. While wind is forecast, the forecasts aren't perfect.
A solution to that is for all planes to send their estimated trajectories to the air traffic management (ATM). That is one of the projects being worked on in Europe, but it's at least a decade from full deployment. One part of it is the extended arrival management (E-AMAN).
Why wasn't it worked on decades ago has to do with the history of data communication in aviation. And it boils down to money and return of investment. Initially some of the users, like the airlines, didn't see a benefit of the high cost of the high tech solutions they'd have to add to their planes.
Seasonal adverse weather en route or in the terminal area complicates matters even more.
Busy international airports with multiple runways land planes every 30 seconds or so, so you can imagine the impact of the slightest delay one plane headed to that airport experiences. So arrival management is first come, first served.
Related: What are the negative associations with Continuous Descent Approach?
answered 2 days ago
ymb1ymb1
78.4k9 gold badges254 silver badges423 bronze badges
$endgroup$
It's better to be low(-ish) and ready for a spot to open, than high and far from that spot. As to why, for busy international airports the answer is really simple:
► There isn't a way to manage it near perfectly (yet).
To understand that statement, requires some prerequisites, so I'll try to simplify and summarize the basics:
There is the concertina effect: it's when fast vehicles slow down, the spacing between them go down. So the nearer the airport for landing, the more squeezing happens.
Add to that that the arriving planes come from all or most directions, and the same low-ish airspace is being used by departures as well.
The trajectory of each plane depends on each plane's load and performance, and the wind it experiences. While wind is forecast, the forecasts aren't perfect.
A solution to that is for all planes to send their estimated trajectories to the air traffic management (ATM). That is one of the projects being worked on in Europe, but it's at least a decade from full deployment. One part of it is the extended arrival management (E-AMAN).
Why wasn't it worked on decades ago has to do with the history of data communication in aviation. And it boils down to money and return of investment. Initially some of the users, like the airlines, didn't see a benefit of the high cost of the high tech solutions they'd have to add to their planes.
Seasonal adverse weather en route or in the terminal area complicates matters even more.
Busy international airports with multiple runways land planes every 30 seconds or so, so you can imagine the impact of the slightest delay one plane headed to that airport experiences. So arrival management is first come, first served.
Related: What are the negative associations with Continuous Descent Approach?
answered 2 days ago
ymb1ymb1
78.4k9 gold badges254 silver badges423 bronze badges
edited 2 days ago
answered 2 days ago
ymb1ymb1
78.4k9 gold badges254 silver badges423 bronze badges
answered 2 days ago
ymb1ymb1
78.4k9 gold badges254 silver badges423 bronze badges
answered 2 days ago
ymb1ymb1
78.4k9 gold badges254 silver badges423 bronze badges
78.4k9 gold badges254 silver badges423 bronze badges
$begingroup$
"Perfectly managed" would be to slow down their cruise before reaching the destination if there was a landing backlog, and have planes (nearly) never circle in holding patterns? But still land 1 plane / 30 sec.
$endgroup$
– Peter Cordes
yesterday
$begingroup$
@PeterCordes: Sure, and to do that you need to know each plane's estimated trajectory, hence one of the paragraphs and the link.
$endgroup$
– ymb1
yesterday
add a comment |
$begingroup$
"Perfectly managed" would be to slow down their cruise before reaching the destination if there was a landing backlog, and have planes (nearly) never circle in holding patterns? But still land 1 plane / 30 sec.
$endgroup$
– Peter Cordes
yesterday
$begingroup$
@PeterCordes: Sure, and to do that you need to know each plane's estimated trajectory, hence one of the paragraphs and the link.
$endgroup$
– ymb1
yesterday
$begingroup$
"Perfectly managed" would be to slow down their cruise before reaching the destination if there was a landing backlog, and have planes (nearly) never circle in holding patterns? But still land 1 plane / 30 sec.
$endgroup$
– Peter Cordes
yesterday
$begingroup$
"Perfectly managed" would be to slow down their cruise before reaching the destination if there was a landing backlog, and have planes (nearly) never circle in holding patterns? But still land 1 plane / 30 sec.
$endgroup$
– Peter Cordes
yesterday
$begingroup$
@PeterCordes: Sure, and to do that you need to know each plane's estimated trajectory, hence one of the paragraphs and the link.
$endgroup$
– ymb1
yesterday
$begingroup$
@PeterCordes: Sure, and to do that you need to know each plane's estimated trajectory, hence one of the paragraphs and the link.
$endgroup$
– ymb1
yesterday
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Airports can accept landing aircraft at a (mostly) fixed, constant rate. However, inbound aircraft arrive at different times and rates based on weather and other factors, regardless of the schedules. This means, at times, aircraft will be coming in faster than the airport can accept them, from many different directions. And airplanes can't just stop mid-air to wait their turn.
The answer is to put aircraft in a "holding pattern", which is a racetrack (not circle) shape that repeatedly passes over the same fixed point, to delay them. When you do this at multiple altitudes, it becomes a "holding stack".
Arriving aircraft are directed into the top of the stack, 1000ft above the previous one. Aircraft at the bottom of the stack are released at a fixed rate to continue toward the airport, and all the aircraft above them are shifted down 1000ft.
The depth of the stack will vary depending on numerous factors, but at congested airports like Heathrow, every arriving plane is pretty much guaranteed to do at least a few turns in holding. And yes, this can mean a lot of noise on the ground for those who live under the stacks. That is the price of airports not being able to expand to increase their arrival rate.
answered 2 days ago
StephenSStephenS
7,6081 gold badge12 silver badges39 bronze badges
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
Thank you for your answer. However my question was more about why the holding pattern occurs on rather low altitudes. Why need often need to wait in line (or in stacks...) is clear to me
$endgroup$
– silent
yesterday
2
$begingroup$
@silent It depends how close the stack is to the airport. In general, the bottom of the stack will be how high airplanes should be if the stack isn't in use. The standard descent angle is 3° (about 1000ft per 1.5nmi), so if the bottom of the Heathrow stacks is at 7000ft, I'd expect them to be about 10nmi from the airport.
$endgroup$
– StephenS
yesterday
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Airports can accept landing aircraft at a (mostly) fixed, constant rate. However, inbound aircraft arrive at different times and rates based on weather and other factors, regardless of the schedules. This means, at times, aircraft will be coming in faster than the airport can accept them, from many different directions. And airplanes can't just stop mid-air to wait their turn.
The answer is to put aircraft in a "holding pattern", which is a racetrack (not circle) shape that repeatedly passes over the same fixed point, to delay them. When you do this at multiple altitudes, it becomes a "holding stack".
Arriving aircraft are directed into the top of the stack, 1000ft above the previous one. Aircraft at the bottom of the stack are released at a fixed rate to continue toward the airport, and all the aircraft above them are shifted down 1000ft.
The depth of the stack will vary depending on numerous factors, but at congested airports like Heathrow, every arriving plane is pretty much guaranteed to do at least a few turns in holding. And yes, this can mean a lot of noise on the ground for those who live under the stacks. That is the price of airports not being able to expand to increase their arrival rate.
answered 2 days ago
StephenSStephenS
7,6081 gold badge12 silver badges39 bronze badges
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
Thank you for your answer. However my question was more about why the holding pattern occurs on rather low altitudes. Why need often need to wait in line (or in stacks...) is clear to me
$endgroup$
– silent
yesterday
2
$begingroup$
@silent It depends how close the stack is to the airport. In general, the bottom of the stack will be how high airplanes should be if the stack isn't in use. The standard descent angle is 3° (about 1000ft per 1.5nmi), so if the bottom of the Heathrow stacks is at 7000ft, I'd expect them to be about 10nmi from the airport.
$endgroup$
– StephenS
yesterday
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Airports can accept landing aircraft at a (mostly) fixed, constant rate. However, inbound aircraft arrive at different times and rates based on weather and other factors, regardless of the schedules. This means, at times, aircraft will be coming in faster than the airport can accept them, from many different directions. And airplanes can't just stop mid-air to wait their turn.
The answer is to put aircraft in a "holding pattern", which is a racetrack (not circle) shape that repeatedly passes over the same fixed point, to delay them. When you do this at multiple altitudes, it becomes a "holding stack".
Arriving aircraft are directed into the top of the stack, 1000ft above the previous one. Aircraft at the bottom of the stack are released at a fixed rate to continue toward the airport, and all the aircraft above them are shifted down 1000ft.
The depth of the stack will vary depending on numerous factors, but at congested airports like Heathrow, every arriving plane is pretty much guaranteed to do at least a few turns in holding. And yes, this can mean a lot of noise on the ground for those who live under the stacks. That is the price of airports not being able to expand to increase their arrival rate.
answered 2 days ago
StephenSStephenS
7,6081 gold badge12 silver badges39 bronze badges
$endgroup$
Airports can accept landing aircraft at a (mostly) fixed, constant rate. However, inbound aircraft arrive at different times and rates based on weather and other factors, regardless of the schedules. This means, at times, aircraft will be coming in faster than the airport can accept them, from many different directions. And airplanes can't just stop mid-air to wait their turn.
The answer is to put aircraft in a "holding pattern", which is a racetrack (not circle) shape that repeatedly passes over the same fixed point, to delay them. When you do this at multiple altitudes, it becomes a "holding stack".
Arriving aircraft are directed into the top of the stack, 1000ft above the previous one. Aircraft at the bottom of the stack are released at a fixed rate to continue toward the airport, and all the aircraft above them are shifted down 1000ft.
The depth of the stack will vary depending on numerous factors, but at congested airports like Heathrow, every arriving plane is pretty much guaranteed to do at least a few turns in holding. And yes, this can mean a lot of noise on the ground for those who live under the stacks. That is the price of airports not being able to expand to increase their arrival rate.
answered 2 days ago
StephenSStephenS
7,6081 gold badge12 silver badges39 bronze badges
answered 2 days ago
StephenSStephenS
7,6081 gold badge12 silver badges39 bronze badges
answered 2 days ago
StephenSStephenS
7,6081 gold badge12 silver badges39 bronze badges
answered 2 days ago
StephenSStephenS
7,6081 gold badge12 silver badges39 bronze badges
7,6081 gold badge12 silver badges39 bronze badges
2
$begingroup$
Thank you for your answer. However my question was more about why the holding pattern occurs on rather low altitudes. Why need often need to wait in line (or in stacks...) is clear to me
$endgroup$
– silent
yesterday
2
$begingroup$
@silent It depends how close the stack is to the airport. In general, the bottom of the stack will be how high airplanes should be if the stack isn't in use. The standard descent angle is 3° (about 1000ft per 1.5nmi), so if the bottom of the Heathrow stacks is at 7000ft, I'd expect them to be about 10nmi from the airport.
$endgroup$
– StephenS
yesterday
add a comment |
2
$begingroup$
Thank you for your answer. However my question was more about why the holding pattern occurs on rather low altitudes. Why need often need to wait in line (or in stacks...) is clear to me
$endgroup$
– silent
yesterday
2
$begingroup$
@silent It depends how close the stack is to the airport. In general, the bottom of the stack will be how high airplanes should be if the stack isn't in use. The standard descent angle is 3° (about 1000ft per 1.5nmi), so if the bottom of the Heathrow stacks is at 7000ft, I'd expect them to be about 10nmi from the airport.
$endgroup$
– StephenS
yesterday
2
2
$begingroup$
Thank you for your answer. However my question was more about why the holding pattern occurs on rather low altitudes. Why need often need to wait in line (or in stacks...) is clear to me
$endgroup$
– silent
yesterday
$begingroup$
Thank you for your answer. However my question was more about why the holding pattern occurs on rather low altitudes. Why need often need to wait in line (or in stacks...) is clear to me
$endgroup$
– silent
yesterday
2
2
$begingroup$
@silent It depends how close the stack is to the airport. In general, the bottom of the stack will be how high airplanes should be if the stack isn't in use. The standard descent angle is 3° (about 1000ft per 1.5nmi), so if the bottom of the Heathrow stacks is at 7000ft, I'd expect them to be about 10nmi from the airport.
$endgroup$
– StephenS
yesterday
$begingroup$
@silent It depends how close the stack is to the airport. In general, the bottom of the stack will be how high airplanes should be if the stack isn't in use. The standard descent angle is 3° (about 1000ft per 1.5nmi), so if the bottom of the Heathrow stacks is at 7000ft, I'd expect them to be about 10nmi from the airport.
$endgroup$
– StephenS
yesterday
add a comment |
$begingroup$
As an aside to the hold explanations furnished above: to save on fuel, an airliner will reduce power to commence descent at a distance from the airport which will place it at either 1) its anticipated hold altitude, or 2) the landing pattern entry altitude, subject to ATC's instructions, upon arrival in the vicinity of the airport.
While at reduced power, the pilot will trim the aircraft for the optimum power-on glide angle that lets him or her make best use of the plane's gravitational potential energy during the descent and approach, and thereby minimize fuel burn during that phase of the flight. The pilot will adjust this to conform to ATC instructions by adding power or deploying spoilers, flaps, or gear as required.
answered 2 days ago
niels nielsenniels nielsen
3,3211 gold badge5 silver badges17 bronze badges
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
Useful information, but the question seems to be about holding patterns.
$endgroup$
– David K
2 days ago
1
$begingroup$
understand, will edit.
$endgroup$
– niels nielsen
2 days ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
As an aside to the hold explanations furnished above: to save on fuel, an airliner will reduce power to commence descent at a distance from the airport which will place it at either 1) its anticipated hold altitude, or 2) the landing pattern entry altitude, subject to ATC's instructions, upon arrival in the vicinity of the airport.
While at reduced power, the pilot will trim the aircraft for the optimum power-on glide angle that lets him or her make best use of the plane's gravitational potential energy during the descent and approach, and thereby minimize fuel burn during that phase of the flight. The pilot will adjust this to conform to ATC instructions by adding power or deploying spoilers, flaps, or gear as required.
answered 2 days ago
niels nielsenniels nielsen
3,3211 gold badge5 silver badges17 bronze badges
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
Useful information, but the question seems to be about holding patterns.
$endgroup$
– David K
2 days ago
1
$begingroup$
understand, will edit.
$endgroup$
– niels nielsen
2 days ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
As an aside to the hold explanations furnished above: to save on fuel, an airliner will reduce power to commence descent at a distance from the airport which will place it at either 1) its anticipated hold altitude, or 2) the landing pattern entry altitude, subject to ATC's instructions, upon arrival in the vicinity of the airport.
While at reduced power, the pilot will trim the aircraft for the optimum power-on glide angle that lets him or her make best use of the plane's gravitational potential energy during the descent and approach, and thereby minimize fuel burn during that phase of the flight. The pilot will adjust this to conform to ATC instructions by adding power or deploying spoilers, flaps, or gear as required.
answered 2 days ago
niels nielsenniels nielsen
3,3211 gold badge5 silver badges17 bronze badges
$endgroup$
As an aside to the hold explanations furnished above: to save on fuel, an airliner will reduce power to commence descent at a distance from the airport which will place it at either 1) its anticipated hold altitude, or 2) the landing pattern entry altitude, subject to ATC's instructions, upon arrival in the vicinity of the airport.
While at reduced power, the pilot will trim the aircraft for the optimum power-on glide angle that lets him or her make best use of the plane's gravitational potential energy during the descent and approach, and thereby minimize fuel burn during that phase of the flight. The pilot will adjust this to conform to ATC instructions by adding power or deploying spoilers, flaps, or gear as required.
answered 2 days ago
niels nielsenniels nielsen
3,3211 gold badge5 silver badges17 bronze badges
edited 2 days ago
answered 2 days ago
niels nielsenniels nielsen
3,3211 gold badge5 silver badges17 bronze badges
answered 2 days ago
niels nielsenniels nielsen
3,3211 gold badge5 silver badges17 bronze badges
answered 2 days ago
niels nielsenniels nielsen
3,3211 gold badge5 silver badges17 bronze badges
3,3211 gold badge5 silver badges17 bronze badges
2
$begingroup$
Useful information, but the question seems to be about holding patterns.
$endgroup$
– David K
2 days ago
1
$begingroup$
understand, will edit.
$endgroup$
– niels nielsen
2 days ago
add a comment |
2
$begingroup$
Useful information, but the question seems to be about holding patterns.
$endgroup$
– David K
2 days ago
1
$begingroup$
understand, will edit.
$endgroup$
– niels nielsen
2 days ago
2
2
$begingroup$
Useful information, but the question seems to be about holding patterns.
$endgroup$
– David K
2 days ago
$begingroup$
Useful information, but the question seems to be about holding patterns.
$endgroup$
– David K
2 days ago
1
1
$begingroup$
understand, will edit.
$endgroup$
– niels nielsen
2 days ago
$begingroup$
understand, will edit.
$endgroup$
– niels nielsen
2 days ago
add a comment |
silent is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
silent is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
silent is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
silent is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to Aviation Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2faviation.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f67775%2fwhy-do-aircraft-leave-the-cruising-altitude-long-before-landing-just-to-circle%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
4
$begingroup$
A couple of thousand feet? The lowest level for Heathrow's stacks is 7000ft, and aircraft will enter higher than that. See Heathrow arrival paths
$endgroup$
– Redd Herring
2 days ago
1
$begingroup$
It’s still an altitude at which you can clearly hear the planes on the ground
$endgroup$
– silent
2 days ago
11
$begingroup$
"creating quite some noise" Username checks out :)
$endgroup$
– Bianfable
2 days ago
7
$begingroup$
@silent Noise intensity falls off with the square of distance. An aircraft at 7000ft is already about one tenth as noisy as one at 'a couple of thousand feet'. Having lived near Biggin Hill for many years I can tell you that the traffic noise from the M25 was far more intrusive than the passing jets.
$endgroup$
– Redd Herring
2 days ago
4
$begingroup$
@sean We're not talking about traffic visiting the airfield, but traffic using the Biggin hold while en route to Heathrow.
$endgroup$
– Redd Herring
2 days ago