| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
vt-ala
Member
Joined: 08 Apr 2008
Posts: 440
|
 Posted: Fri Sep 26, 2008 9:01 pm Post subject: The first few at VIDP RWY 29 |
 |
|
Arrivals on the first morning at VIDP / DEL's brand new rwy 29
The plane that inaugurated commercial operations. BA's 772 from LHR see n here being given a follow me service to guide him out of the new rwy / twy layout
The 3rd arrival, AI's A313 VT-AIA 'Tapti'. According to the ministry press release, this guy was supposed to be first !!
LH's A346 service from Munich touches down. Note the condensation forming on top if the wings
AIX VT-AXM about to touch down. Note condensation trails from the trailing edges
A Gulfstream G550 on short finals....
...Followed by a 9W 737
An IAF Hs-748 with props stopped by the 1/4000 shutter speed
AI (IC) A319 VT-SCI about to touch down
AI VT-EJJ 'Beas'
And finally, the one I was waiting for 9W's 77W Vt-JEK inbound from LHR
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
HAWK21M
Member
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
Posts: 8132
Location: Mumbai, INDIA
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 26, 2008 9:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Nice Pics.I liked the 9W B777.
regds
MEL
_________________
Think of the Brighter side !!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sushank320
Member
Joined: 26 Apr 2007
Posts: 409
Location: malviya nagar,new delhi,INDIA
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 26, 2008 9:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| wow amazing pics vt-ala...love the AI A319... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sumantra
Member
Joined: 28 Oct 2007
Posts: 4685
Location: New Delhi
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Great catch, vt-ala. Are you going to post higher resolution versions on your flickr site?
Thanks, Sumantra. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
saurabhm_101
Member
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
Posts: 529
Location: Mumbai
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 27, 2008 12:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
VT-ALA correct me if im wrong but the pic after the Gulfstream seems to be a 767 not a 737 notice the double boogie main gears...
But love the pictures! your one lucky dude! tc
_________________
Flying High.... You and Me...! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sushank320
Member
Joined: 26 Apr 2007
Posts: 409
Location: malviya nagar,new delhi,INDIA
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 27, 2008 1:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| yeah,,it might be the Ethiopian B767. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sammyk
Member
Joined: 20 Dec 2006
Posts: 2719
Location: Austin, TX
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 27, 2008 8:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Definitely a 767 of some variety, the main gears are hanging forward. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
himmat01
Member
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
Posts: 1392
Location: DEL
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 09, 2008 3:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Nice pics, VT-ALA.
_________________
Save Maharashtra! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stealthpilot
Member
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
Posts: 2325
Location: BLR, DXB
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 23, 2008 4:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Nice VT-ALA!
Question- a couple of times when I landed on 29 some heavies took 28 saying they were not authorised for 29.
Did you see any big guys landing on 28 during your 29 spotting because the landing distance of 29 is barely more than 27.
_________________
eP007 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vt-ala
Member
Joined: 08 Apr 2008
Posts: 440
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 23, 2008 4:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | stealthpilot
Question- a couple of times when I landed on 29 some heavies took 28 saying they were not authorised for 29. Did you see any big guys landing on 28 during your 29 spotting because the landing distance of 29 is barely more than 27. |
--
Well a 77W and a A346 are heavy right? Most pilots are landing on 29, though some airlines - mostly cargo flights with MD-11s request 28, instead of 29. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sumantra
Member
Joined: 28 Oct 2007
Posts: 4685
Location: New Delhi
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 23, 2008 10:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
vt-ala wrote:
``...though some airlines - mostly cargo flights with MD-11s request 28, instead of 29.''
Any specifc reason for the MD-11, or for a cargo aircraft?
Thanks, Sumantra. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vt-ala
Member
Joined: 08 Apr 2008
Posts: 440
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 24, 2008 8:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Any specifc reason for the MD-11, or for a cargo aircraft? |
Sumantra, for reasons beyond my knowledge some MD-11s flying with cargo airlines have a longer minima for the landing distance needed. The LDA at 29 is just about at the edge of their minima - so i feel the request for 28. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sumantra
Member
Joined: 28 Oct 2007
Posts: 4685
Location: New Delhi
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 25, 2008 10:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks, vt-ala!
Cheers, Sumantra. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stealthpilot
Member
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
Posts: 2325
Location: BLR, DXB
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 26, 2008 9:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| vt-ala wrote: | | Well a 77W and a A346 are heavy right? |
Yes I know that  I did say some heavies.
I thought the reason was maybe because it was a new runway some carriers had not (for whatever reason) authorised their pilots to land on it. Don’t know.
Your last post if true goes a bit to explain the question though, thanks.
_________________
eP007 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
