Irish Steve wrote: » Long time ago now, but I well remember the hassles of landing on 23 at Dublin when the wind was slightly stronger than normal from around 20, the combination of Hangar 6 and the falling ground north of the threshold made for "interesting" landings in a light aircraft, especially if there was also a 747 on the holding point. A very late go around after a significant upset was a better option than a potentially bent aircraft.
HTCOne wrote: » 29 would have been the worst affected by Hangar 6 no?
Irish Steve wrote: » The construction period made for interesting operations on 05, as during the construction, it meant the removal of all the approach lights on 05, with the result that I well remember one foul morning arriving in from the UK, having to hold some 40 miles out in my own private orbit at 6000 Ft for close on an hour as a heavy snow shower went through and closed everything, and then when things improved enough to be able to approach, having to fly an ILS on to 16 with a wind of 050 10G20, which made for an interesting crabbed approach, it was the one and only time I can remember looking out of the right hand seat window to see the runway, due to the offset required to maintain the localiser. The L1011, (yeah that long ago) on the holding point was a useful wind break at just the right moment, I couldn't use 05 as there were no lights at all at that end of the runway, and the cloudbase was too low for 34 to be usable, as there were no precision approaches for that runway either, and construction works for the new runway were also affecting operations on 34. It was an interesting period.
smurfjed wrote: » Thread drift, you couldn’t have had much fuel remaining, so why didn’t you divert to Belfast or Liverpool rather than holding?
as long as the evil Janitrol heater wasn't on strike!
smurfjed wrote: » only ever saw one of those in a DC3 :)
Irish Steve wrote: » A number of the Piper twins had them, and they were not a nice device, but there was no alternative if you didn't want to freeze in the winter months, even below 10,000 Ft it could get baltic very quickly with no heat, as there was no engine heat ducts to get heat into the cabin.
eastmayo wrote: » Update 27/12/20
eastmayo wrote: » Update 26/12/20
Comhra wrote: » Looks like a giant Airfix kit partially built and ready for decals and painting.
irishgeo wrote: » The engines don't be long getting removed. Already pulled out of the other 2 planes.
interlocked wrote: » Some eye watering figures in this link, estimating up to $80 million value in component parts recovery from an A380.https://www.cirium.com/thoughtcloud/what-does-the-end-of-a380-production-mean-for-values/
eastmayo wrote: » Got this photo today.
Acosta wrote: » Would have made a cool air bnb or something. I think someone did that with an old DDR Interflug plane. That would probably require landing it in a field or something like they did with the Interflug, so probably not possible.
theguzman wrote: » There is a guy in Sligo with similar, a few outsize lorries and he might take the carcass for that. A mile-high motel
FintanMcluskey wrote: » Which is now a rusting scrapyard that the locals are unhappy with. An awesome sight for an outsider though, as was the procedure used to transport the plane
irishgeo wrote: » yeah it never opened. rumour was he didn't want to risk his own money and the bank refused to loan all the money he needed.
Lurching wrote: » Locals can complain all they want - it's definitely drawing tourism to Enniscrone.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w5.vanillicon.com/v2/5fffda8352925b36d6f8503d7ddaac66.svg)
