nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Knock/Eirtrade thread

[Deleted User]

Inbound to knock on Friday between 1300-1400 for scrapping F-HPJB

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

joujoujou

In brief - any element valuable for 2nd hand market must have its own certificate issued during dismantling process (please, anyone who knows better to correct me if I'm wrong).

Atlantic Dawn

With regard to reusing some of the parts what happens where the parts have serial numbers embedded on them related to the original aircraft they came from, are these markings removed or notes kept that they are now on x aeroplane.

interlocked

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/

HTCOne

irishgeo wrote: »

The engines don't be long getting removed. Already pulled out of the other 2 planes.

Most valuable parts of the salvage. They can likely be re-used on other airframes, although maybe not in the case of the 380.

masit

Eventually got down today before lockdown

Today, https://youtu.be/QIERJkV1g6E

When she landed , https://youtu.be/13xd7KG1JhY

irishgeo

Comhra wrote: »

Looks like a giant Airfix kit partially built and ready for decals and painting.

The engines don't be long getting removed. Already pulled out of the other 2 planes.

Muahahaha

This thread is reminding me that an aircraft engineer got hold of of a VC10 engine housing and made a caravan out of it recently. The build was featured on George Clarkes Amazing Spaces a few months back

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__BB4FlINYI

Comhrá

Looks like a giant Airfix kit partially built and ready for decals and painting.

Atlantic Dawn

eastmayo wrote: »

Update 26/12/20

Loving the concrete blocks holding it up, like some abandoned project car a neighbour has given up working on

Silent Running

eastmayo wrote: »

Update 27/12/20

That's what it's going to look like tomorrow?

eastmayo

Update 26/12/20

Growler!!!

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.

The survey Aztecs had these fitted. Found them great, but had to make sure to switch them off before landing. Otherwise they’d trip out and you’d only find out the next flight. I started checking the thermal relay in the forward baggage compartment before every flight after being caught out in the past!

Irish Steve

smurfjed wrote: »

only ever saw one of those in a DC3 :)

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.

smurfjed

as long as the evil Janitrol heater wasn't on strike!

only ever saw one of those in a DC3

Irish Steve

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?

Light aircraft, always left Dublin on the Friday with full tanks, ( range full would have got me to Rome in economy cruise) it saved the condensation issues when parked, and by the time I got back to Dublin on the following Monday, if I'd not been local flying at the weekend, (duty free fuel, so cheaper) I still had way over 3 hours fuel left, so it wasn't an issue, as long as the evil Janitrol heater wasn't on strike! Full tanks wasn't an option if I had more than 1 passenger with bags on board though, but most of the time, I was on my own, so it wasn't an issue.

If circumstances were different, I'd buy it again tomorrow, fun aircraft to fly, and had the speed to do distances without stress.

smurfjed

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.

Thread drift, you couldn’t have had much fuel remaining, so why didn’t you divert to Belfast or Liverpool rather than holding?

Irish Steve

HTCOne wrote: »

29 would have been the worst affected by Hangar 6 no?

If it was used with cross wind, yes, the same issues, but for 29 to be in use, the wind was strong from that direction, if it wasn't strong, the length was a limiting factor for the jet aircraft, so most of the time, it was only used for light aircraft interspersed with the heavier aircraft on 23.

A Cessna 150 coming in was a nightmare for utilisation, the separation and difference in airspeed meant that 2 or possibly 3 landing slots were lost to accomodate one C150. Mine (PA39) wasn't so bad, I was pretty much the same speeds as the Shorts 360's until very late final, when I had to pull the speed back, but 120 all the way down the slope was fine for me, so ATC didn't mind as much.

Fun days, Dublin was a very different environment back in those times.

HTCOne

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.

29 would have been the worst affected by Hangar 6 no?

Irish Steve

05/23 was the main runway, and active until 10/28 was complete and ready for service. 99% of the time it was 23 that was in use, so while the construction of the new runway affected things, it wasn't usually significant, and there were no precision aids or procedures of any sort for the short runway (11/29 if I remember correctly)

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.

Hotblack Desiato

Seems so quaint now that light aircraft at DUB was once a thing.

Also runway 23 - must be very long ago if the magnetic pole has shifted that much :pac:

(joke)

Presume 05/23 went around the same time the present 10L/28R was built (I keep calling it 09/27 in my head....)

MoeJay

Was Hangar 6 built before 23 closed...? Couldn't have been around at the same time for long?

Irish Steve

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Hangars themselves can cause issues when the wind is blowing in the wrong direction e.g. at Shannon.

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.

Hotblack Desiato

Hangars themselves can cause issues when the wind is blowing in the wrong direction e.g. at Shannon.

joujoujou

Quite unlikely (however not impossible) to blow something onto the runway, as Southerly winds are there most of the time and their scrapyard is located north of the runway. And they have plenty of heavy shipping containers surrounding the place.

BonnieSituation

mickdw wrote: »

You know and I know that Airports are not run on a 'be grand' basis so that hardly cuts it.
I worked at dublin airport on construction projects and certainly there, there was layer upon layer of paperwork before anything could be progressed. Permit for everything.

The "be grand" attitude worked when they built Knock though!

mickdw

irishgeo wrote: »

A gust of wind blowing it that far is likely to keep it going over the hill.

You know and I know that Airports are not run on a 'be grand' basis so that hardly cuts it.
I worked at dublin airport on construction projects and certainly there, there was layer upon layer of paperwork before anything could be progressed. Permit for everything.

yew_tree

Masala wrote: »

As matter of interest... what kind of money is involved building same??

Also - so who owns the Hangar??? Knock or Eirtrade??

Not a clue, your asking the wrong person. I think a large part of land around the airport was designated an SDZ special zone? I’m not sure if it allows fast tracking of planning or not.

yew_tree

mickdw wrote: »

I said this before when we heard they were going to break an A380 but how is it allowable to do that work so close to live runway.
Look at the amount of crap thrown around the place. They are on top of a hill in the west of Ireland. A gust of wind blowing something onto the runway could result in a major incident.
The sooner this hanger is built, the better.

No doubt someone from another part of the country will object. Some clown in Wicklow made an objection to a proposed development a few years ago. Mad planning laws how someone the other side of the country can object.

irishgeo

mickdw wrote: »

I said this before when we heard they were going to break an A380 but how is it allowable to do that work so close to live runway.
Look at the amount of crap thrown around the place. They are on top of a hill in the west of Ireland. A gust of wind blowing something onto the runway could result in a major incident.
The sooner this hanger is built, the better.

A gust of wind blowing it that far is likely to keep it going over the hill.

mickdw

There will be a few from now til january