07/10/2009 diversions/delays at EBBR due to thunderstorms

[LX-LGX]

BRU : lots of delayed and diverted flights tonight.

[SN539]

Heavy thunderstorms over EBBR at this moment. Approaches justed started again on runway 20.

[Atlantis]

It was very heavy. It was not safe anymore

[FLYAIR10]

Indeed a lot of diversions to the regional airports.
To OSTEND: BUC(Tarom),FRA(SN),HEL(SN),LHR(BD)
To LIEGE : MUC(SN),VIE(SN),MAD(SN),WAW(SN),GVA(EZS)
To CRL : TXL(SN),MAN(CLL),LYS(SN)
To ANTWERP: HAM(SN)

Who decides where to divert to and when?
- is this in the flight plan?
- Brussels ATC?
- The pilot in command?
- the airline?

just wondering...

Grtz.Flyair10

[jan_olieslagers]

All these flights are covered by a flight plan, and a flight plan must mention at least one alternate destination. If the original destination aerodrome is not available then diversion is made to the first alternate. But who decides on the alternate(s) on the flight plan?

Also, I understand scheduled services have a "repetitive flight plan" - does it mean a scheduled flight has a fixed alternate?

[sdbelgium]

I would guess that alternates are pretty much fixed for certain routes, yes. There is probably a conversation between PIC and Operations/Dispatch Department of the airline to decide whether or not to divert and if so where to and when.

[Marten]

sdbelgium is right, there is communication between the PIC and the Operation Department of the airline about the diversion, but the decision is to be made by the PIC. About the diversions, I know there are 5 alternates written down in the flightplan, but no idea how they are defined.

Marten

[cnc]

Indeed a lot of diversions to the regional airports.
To OSTEND: BUC(Tarom),FRA(SN),HEL(SN),LHR(BD)

also JAF comming from SID

[EBAW_flyer]

First of all, your alternate(s) (max 2) on your ATC flightplan are not binding (unless in case of communication failure).
Whenever possible it is coordinated with operations (or by ACARS or when within VHF range by company frequency).
The choice of alternate depends on many factors: weather, runway, rescue services, handling, if necessary hotel accomodation for passengers, ...

About the diversions, I know there are 5 alternates written down in the flightplan, but no idea how they are defined.

On an ATC flightplan it is only possible to fill in 2 alternates. On an operational flightplan it is possible to have more alternates just for info (depends on the software).

[Acid-drop]

From a very basic observation (thus maybe wrong), it looks like they land anywhere you burn as less fuel as possible : land in LGG when you come from the east of europe, in OST when you come from the west ...

[euroflyer]

From a very basic observation (thus maybe wrong), it looks like they land anywhere you burn as less fuel as possible : land in LGG when you come from the east of europe, in OST when you come from the west ...

That is why the flights from FRA and BUC diverted to Ostend yesterday

[cnc]

some handling contracts have diversion stations in it because the handling agent is present there too but this time some diversions to OST where due to a full tarmac at LGG i think. could someone confirm this?

[tolipanebas]

First of all, your alternate(s) (max 2) on your ATC flightplan is (are) not binding, unless in case of communication failure.

If you think about it, that makes a lot of sense: imagine you can't land at your intended destination and MUST divert to a place where the weather has become really bad too, just because you happen to have filled it in on your flightplan! Obviously not...

Whenever possible it is coordinated with operations (or by ACARS or when within VHF range by company frequency).
The choice of alternate depends on many factors: weather, runway, rescue services, handling, if necessary hotel accomodation for passengers, ...

When it becomes obvious we can't land at the intended destination, we will try to contact our operations centre in BRU, which will suggest to us the airport they'd prefer to see us divert to.
For inbound flights to BRU, this can be done via VHF; for flights outbound BRU we use ACARS.
Since the 737s don't have ACARS, they'll make use of a predetermined list of what are called commercially preferred alternates, so the crew has some kind of guidance as to where the company most likely will want them to go to in case of divertion...

The final decision always remains with the captain though and safety always comes before commercial aspects, so when under time (fuel) constraint the above process may be skipped and the captain may land wherever he deems suitable.

I understand scheduled services have a "repetitive flight plan" - does it mean a scheduled flight has a fixed alternate?

Brussels Airlines does not use repetitive flight plans, we use planning software which calculates the optimal route for each individual flight apart and then suggests a shortlist of possible filable options to the dispatcher on duty who'll select the best-suited one in function of cost, time and expected delay, which is then automatically filled with ATC.

The process only takes a few minutes or so and can be repeated several times. (for instance if a slot appears on one route, to avoid it). No big deal. Repetitive flight plans are something from the past really, used today only by small airlines without operational support.

The alternates filed in our flightplans are selected by the dispatcher and take into account the weather at the time of arrival at the alternate in case of divertion.
Obviously he'll also take into account other aspects like airport limitations, aircraft limitations, origin of the flight etc.
Most of the times, SN uses EBLG, EBOS and EBCI.
EBAW will never be planned (but may be used by the captain) since it is a fairly limited airport and in case weather in Belgium becomes really bad, SN files ELLX, EDDL, EHAM or LFPG, depending where the flight comes from.
As said, once the flight is airborn, the captain has the final word and may divert wherever he thinks is best.
The further away the planned alternate,the more divertion fuel he'll have available, and the more options he'll have, so although EBLG could have been filed, there's always to option to go to EBOS and if weather in the east is bad (like yesterday), it's often a logic thing to do, which is why you can see a flight from FRA to BRU go to OST, iso LGG (which will have been the planned alternate)

[tolipanebas]

From a very basic observation (thus maybe wrong), it looks like they land anywhere you burn as less fuel as possible : land in LGG when you come from the east of europe, in OST when you come from the west ...

Actually that depends on the reason of the divertion.

If you know your destination airport will be closed for a long time, then there's no use to go over there and try an approach, so yes, you better land is LGG, MST, DUS or LUX when coming from the east, and OST or RTM when coming from the west...

BUT

if you feel like there's a change you can make it at BRU, then you'll obviously first try that and then once you decide to divert away from BRU, it's really all the same whether you go from BRU to LGG or to OST, so you just pick the best one.

[airazurxtror]

Yesterday evening, around 2100, BMI Embraer EMB135 G-RJXL was at Charleroi, no doubt a diversion from Brussels ...