LONGisland89 From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 633 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (2 years 7 months 1 week 8 hours ago) and read 5068 times:
Very interesting. I wonder if ZRH has any kind of master plan that includes possible expansion possibilities.
PITrules From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 2679 posts, RR: 3 Reply 2, posted (2 years 7 months 1 week 2 hours ago) and read 5050 times:
Quoting LONGisland89 (Reply 1): Very interesting. I wonder if ZRH has any kind of master plan that includes possible expansion possibilities.
Here is the master plan in the early 1980s. The existing terminals at the time are in purple, with future expansion in blue. So looks like they added on pretty much as planned, with the A concourse, first of two midfield concourses, and GA area north of rwy 28. I'm curious if they still plan on adding the concourse extending south from terminal B.
glidepath73 From Germany, joined Mar 2005, 1017 posts, RR: 50 Reply 3, posted (2 years 7 months 1 week ago) and read 5046 times:
Quoting PITrules (Reply 2): Here is the master plan in the early 1980s. The existing terminals at the time are in purple, with future expansion in blue. So looks like they added on pretty much as planned, with the A concourse, first of two midfield concourses, and GA area north of rwy 28. I'm curious if they still plan on adding the concourse extending south from terminal B.
Hey! Interesting draft. Never saw that one before.
Currently Dock B gets rebuild in a shorter version for proper Schengen passanger handling.
There has been a bus gate added to 'Dock B'. But not concourse is planned as I know.
I think they should scrap the Gate gourmet building and ad there an extended Terminal B with extended Dock B gates.
The more important: The current runway layout limits the airport by a high degree.
This problem should be fixed by a readjustment of the heading of either RWY 14 or 16 as shown in my two drafts.
But I think there will nothing happen before 2030....
PITrules From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 2679 posts, RR: 3 Reply 4, posted (2 years 7 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 4999 times:
Quoting glidepath73 (Reply 3): The more important: The current runway layout limits the airport by a high degree.
This problem should be fixed by a readjustment of the heading of either RWY 14 or 16 as shown in my two drafts.
But I think there will nothing happen before 2030....
I think with 3 runways the current setup works as they can always use two runways at the same time, one for departures and one for arrivals (although 10-28 could use an extension for long haul departures). But I agree, as the airport gets even busier in the future, for simultaneous arrivals they need independent parallel runways separated by at least 4,300 feet, so I like the second of the plans you drew up. I'm sure they now wish they positioned 14/32 appropriately, but then again it was designed in the 1970s, if not earlier.
glidepath73 From Germany, joined Mar 2005, 1017 posts, RR: 50 Reply 5, posted (2 years 7 months 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 4972 times:
Quoting PITrules (Reply 4): although 10-28 could use an extension for long haul departures).
That would be the first step...
Quoting PITrules (Reply 4): But I agree, as the airport gets even busier in the future, for simultaneous arrivals they need independent parallel runways separated by at least 4,300 feet,
That would be the second step...
Proper simultaneous traffic would only then be possible. The problems might be the surrounding topography as well as the surrounding towns / villages. Really bad situation in ZRH in regards of expansion.
Sponsor Message: 
From Germany, joined Mar 2005, 1017 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 633 posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
