While spotting JAL 777 (787 temporary substitute) in SAN this morning there was construction on the main taxiway B/B1. Several aircraft crossed active runway 27 onto taxiway C and held for takeoff on the full runway. Several WN aircraft and QX requested to hold short at taxiway D, and took off at the displaced threshold. It was rare sight in SAN.

http://youtu.be/rL8dN2wPBXs

http://youtu.be/cHatq3NZdhI (QX holding at D and US on taxiway C)


http://youtu.be/mnsXHBn9rR0

and JAL 777 Landing today (you can see QX and WN holding at D)


Cheers!

[Edited 2013-01-30 14:37:42]

Quoting san88 (Thread starter): Several WN aircraft and QX requested to hold short at taxiway D, and took off at the displaced threshold. It was rare sight in SAN.

Actually, that WN aircraft is departing from the threshold. The displaced threshold is the portion of runway behind the threshold that is used for departures but not for landings.  

[Edited 2013-01-30 14:33:59]

Quoting Silver1SWA (Reply 1): Actually, that WN aircraft is departing from the threshold.

THANKS RYAN   Did you get the 777 photos?

[Edited 2013-01-30 14:36:00]

Quoting san88 (Reply 2): Did you get the 777 photos?

I did! I'm still at work until later tonight so I'll post a teaser from my camera's LCD. 

Quoting Silver1SWA (Reply 1): Actually, that WN aircraft is departing from the threshold. The displaced threshold is the portion of runway behind the threshold that is used for departures but not for landings.

Did the JAL 777 use the displaced threshold for takeoff? I'm thinking the 777 would
need the entire runway for departure? I wonder what kind of construction they're doing
to the taxiway?

[Edited 2013-01-30 15:14:35]

Wow what a great shot of it!!! Great lighting! I'll have to head down to my spot Sunday to watch it

Great videos san88! Are you on the roof of the Port Building?

That was pretty cool today...  







[Edited 2013-01-30 17:52:54]

So I'm confused....They took off from a point down the runway? Like a quarter less runway! Is that a private 727 on the ramp?

Quoting EASTERN747 (Reply 8): So I'm confused....They took off from a point down the runway? Like a quarter less runway!

Yes. I'm not sure it was 1/4 of the runway worth, but yes.

Quoting EASTERN747 (Reply 8): Is that a private 727 on the ramp?

Yep

http://www.airliners.net/search/phot...&page_limit=15&thumbnails=

Quoting san88 (Thread starter): Several WN aircraft and QX requested to hold short at taxiway D, and took off at the displaced threshold.

Once took-off half way down the runway abeam with the fire station at taxiway B-6 on a Golden West Dash-7 back in 1980. Great plane.

Quoting EASTERN747 (Reply 8): Is that a private 727 on the ramp?

Just to be clear, it is at the FBO, Landmark Aviation, and not at the airline terminal.

This is off the topic a bit, but aren't the runways long enough to handle 747s in heat and full....ie BA747..

The length of 9/27 is 9401'. The threshold is displaced 1821' which still provides 7580' for departure on Rwy 27, still more than enough for a fully loaded 737-700.

And Silver, technically, the SWA flight was departing from the displaced threshold. The threshold is where the physical beginning of the runway is. On SAN Rwy 27 they've displaced the threshold 1821' forward for landing. Departures typically occur from the threshold, or the physical beginning of the runway.

Very cool pic of the JAL 777.

Quoting EASTERN747 (Reply 12): his is off the topic a bit, but aren't the runways long enough to handle 747s in heat and full....ie BA747..

I would suspect that 747 service is either range limited or weight restricted based on the departure 25R preference for MTOW 747 departures at LAX.

Quoting SKC (Reply 13): And Silver, technically, the SWA flight was departing from the displaced threshold. The threshold is where the physical beginning of the runway is. On SAN Rwy 27 they've displaced the threshold 1821' forward for landing. Departures typically occur from the threshold, or the physical beginning of the runway.

Well now im confused and the FAA definition isn't helping as it seems to back us both up. So which is it? I always understood that the displaced threshold, according to runway markings, is the portion with the arrows pointing to the runway threshold (piano keys).

Quoting EASTERN747 (Reply 12): This is off the topic a bit, but aren't the runways long enough to handle 747s in heat and full....ie BA747..

A fully loaded BA 747 needs just over 10,000 feet of runway on a standard day, zero elevation. Runaway length would only increase with with an increase in temperature, so no.

Easiest way is that imagine they lay out a strip of concrete for a new runway and mark it accordingly. You have thresholds at either end, typically, where the concrete starts.

They later decide that the hill at one end makes it unsafe for a normal 3* descent profile to landing, so they "move" or displace the threshold 1000'. The original threshold is still there, just only usable for departures, where the hill isn't a factor.

Because the "piano keys" are really markings for landing aircraft, they displace those as well as other standard runway markings.

[Edited 2013-01-31 11:06:58]

Quoting SKC (Reply 17): Easiest way is that imagine they lay out a strip of concrete for a new runway and mark it accordingly. You have thresholds at either end, typically, where the concrete starts. They later decide that the hill at one end makes it unsafe for a normal 3* descent profile to landing, so they "move" or displace the threshold 1000'. The original threshold is still there, just only usable for departures, where the hill isn't a factor. Because the "piano keys" are really markings for landing aircraft, they displace those as well as other standard runway markings. [Edited 2013-01-31 11:06:58]

Okay, that makes sense. I stand corrected so apologies to the OP.

I always thought that when describing the location of the runway threshold, you go by the threshold markings or "piano keys" and displaced threshold refers to the portion of runway behind the threshold that is available for taxi, takeoff or landing rollout. In my quest to get this straight, I have seen it defined both ways.  

[Edited 2013-01-31 12:13:08]

Out of boredom and curiousity I superimposed a photo taken of the Dreamliner on its inaugural arrival with the above photo. I was somewhat surprised to see just how much larger the 772 appears than the 788:

--out of boredom and curiousity I superimposed...--

I like it, nice comparison

Quoting WarmNuts (Reply 19): I superimposed a photo

Great job. Very interesting.

bb

They could get 500 feet more out of SNA if they did the same thing. How much would 500 feet help?

Quoting sanflyr (Reply 6): Great videos san88! Are you on the roof of the Port Building?

I wish, I was on India street hence the eye-soar of power lines in the shot. Still looking for ways to get closer on a building somewhere

Quoting WarmNuts (Reply 7): That was pretty cool today...

I was wondering where all the spotters were at, no one was really out to see the 777

Quoting Silver1SWA (Reply 18): so apologies to the OP.

  

Quoting SKC (Reply 17): They later decide that the hill at one end makes it unsafe for a normal 3* descent profile to landing, so they "move" or displace the threshold 1000'. The original threshold is still there, just only usable for departures, where the hill isn't a factor.

I thought the displaced threshold was due to construction of that parking garage just east of the runway?




StudeDave

Quoting san88 (Reply 23):

For what it's worth, I've asked a few of our pilots about it today. It seems there is the technical definition brought up by SKC, but in practice most refer to the location of those departures as being the threshold.

Eff it...we're both right!   

Quoting pwdalmech (Reply 20): I like it, nice comparison

Quoting SANFan (Reply 21): Great job. Very interesting. bb

Thank you both...

Quoting san88 (Reply 23): I was wondering where all the spotters were at, no one was really out to see the 777

Yeah, I was fairly surprised to see just one other spotter in the spotting lot, especially considering the rarity and temporary status of this particular visitor. As impressed as I was to see JA827J arrive on her maiden voyage from NRT, I was every bit as impressed to see that timeless JAL livery arrive on the fuselage of a 777.

Man, I'd love to see that docked side by side with our other regular 772 at T2...

[Edited 2013-01-31 16:46:41]

Quoting WarmNuts (Reply 26): Yeah, I was fairly surprised to see just one other spotter in the spotting lot, especially considering the rarity and temporary status of this particular visitor.

Well, there's this little thing called "work" that prevents most of us from getting out there on a weekday morning!  
I wish I could have been there to get pics, but real life gets in the way some times!

Quoting StudeDave (Reply 24):

That was a hypothetical roughly based on SAN. I used a hill just for an example.

Quoting Scooter (Reply 27): Well, there's this little thing called "work" that prevents most of us from getting out there on a weekday morning!   I wish I could have been there to get pics, but real life gets in the way some times!

Yeah, I forgot that JA66's inaugural arrival in the Dreamliner took place on a Sunday. Nonetheless, I guess I expected to see more than one. You know... Like two, maybe? Hell, I ran into more spotters - again, on a workday - who showed up to se CPA take delivery of their first aircraft at CLD.

I guess that's one of the perks of having a small business. Suck it, working girl.  

Quoting Scooter (Reply 27):

Quoting WarmNuts (Reply 29):

Well that little thing called work is precisely the reason I get to be there for these things!

I win. 

I'm sorry, but what is the point of this thread? A WN jet took off at the piano-keys of a runway instead of the threshold???

Quoting Silver1SWA (Reply 30): Well that little thing called work is precisely the reason I get to be there for these things! I win.

I know... but do you have to rub it in?  I mean, I'm making about half what I did in my career, so I need such perks...

Quoting WarmNuts (Reply 32): I know... but do you have to rub it in?

  

A couple shots from Wednesday...


JAL B772 - SAN by Silver1SWA (Ryan Pastorino), on Flickr


JAL B772 - SAN by Silver1SWA (Ryan Pastorino), on Flickr

 

[Edited 2013-02-01 14:11:20]

Thank you Silver'! Gorgeous pix as always and very much appreciated by those of us who (for whatever reason) couldn't be there in person!  

(BTW, do you know what the taxiway construction project down at the east end of 27/9 is? Something to do with the clearing of the Ryan property or perhaps some preliminary work on the future service road?)

bb

Quoting StudeDave (Reply 24): I thought the displaced threshold was due to construction of that parking garage just east of the runway?

It couldn't have been. Here you can see it displaced and no parking structure. Has to be mid 1970's:

Great photos, Ryan! Since that 777 presumably isn't fully loaded, it must take off from SAN a bit like a rocket!

Cheers,

Edward

Great shots Ryan - thanks for the close-up look!