Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Logan Finally Gets Green Light For New Runway  
User currently offlineKearnet From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 230 posts, RR: 0
Posted (11 years 1 month 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 4421 times:

Well It's it's only taken 2+ decades, but Boston Logan (BOS) can finally build the another runway that will hopefully remove some of the congestion the field is known for: http://www.whdh.com/news/articles/local/A29474/

14 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineMia777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2002, 1165 posts, RR: 6
Reply 1, posted (11 years 1 month 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 4406 times:

Interesting...how long will it be? Will it be limited to RJs? It definitely looks small in comparison (well according to that image on the site) to the other runways.

Anyways, always provide an active link!!!

http://www.whdh.com/news/articles/local/A29474/



MIA777
User currently offlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17821 posts, RR: 46
Reply 2, posted (11 years 1 month 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 4396 times:

It's tiny (about 5000'), and can only be used when the wind is blowing in a certain direction, on Tuesdays, in years that end in 9, and only by captains that are Libras. That said, hell must have frozen over because I thought I'd never see any kind of runway development in BOS.


E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlineGoboeing From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 2725 posts, RR: 15
Reply 3, posted (11 years 1 month 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 4370 times:

That looks like perhaps the most useless runway in the USA's largest airports. Worse than 8-26 at PHL.

Nick


User currently offlineLymanm From Canada, joined Jan 2001, 1140 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (11 years 1 month 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 4336 times:

Useless? Hardly. Under virtually all wind conditions, most turbo props would normally have little difficulty getting on the new runway. On windy days, 5000ft is enough for even light Boeing/Airbus models. Also significant is that BOS' biggest operator in terms of movements is Cape Air, using Cessna 402s. Those would have no problem at all using 5000ft, and it would free up slots on longer runways.


buhh bye
User currently offlineChrisNH From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 4163 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (11 years 1 month 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 4295 times:

Now Boston Mayor Menino can practice speaking out of both sides of his mouth again: He'll rant and rave and complain about the new runway while imploring tourists to come to 'his' city and attend the new (already over-budget and a white-elephant) convention center.

User currently offlineBosugadl From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (11 years 1 month 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 4225 times:

This is great news, hopefully it will help all those delays...Does anyone know when construction will begin and when it will be completed? (God will the construction in Boston ever STOP!!!!!)

Also, a little off topic, does anyone know what's up with the small 2000'+ runway 15L/33R...Was this a runway that was never finished and if so, why not?...And why is there no talk about expanding this runway?


User currently offlineCs03 From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 413 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (11 years 1 month 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 4205 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Useless! No! As the above posts have said, many small carriers use BOS, and these regional operators will greatly benefit from this new runway. I do agree that a longer runway would help all carriers using BOS, but as usual, there had to be a compromise. That is the problem. Lots of time and money wasted for what....

User currently offlineGD727 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 925 posts, RR: 10
Reply 8, posted (11 years 1 month 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 4170 times:

Excellant! Massport has been waiting decades for this one! With all of BOS's commuter traffic, this will ease congestion quite a bit.

Btw, I agree with ChrisNH about Mayor Tom "mumbly" Menino, he has got to be one of the stupidest major city mayors in the country IMO.

-GD727



Mmmm forbidden donut.
User currently offlineVikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 10331 posts, RR: 26
Reply 9, posted (11 years 1 month 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 4161 times:

About damn time! I honestly don't understand why people in the surrounding communities are upset about shifting more approaches over the harbor, instead of over residential neighborhoods. Now I live 2 miles from Hanscom Field (one of the alternative suggestions), and frankly, I'd love to see some commercial activity out of there (though I'm in the tiny minority on that one, I know). But Logan has needed another runway for way too long. One question though is why didn't they design this runway to be parallel to the 15/33s? Would it conflict with existing taxiways, buildings, or the harbor? Also, it is my understanding that this runway is only to be used for landings to the NW, and takeoffs to the SE (which don't happen frequently at all).
Bosugadl,
If you look at an overhead picture or map of Logan, there are small clues that it was originally conceived to have 3 sets of parallel runways, which would be the 4/22 (already exist), 15/33, and 9/27 sets. These "clues" are such things as what seems to be a 150 ft taxiway that lines up with where a runway would be - don't know how realistic it is though. May be my imagination.
~Vik



How can I be an admiral without my cap??!
User currently offlineStevenUhl777 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (11 years 1 month 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 4132 times:

Will it cost $14 billion like the Big Dig?

User currently offlineScottB From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 6825 posts, RR: 32
Reply 11, posted (11 years 1 month 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 4070 times:

Well, it's more-or-less parallel to the 15-33's (though 15L-33R is so short as to be essentially useless), even the new runway is planned to be 14-32. Basically, it's going into the only available space on the airfield -- there's no way that Massport would get approval to fill any of the tidal flats closer to Winthrop, and building the new runway anywhere else on the property would require demolishing much of the terminal complex (not that this would be a bad thing...)

It'd be nice if they had the stones to build it to 6500-7000 feet so that it'd actually be more useful...but this is Massachusetts *sigh*


User currently offlineAaway From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 1560 posts, RR: 18
Reply 12, posted (11 years 1 month 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 4064 times:

congrats to BOS!!! Perhaps theres hope for LAX.


With a choice between changing one's mind & proving there's no need to do so, most everyone gets busy on the proof.
User currently offlineEastbay From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 211 posts, RR: 2
Reply 13, posted (11 years 1 month 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 4034 times:

I've landed several times with Beech 1900's on 33R. When the wind really blows right down the pipe it's not too difficult, but you gotta set it down on the numbers. Still, it's preferable to take the longer runway but when approach tells you that the final for 33L is 35 miles long, and you have 9 more legs to do that day, 33R sounds a lot better. The funny thing was that we had takeoff data for that runway, with authorization only for temperatures well below zero, and with a max takeoff weight of ZFW plus maybe 300 pounds.

User currently offlineKearnet From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 230 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (11 years 1 month 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 4018 times:

*Getting slightly off subject* what attracted me to this story was that in the promo on TV, it showed a DL L-1011 landing, I had the sound off so I didn't know what it was about.

I just got around to looking at the video that can be view from my included link above, and I started laughing when I that it contained footage of a TWO jet, BEX planes, and a US 727. Man do I love stock footage. *OK back on subject*


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
LHR Gets Green Light For Terminal 5 posted Sun Nov 11 2001 23:02:48 by Jiml1126
LGB Terminal Expansion Gets Green Light posted Thu Jun 22 2006 21:26:43 by Laxintl
Green Light For Mobils In Cabin. posted Wed Jun 14 2006 22:13:37 by Solnabo
MSP Announces Celebrations For New Runway 17/35 posted Fri Sep 9 2005 06:46:47 by Pilottim747
DOT Gives Santa Green Light For Flight posted Wed Dec 22 2004 21:18:49 by AmtrakGuy
Sheremetyevo 3 Gets Green Light posted Wed Sep 22 2004 12:16:37 by Kevin
Taiwan Gives Green Light For Taiwan-China Link posted Thu Nov 14 2002 01:24:07 by Bigo747
Still No Green Light For US/HK Open Skies posted Sat Mar 2 2002 19:22:08 by Jiml1126
(Almost) Green Light For DAT Plus posted Mon Dec 3 2001 20:37:07 by Aerokid
Heathrow T5 Gets Green Light posted Tue Nov 20 2001 17:10:12 by Gordonroxburgh