Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
PHL Going Ahead With 17-35 Extension!  
User currently offlineUSAir330 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 822 posts, RR: 1
Posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 2664 times:

http://www.phlrunway17-35eis.com/

Do you guys think this will make much of a diffrence with the delays that occur in PHL or no?

17 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlinePHLBOS From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 7519 posts, RR: 24
Reply 1, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 2598 times:

The extension of R/W 17-35 will allow more mainline airliners to utilize it more often. Prior to the recent 12 foot shoulders that were added on both sides, very rarely did one see a mainline jet (like a 737) land on it. In the 14 1/2 years I've lived in the area, I've never seen nor heard of a mainline jet ever using the runway for take-offs. However, within the past year, many PHL spotters have seen 737s from both US and WN along with some US A319s occasionally use Runway 35 for landings. To my knowledge, even with the shoulder upgrades that were added 3 years ago, no mainline jet uses the runway for take-offs nor land in the Runway 17 direction.

The short answer to your question is, "Yes, the runway extension will help ease some of the congestion delays at PHL; but not all."

This runway extension is an interim solution. The ultimate solution will come later with a plan to re-align the main runways and add an additional parallel runway.



"TransEastern! You'll feel like you've never left the ground because we treat you like dirt!" SNL Parady ad circa 1981
User currently offline7E72004 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3587 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 2583 times:

this is a dumb question but is the runway everyone is talking about the one that runs "east-west?"


The next generation of aircraft is just around the corner!
User currently offlineN670UW From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 1604 posts, RR: 8
Reply 3, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 2573 times:

this is a dumb question but is the runway everyone is talking about the one that runs "east-west?"

No. A 17-35 (at any airport) would run generally north-south. PHL's 9-27's run east and west.



N670UW


User currently offline7E72004 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3587 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 2568 times:

i see...it has been a while (3 years) since i have been to PHL.  Big grin


The next generation of aircraft is just around the corner!
User currently offlineACAfan From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 710 posts, RR: 6
Reply 5, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 2559 times:

The small runway on the left.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Derek Hellmann




Freddie Laker ... May be at peace with his maker ... But he is a persona non grata ... with IATA
User currently offlineRunway27right From United States of America, joined May 2004, 131 posts, RR: 10
Reply 6, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 2462 times:

I believe the rolling hub plan, which goes into effect Feb. 8th will ease a lot more of the delays than the Runway 17-35 extension. On watching much of the goings on at PHL, it seems like taxiway clutter is another addition to the delay factor. There's still going to be cross traffic. There hasn't been a day I've been to PHL where a plane has to go around, mostly on 35, because of landing traffic on the 27's. So now some of this traffic will be using 17/35. So the big question is, will it cause more go arounds? I expect it to stay the same, but now instead of the smaller stuff going around, you'll have the big carriers going around. Which I don't think they will care for  Smile

BTW, you can figure out runway directions like this. 90 degs is East, take off the '0' and you'll have the runway, so Runway 17 is 170 degs., 35 is 350 degs. (360 degs is North).

Paul



Keeping PHL Spotting Alive Daily!
User currently offlineUSAFHummer From United States of America, joined May 2000, 10685 posts, RR: 53
Reply 7, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 2427 times:

They also wanted to extend 8/26 another 2000 ft. or so to the east, but they can't do it because the Kvaerner shipyard crane is too tall and close to what would be the new glideslope for 26...I think you'll definitely see an increase in mainline traffic on 17/35 when this is done, particularly by airlines in Terms D and E (read: WN will love this!), since 17/35 runs close to Terms D and E and will significantly reduce taxi times...

Greg



Chief A.net college football stadium self-pic guru
User currently offlineUALPHLCS From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 2338 times:

Yes, recently they have really stepped up use of 17/35.

In the first 5 years of my time at PHL I saw two A320's and 1 737 land on 17/35. However in my last six months, landings by larger jets was a daily occurance. Then, just days before my layoff they landed a US 757 on it.

Will it help? Sure.
Will it solve PHL's problem forever. Hell No.

Only a complete runway reconfiguration can do that.


User currently offlineERJ170 From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 6763 posts, RR: 17
Reply 9, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 2336 times:

My last visit to PHL (about 2 weeks ago), I had an 1.5 hour layover and during that time, I saw about 15 737 (US/WN) aircraft land on 17/35 during that time.. but I saw not a single one take-off on that runway.. I was quite perplexed and ticked off cause when my flight pulled out from the gate, it was about 30 aircraft in que ahead of us..


Aiming High and going far..
User currently offlineMD11LuxuryLinr From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 1385 posts, RR: 14
Reply 10, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 2322 times:

I didn't see it state the length of the extension anywhere.. Anyone see it?


Caution wake turbulence, you are following a heavy jet.
User currently offlineWagz From United States of America, joined Mar 2003, 516 posts, RR: 16
Reply 11, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 2283 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

There were 2 plans for the extension. The longer of the two making it 7000 feet total I beleive, and eradicating Rt 291 in the process.

Chris, I was working the 104 bus one day a few weeks ago when the 9s/17 were in use. It was the day a large hole was found on 9L and it was closed for 4 hours. I saw at least 3 WN 737s, 1 or 2 US 737s and a US A320 all on final for 17. For the record, 17 arrivals actually pass about 1200 to 1500 feet or so above the 69th St Terminal Area. There are some pretty good views from there.

Joe



I think Big Foot is blurry, Its not the photographers fault. Theres a large out of focus monster roaming the countryside
User currently offlineTheiler From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 633 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 2223 times:

Lengthening 17/35 ought to be interesting - I'm thinking that it will actually be more valuable for non-commercial aircraft. Philly has a good amount of non-commercial traffic (Business jets,etc). But many probably can't accept a 5000' runway for takeoffs?

Atlantic is located very close to 17/35. As I recall, we had a rather annoying taxi (at Philly?! haha) when we were down there last year, as we had to hold short a cross at least one other active runway, prior to reaching the departure runway.


User currently offlineWagz From United States of America, joined Mar 2003, 516 posts, RR: 16
Reply 13, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 2200 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Yep. You have to cross 27R to get to 27L for departures. It's really not that bad though. The worst part is the huge bottleneck when 30 aircraft get to the runway simaltaneously.

Now, when the 9s are in use, arrivals on 9R must then cross the departures on 9L. For some reason that always takes much longer.

By the way, call me an idiot, but where does it actually say on the site linked in the original post that the plan is actually going through? In fact it says on the main page that "This site will provide you current information about the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the proposed Runway Extension Project (Runway 17-35 Project)".

Also, the residents of Southwest Philly are still in a shit storm about how the increased traffic will be ruining their lives.

Joe



I think Big Foot is blurry, Its not the photographers fault. Theres a large out of focus monster roaming the countryside
User currently offlineSwadispatcher From United States of America, joined May 2004, 427 posts, RR: 9
Reply 14, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2193 times:

I'm very glad to hear this.. I almost always plan departures off of 35 because it cuts down on taxi time.

I'm also glad to hear that US is making PHL a rolling hub. Maybe that will ease the holding experienced going into there. The weather was severe clear there today and we still had a stupid ground delay program.. absolutely amazing!



Maintain 2300 until Boiler, cleared for the VOR-A approach, report BATLE inbound..
User currently offlineConcord977 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 1261 posts, RR: 25
Reply 15, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2183 times:

" ... didn't see it state the length of the extension anywhere.. Anyone see it? ... "

It was buried in there somehwere:

Alternative 1 - Standard Runway Safety Areas

Alternative 1 would extend Runway 17-35 to the north by 640 feet and to the south by 400 feet from its existing length of 5,460 feet to a proposed total length of 6,500 feet. A new Runway Safety Area, a flat unpaved surface at the end of the runway that allows airplanes that overshoot or undershoot the runway to stop safely, would extend 1,000 feet beyond the new extensions on both ends. Alternative 1 would potentially require the relocation of a portion of State Route 291. Tall shipping vessel obstructions on the Delaware River would be avoided by discontinuing the use of Runway 35 (south end) for landings when ships are present. This would occur on average four times per day for 15 minutes.

Alternative 2 - Engineered Material Arresting System (EMAS) and Displaced Threshold

Alternative 2 would extend Runway 17-35 to the north by 1,140 feet and to the south by 400 feet from its existing length of 5,460 feet to a proposed total length of 7,000 feet. A new Runway Safety Area would extend 500 feet beyond the extension to the north. An Engineered Material Arresting System (EMAS), collapsible concrete blocks that stop an overrunning aircraft in a shorter distance than a standard unpaved safety area, would be placed in this Runway Safety Area. A new Runway Safety Area would extend 1,000 feet beyond the new extension to the south. Alternative 2 would accommodate tall shipping vessel obstructions on the Delaware River by displacing landings from the south by 1,444 feet to the north of the unpaved runway end and would accommodate I-95 by displacing landings from the north by 500 feet to the south of the unpaved runway end. The use of a displaced threshold means that planes land at a certain point, or threshold, on the runway that is different, or displaced, from the physical runway end.



No info
User currently offlineCrownvic From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 1898 posts, RR: 5
Reply 16, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2173 times:

It would be silly, not to extend Philly!
Go Eagles!


User currently offlineUSAir330 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 822 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 2143 times:

Thanx for responding guys!!!

"where does it actually say on the site linked in the original post that the plan is actually going through?"

I'm just assuming they are simply because it's on PHL's homepage. Obviously I was wrong for saying they are going ahead with the extension, sorry.  Nuts


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...
PHL Runway 17-35 Extension posted Tue May 9 2006 19:41:34 by Rolo987
PHL Runway 17-35 Extension posted Tue May 9 2006 19:33:10 by Rolo987
Article: FAA Approves Extension Of PHL R/W 17-35 posted Thu Mar 3 2005 14:39:09 by PHLBOS
Are They Going To Go Ahead With EOS Airlines? posted Fri Jul 22 2005 21:20:04 by Xtra1
What Is Going On With The Bos-phl Route? posted Wed Feb 6 2002 22:38:05 by Usairways85
What's Going On With F-WWBA? posted Mon Dec 11 2006 18:42:29 by AirbusA346
What Is Going On With Iberia’s Customer Service? posted Sat Dec 2 2006 05:37:15 by Cafa
What Is Going On With FLG5738? posted Sun Nov 26 2006 17:45:47 by Onetogo
Whats Going On With EL AL In LAX? posted Tue Nov 7 2006 05:38:42 by Access-Air
Whats Going On With This 777 posted Sun Oct 15 2006 19:29:33 by J41