Boeing Nut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (9 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 2078 times:
I hope I am not out of bounds asking this, but it seems ridiculous to me. So there must be a reason why this occurs. I work at STL for the airport authority. We have three runways.
1 - 12R/30L, an 11,019 ft runway.
2 - 12L/30R, a 9,003 ft. runway.
3 - 6/24 a 7,602 ft runway.
I hear requests for jetstream 41's and several RJ's that they want runway 12R/30L for takeoff performance reasons stating that 12L/30R is too short. (heavy) The aggravating thing is that 99% of the time, these aircraft rotate near the halfway point of 12R/30L which leaves nearly 5,000 ft of runway. If 12L/30R was used they still would have 2,000-3,000 feet of runway left.
Is this for rejected takeoff reasons? I was under the impression that once you rotate, you're airborne no matter what happens.
Someone please make some sense of this for me because I think it's stupid why a regional aircraft needs an 11,000 foot runway when a 9,000 footer is more than enough.
Pilotpip From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 3151 posts, RR: 11
Reply 1, posted (9 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 2033 times:
TSA won't do intersecton departures. It's against their ops specs from what I have heard. Maybe those things require a large balanced field length or because of the intersection of the south runway with 6/24. All just speculation. Then again, they might just be looking for a shorter taxi route.
You guys having fun carting Signature around to pick up their planes littered all over the field?
KcrwFlyer From United States of America, joined May 2004, 3845 posts, RR: 7
Reply 2, posted (9 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 2024 times:
well, for thrust settings on takeoffs, we all know they could get up in less than 6,000. But rules require that there has to be a certaim amount of runway to use a certain amount of thrust.also airline policies. And if your talking about CRJ's.... if theyre full pax and fuel it does take them a good bit to get up.
I think thats the right answer.. somone correct me please.
Flightopsguy From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 348 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (9 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 2001 times:
It could be a performance limit (second stage of climb), but my narowbodies show a lower allowable gross weight on 30R as a runway limit, so maybe there is a close-in obstacle. I would assume they use balanced field length weights, where accelerate stop and accelerate go are the same number and V1 is right next to Vr. Interestingly, even 30L does not show full structural limit as the allowable.