Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
AMS Bigger Than FRA?  
User currently onlineA388 From Netherlands Antilles, joined May 2001, 9814 posts, RR: 11
Posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 5426 times:

I was looking at areal photos of both AMS Schiphol Airport and FRA Rhein Main Airport and was asking myself whether Schiphol is larger than FRA when looking at the total area these airports use and the size of the terminals. I know that FRA has more traffic than Schiphol but Schiphol does look larger in size than FRA. Is Schiphol really larger than FRA, if so how much larger is it? Schiphol also has more runways than FRA. Can Schiphol Airport in the future become a more attractive airport for airlines who are looking for expansion of their European flights? There are plans to build a few more terminals at Schiphol Airport, one being close to the Zwanenburg runway IIRC. Schiphol Rijk will also get a new cargo terminal, unfortunately the famous spotters location there will be no more because of this. Also a there may be build two new runways, one being on the other side of Schiphol Rijk close to the industrial park there and one in between the Zwanenburg runway and Polderbaan (18R & 18C?).

FRA:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © MUC-Pix



AMS:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Jacqueline Vollebregt



Regards,

A388

76 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineMauriceB From Netherlands, joined Aug 2004, 2490 posts, RR: 25
Reply 1, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 5326 times:

think AMS is quite bigger than FRA , but indeed not as much as traffic. However for the next couple of years they expect AMS to become much bigger......

User currently offlineHardiwv From Brazil, joined Oct 2004, 8780 posts, RR: 49
Reply 2, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 5321 times:

Quoting MauriceB (Reply 1):
However for the next couple of years they expect AMS to become much bigger......

Do you have more details? AMS is already Europe's 4th biggest hub, which for a city of less than 1 million inhabitants is a superb achievement.

Rgs,


User currently offlineFlyAUA From Austria, joined May 2005, 4604 posts, RR: 55
Reply 3, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 5307 times:

Quoting A388 (Thread starter):

EHAM is indeed larger than EDDF when seen from a surface area point of view. From an operational point of view, EDDF has more traffic. As you have mentioned, they are planning new terminals at Amsterdam and a new runway as well that will be situated between 36L/18R and 36R/18L named 36C/18C. Didn't know though that there would be 2 new runways. The terminals are supposed to be built somewhere north of the current location for the terminals (which RWY is the Zwanenburg runway?).

Regards,
Moe



Not drinking, also isn't a solution!
User currently offlineSquirrel83 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 5281 times:

Quoting FlyAUA (Reply 3):



Quoting FlyAUA (Reply 3):
Zwanenburg runway?).

18R-36L runway. it was operational Nov 1, 2003


User currently offlineFlyAUA From Austria, joined May 2005, 4604 posts, RR: 55
Reply 5, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 5240 times:

Quoting Squirrel83 (Reply 4):

Ahhh the new one  Smile

Cheers for clarifying!



Not drinking, also isn't a solution!
User currently offlineMauriceB From Netherlands, joined Aug 2004, 2490 posts, RR: 25
Reply 6, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 5218 times:

EHAM is indeed larger than EDDF when seen from a surface area point of view. From an operational point of view, EDDF has more traffic. As you have mentioned, they are planning new terminals at Amsterdam and a new runway as well that will be situated between 36L/18R and 36R/18L named 36C/18C. Didn't know though that there would be 2 new runways. The terminals are supposed to be built somewhere north of the current location for the terminals (which RWY is the Zwanenburg runway?).


true, wich will make it 1st or 2nd in europe... Amsterdam isn't one of the biggest city's, however 80% of the passengers at AMS are foreigners , about 80% of that is Transfer... Amsterdam is a fantastic transfer place...

18R-36L runway. it was operational Nov 1, 2003


nope thats the polder baan..... its on the left side

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © DutchAviation



polderbaan


zwanenburg baan is 18C-36C :


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Steven Filipowicz



its the one in the upper left corner, and its closer to the terminals... but between these 2 runways, the new terminal is planned, but the 2 new runways are planned further away...


User currently offlineFlyAUA From Austria, joined May 2005, 4604 posts, RR: 55
Reply 7, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 5191 times:

Quoting MauriceB (Reply 6):
18R-36L runway. it was operational Nov 1, 2003


nope thats the polder baan..... its on the left side

Yeah I was slightly puzzled... been googling ever since. I thought the new runway was called "polderbaan". So yes, if the new terminals are not built at the new runway, it would make sense that it's North of the current terminals as I was saying. The zwanenburg runway is (unlike what I stated in previous post already existing as 18C/36C - sorry for the mistake).

Thx for the nice pics by the way  Wink



Not drinking, also isn't a solution!
User currently offlineJCS From Netherlands, joined Jun 2004, 211 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 5104 times:

A nice view on the 6 runways of AMS / EHAM: http://www.xinu.nl/users/edwin/aviation/schiphol/EHAM_FL100-large.jpg

(I hope it remains online!)


User currently offlinePanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9375 posts, RR: 29
Reply 9, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 5102 times:

At the end of the day it will be subject to the success of the home carrier and that will be subject to the growth potential of their hub.

AMS has already what FRA is fighting to get, we need a new runway for landings here which will increase the average movement capacity per hour to 120, presently it is abut 80. A third terminal is planned as well which will bring the total capacity to approx.80/85 Million.

CDG/FRA/AMS play the top league and LHR needs a third runway as well to keep its top position, T5 won't be enough.

Clear advantage at the moment for AMS/CDG , meanwhile LH generates the bulk of its growth at MUC. .



E's passed on! That parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!
User currently offlineAndreas From Germany, joined Oct 2001, 6104 posts, RR: 31
Reply 10, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 5068 times:

Just visited Schiphol last weekend for the umpteenth time, I just love this airport (and that coming from a FRA guy). Considering how long it takes to drive your car around the whole area (not using the roads that go between the terminal and Polderbaan); I'd say AMS does definitely cover much more ground!

btw: FRA is also a city with much less than 1m. of people living there...sometimes size does NOT matter  Wink, in most other cases it does, though...  Wink Big grin



I know it's only VfB but I like it!
User currently offlineNumberTwelve From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 1431 posts, RR: 9
Reply 11, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 5062 times:

Quoting Andreas (Reply 10):
I'd say AMS does definitely cover much more ground!

btw: FRA is also a city with much less than 1m. of people living there...sometimes size does NOT matter , in most other cases it does, though...

A friend of mine from Fraport uses to say "air craft carrier" because of it's shape (ok, forget the 18west) and the very limited space used for this airport.

And because of this limited space we have few slots - so FRA is totally happy to see the 380 in the nearest future.

And, Andreas, what do you mean with the size matters and size doesn't matter?
 listen 



signature censored by admin - so check my profile
User currently offlineHardiwv From Brazil, joined Oct 2004, 8780 posts, RR: 49
Reply 12, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 5058 times:

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 9):
CDG/FRA/AMS play the top league and LHR needs a third runway as well to keep its top position

Indeed, although I'm based in AMS (I'm not Dutch) I must say that AMS is simply Europe's best airport, and certainly one of the best in the world. This also partly explains the sucess of KLM as a major world carrier.

AMS is an excellent airport. There is no discussion here; AMS is consistently ranked in the top 10 airports of the world in any survey (see recent SkyTrax survey, in which AMS and CPH were the only European airports included in the top 10 rank - bearing in mind that AMS has a much bigger traffic than CPH).

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 9):
Clear advantage at the moment for AMS/CDG , meanwhile LH generates the bulk of its growth at MUC

I also think that LH will grow with a dual-hub strategy: FRA and MUC (or very soon triply hub: FRA, MUC and ZRH). It makes sense in a country the size of Germany.

Quoting Andreas (Reply 10):
FRA is also a city with much less than 1m. of people living there...sometimes size does NOT matter

Correct. Other examples: SIN and DXB.

What could be Europe no. 5 or next emerging airport hub? MAD? MUC?

Rgs,


User currently offlineThestooges From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 5041 times:

Amsterdam may be the 4th biggest hub with a population of 1 million but Frankfurt is Europes 2nd biggest hub with a population of only 500,000, which is even more of an achievement.

However the total population of the Randstad which is comprised of Amsterdam, Haarlem, Utrecht, Den Hague and Rotterdam is about 10 million. To get from Amsterdam to Rotterdam takes only an hour by train. In many cities you can travel for an hour by train and easily still be in the same city.

Schipol is the only major international airport in all of the Netherlnads so in fact it serves a population of 17 million and you can easily add an extra few million on top of that as people come from Belgium and Germany to use the airport as well. It shouldnt take more than three or four hours by train or car to get from any point in the Netherlands to Schipol.

Frankfurt is also very similar. Even though the actual city is quite small the surrounding areas are heavily populated with maybe 10 million or more people living within 2 hours driving time of the airport.

The pattern of ubanisation that has occured in Holland and the Rhine valley of Germany has led to the development of many small cities the size of Amsterdam and Frankfurt that are within close proximity to each other. These cities then make up much larger urban conglomerations. This is different to Paris and London where one city enlarged to incorporate the surrounding towns creating mega-cities of 10 million plus people.

So in short its no surprise that Schipol and Frankfurt are as big as they are, even though the cities that they are named after are quite small the immediate areas they serve are just as populous as London and Paris.


User currently offlineIntothinair From Germany, joined Mar 2005, 392 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 5030 times:

In 2004:
FRA: 50,098,271PAX
AMS: 42,541,180PAX

In 2004, aircraft movements:
FRA: 477,475
AMS: 418,611

What wonders me is:
Why does AMS need 6 runways, with less aircraft movements than FRA, who only has 2 takeoff/landing+1 takeoff runway?
I think we all know that FRA needs a 4th runway AS FAST AS POSSIBLE to keep up with CDG and AMS, but aren't 6 runways ENOUGH for now, for AMS?

Quoting MauriceB (Reply 1):
However for the next couple of years they expect AMS to become much bigger......

Any source?
Once FRA gets a 4th runway(hopefully by 2009), traffic should increase quite rapidly, and looking over how much AMS has grown over the last few years, I doubt that AMS will catch FRA interms of Passenger numbers.
However, maybe in 10years+ once FRA gets a problem with slots again, as their reaching maximum capacity again, unless they can quickly build a 5th runway, AMS might just catch them.
We'll have to see!

Cheers, Konstantin G.


User currently offlineHardiwv From Brazil, joined Oct 2004, 8780 posts, RR: 49
Reply 15, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 5040 times:

Quoting Thestooges (Reply 13):
However the total population of the Randstad which is comprised of Amsterdam, Haarlem, Utrecht, Den Hague and Rotterdam is about 10 million. To get from Amsterdam to Rotterdam takes only an hour by train. In many cities you can travel for an hour by train and easily still be in the same city.

Schipol is the only major international airport in all of the Netherlnads so in fact it serves a population of 17 million and you can easily add an extra few million on top of that as people come from Belgium and Germany to use the airport as well. It shouldnt take more than three or four hours by train or car to get from any point in the Netherlands to Schipol.



Quoting Thestooges (Reply 13):
So in short its no surprise that Schipol and Frankfurt are as big as they are, even though the cities that they are named after are quite small the immediate areas they serve are just as populous as London and Paris.

Very good point, which I completely agree. AMS and FRA catching area, in terms of total population, is similar to London and Paris, as you rightly pointed out. And AMS still has the advantage that BRU is and under-developed hub, and many Beligum-based pax use AMS as their hub.

Rgs,


User currently offlineAndreas From Germany, joined Oct 2001, 6104 posts, RR: 31
Reply 16, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 5028 times:

Quoting NumberTwelve (Reply 11):
And, Andreas, what do you mean with the size matters and size doesn't matter?

Funny, I've known the answer all my adult life, but just now, it slipped me  Wink Big grin

Quoting Thestooges (Reply 13):
people come from Belgium and Germany to use the airport as well.

Yes actually that goes both ways, those times when people flew from their "home" airport are over...nowadays ti is easy to get to most airports by highspeed trains, even AMS and FRA are well-connected, 4 hours by ICE international, including Sneltrain from Centraal to AMS (13 minutes ride!)



I know it's only VfB but I like it!
User currently offlinePanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9375 posts, RR: 29
Reply 17, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 5000 times:

Quoting Intothinair (Reply 14):
In 2004:
FRA: 50,098,271PAX
AMS: 42,541,180PAX

In 2004, aircraft movements:
FRA: 477,475
AMS: 418,611

What wonders me is:
Why does AMS need 6 runways, with less aircraft movements than FRA, who only has 2 takeoff/landing+1 takeoff runway?
I think we all know that FRA needs a 4th runway AS FAST AS POSSIBLE to keep up with CDG and AMS, but aren't 6 runways ENOUGH for now, for AMS?

In fact there are 5 only, forget about the Fokkerbaan., The three parallel runways can easily handle at least 650K movements p.a.,because of their spacing, leaving AMS the luxury to "spread" the noise and never use the full daily capacity of any single runway.

With the 4 runways in FRA the capacity will come to about 650K as well and from there it's a simple calculation with average pax per plane to see that there is some room to achieve the 80 Mio (and more) pax p.a. goal

With the "Nordwestbahn" here in FRA we should not worry about growth potential over the next 10-15 years.



E's passed on! That parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!
User currently offlineHT From Germany, joined May 2005, 6525 posts, RR: 23
Reply 18, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 4988 times:

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 9):
LHR needs a third runway as well to keep its top position

... but it will not get one in the foreseeable future (just my opinion), though I´d love one to see at LHR.

Quoting Hardiwv (Reply 12):
I also think that LH will grow with a dual-hub strategy: FRA and MUC (or very soon triply hub: FRA, MUC and ZRH). It makes sense in a country the size of Germany.

... anybody out there thinking that in 10 years the new SXF "Berlin Brandenburg Int´l" will become a hub for LH ? I doubt that it will.

Quoting Hardiwv (Reply 12):
What could be Europe no. 5 or next emerging airport hub? MAD? MUC?

Both MAD and MUC are already hubs IMO; with the new terminal & rwys at MAD it will become a much bigger player for traffic to South America as it is already today.

Quoting Intothinair (Reply 14):
FRA gets a problem with slots again, as their reaching maximum capacity again, unless they can quickly build a 5th runway

Where would they try to put a 5th rwy?



Carpe diem ! Life is too short to waste your time ! Keep in mind, that today is the first day of the rest of your life !
User currently offlineMauriceB From Netherlands, joined Aug 2004, 2490 posts, RR: 25
Reply 19, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 4928 times:

However the total population of the Randstad which is comprised of Amsterdam, Haarlem, Utrecht, Den Hague and Rotterdam is about 10 million.

not 10 million people near Amsterdam... In fact, almost half of North, East , and south Netherlands use FRA as theire airport... also know some photographers wich life in Holland but are spotting mostly at FRA since its closer to theire house...


User currently offlineJCS From Netherlands, joined Jun 2004, 211 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 4915 times:

Hello,

Quoting Intothinair (Reply 14):
Why does AMS need 6 runways

Perhaps another point is that at AMS is more (strong)wind from different directions. AMS is near the Northsea. When you take a look at the shape of the airport you see the runways are spread around it. And indeed, the 6th runway is only used by small trafic.

Johannes


User currently offlineNumberTwelve From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 1431 posts, RR: 9
Reply 21, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 4905 times:

Quoting Andreas (Reply 16):
, it slipped me

It slipped you? Maybe its because of the size?

Quoting Thestooges (Reply 13):
can easily add an extra few million on top of that as people come from Belgium and Germany to use the airport as well

Same with Frankfurt, people from Belgium and rest of Germany use FRA as a hub.

I don't know AMS (never been to the airport there) but FRA is totally shortened and every squaremeter has to be used.



signature censored by admin - so check my profile
User currently offlineFlyAUA From Austria, joined May 2005, 4604 posts, RR: 55
Reply 22, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 4907 times:

Quoting Intothinair (Reply 14):
What wonders me is:
Why does AMS need 6 runways, with less aircraft movements than FRA, who only has 2 takeoff/landing+1 takeoff runway?
I think we all know that FRA needs a 4th runway AS FAST AS POSSIBLE to keep up with CDG and AMS, but aren't 6 runways ENOUGH for now, for AMS?

It's more about being pro-active rather than reacting once the problem already exists. I can't recall ever hearing that AMS was restricted due to terminal space, RWY limitations, etc... It is one of the airports that has always planned way ahead. So just because there is talk of it, doesn't mean it will happen tomorrow. Also, note that they have purchased a LOT of land within the airport permimeter to make life easier for themselves when they need to expand in the future. The additional runway capacity that is being discussed also has to do with accommodating the 85 million pax capacity figure which they foresee in the near future. I agree however that it may seem unecessary at the moment.

AMS is definately my favourite airport. It is a pleasure to travel from/to/via Schiphol. Good job, and I hope they keep up the good work  Smile

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 9):
LHR needs a third runway as well to keep its top position

It most certainly does. If I remember correctly, it is considered the airport (or at least one of them) with the highest denisty... i.e. highest number of movements/pax/whatever per square kilometre.

What puzzles me though is why they talk of a RWY that is almost half the length of the existing ones. The plan is to build one parallel and north of 27R/09L. Is this just lip-service to not piss off the public that were promised (1) T5 would not be built (2) There would be no 3rd RWY if T5 was built? And if so, isn't it better to get it right in the first place since you are going through all the trouble anyways, than to build a RWY that would restrict movements to an extent and was not long enough for certain aircraft types?

Regards,
Moe  Smile



Not drinking, also isn't a solution!
User currently offlineJCS From Netherlands, joined Jun 2004, 211 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 4911 times:

Beste MauriceB,

Quoting MauriceB (Reply 19):
since its closer to theire house...

This is big BS. No way that FRA is closer to any peace of Netherlands. And all people in Netherlands use FRA when they may travel cheaper. But it is not closer. But there are other airports: Dusseldorf, NRN, Brussels, CDG and Rotterdam which have big deals with Dutch. And we have the airports at Eindhoven/Maastricht/Groningen/Twente.
BTW Did you ever drive to FRA? In that case you know how SMALL Netherlands is...

Johannes

[Edited 2005-05-31 14:35:12]

User currently offlineMauriceB From Netherlands, joined Aug 2004, 2490 posts, RR: 25
Reply 24, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 4889 times:

BTW Did you ever drove to FRA? In that case you know how SMALL Netherlands is...

Johannes


2 weeks ago for the last time.... but thrust me i know a lot of people who use FRA, since a lot of flights are cheaper with LH... Didn't u noticed the hugh LH campagnes in holland?


25 Hardiwv : Indeed, a lot of Germans use AMS because KLM is in general cheaper than LH...Germany's population is much bigger than the Netherlands and you have a
26 HT : Isn´t it the usual scheme ? Always the "Homecarrier" is more expensive than carriers from another country ... That´s how KL and AF try to siphon-off
27 Post contains links JCS : Ha, okee MauriceB. It is really funny that KLM tickets are cheaper on www.klm.de, for example with a tranfer Dusseldorf-AMS then when you buy the KLM
28 Hardiwv : You are correct. I have friends that do the same: flying KLM from BRU is cheaper than AMS! Rgs,
29 Morvious : Well, from my house (living 30 minutes from germany) it is: 110 Km to Schiphol, 1 hour and 10 minutes driving. 360 Km to Frankfurt, 3 hours and 45 mi
30 A388 : That's true. I remember the time when a lot of people booked and went to Germany to fly to Curacao with KLM as this was cheaper compared to a ticket f
31 Post contains images Tripple7 : This is what I do all the time. I live right between AMS and DUS, so it doesn´t matter to which airport I drive. Both are about a 1 hour and 15 minu
32 Post contains images FlyAUA : LOL No it doesn't but it's cheaper
33 MauriceB : to clear things up first, Sorry i confused with DUS!!!!! Question though.. For airliners, what airport is more expensive? AMS seems to be a nice place
34 Post contains images Morvious : Apaches would be a nice extra for spotters
35 Stirling : I am wondering....last year this time, I took the train from Amsterdam to Antwerp, around the airport, it goes underground, or at least sub-terrean, b
36 AMSSFO : At the large photo from JCS reply 8 you look north. The three parallel runways on that picture are all 36/18. You can't see the station because it is
37 Stirling : AMSSFO- Thanks! Excellent info. One more question. Then that means the view in the first post, is looking north? (or south?) I will assume the rail li
38 N1120A : Better yet, perhaps they should think about building a 4th runway first 10 years from now it seems likely that SXF will still be how it is and TXL wi
39 AMSSFO : picture is taken from the south looking to the north. The city in the right upper corner is Amsterdam. And yes you can actually see the railway. At t
40 Stirling : You've been more than helpful, thanks. Maybe someone else knows?
41 Thestooges : Almost every point in the Netherlands with maybe the exception of the Maastricht area is definitely closer to AMS than FRA. In additon to this, most o
42 Post contains images Joost : The Schiphollijn is built in 3 phases. Next to that, there are 3 additional projects (Zuidtak 1993, Hemboog 2003, Utrechtboog october 2005) that can
43 Iberiadc852 : By the way of talking about the seventies, I am very interested in airports' evolution but in the retrospective way, and especially all about Schipho
44 Intothinair : This is a hard one, at the moment, looking at an overview, the only place for a 5th one is behind the future T3, however this runway would cross over
45 Joost : As I am working 6 meters from the Dutch Aviation Archive, I left my desk for a while to check out the old photo books. The 'new' (current) Schiphol o
46 HT : This place would have several disadvantages: Next to the proposed T3 is already Cargo-City Sued (South) Building a rwy south of this combined complex
47 Post contains images BuyantUkhaa : To add to this, the first railway tunnel was built in stages. The first stretch (about 500m) had in fact already been built in the 1960s. This is the
48 Post contains images JCS : Some more facts about AMS: - In 1573 there was a seebattle between ships of Spain and Holland - In 1852 the land of AMS was gained from the see - Firs
49 Intothinair : Thanks for that additional information HT. The question is though, if they build a runway 18R for landings, where would the next one for landing be bu
50 FraT : FRA won't get a 5th runway in the next 15 years. The current discussion about the 4th runway shows that it is extremely difficult to get an approval b
51 Iberiadc852 : Thank you very much for your offering. As I suppose it's not easy to post any old photo to this forum, one of the things I'd like to know is which on
52 Joost : Iberiadc852: contact me by the mail-form and I'll see what I can do for you
53 Vunz : Prior to the opening of the new Schiphol in 1967, the airport had only two runways. The current Oostbaan, 04-22, which is still in use for small traff
54 Vunz : I have a book on the history of Schiphol, I'll will look it up tonight.
55 Post contains links and images BuyantUkhaa : As far as I know, 04-22 is the only runway left of the old (i.e. pre-1967) layout. Another remainder is (closed) 14-32 (starting from the intersection
56 MauriceB : the polderbaan isn't on this map..... don't you have newer map?
57 Post contains links BuyantUkhaa : Well this is essentially the layout between 1967 and 2003. Some taxiways were added (most notably those at the northern half of the Zwanenburgbaan. I'
58 N774UA : Just a little update. The old 14-32 (G3) is no longer being used as a taxiway, except for the crossing with 18L-36R. They stored the European 742 at t
59 BHMNONREV : Is this proposed T3 to be built at what is now Rhein-Main Air Base?? Are there any plans/drawings available for viewing, and who are the planned occu
60 AMSSFO : This would mean that at some point in time (when?), when pier D (now F) was constructed, they switched A and C. Before the construction of the fifth
61 HT : Yes, at FRA T3 is supposed to be built at the site of the current USAF Rhein-Main Airbase. While the space currently is extraterritorial (just like t
62 BHMNONREV : I believe the American government will turn over the base on Dec 31 of this year. Not sure if any American military presence will remain or not. But
63 HT : You´re very welcomed ! -HT
64 Post contains links HT : There have been questions about AMS´s rwy names and maps of it. The link in reply #3 to thread Spotting At AMS (by Ncfc99 Jun 3 2005 in Civil Aviatio
65 AMSSFO : Vunz, does your book tell when they constructed pier D (now F) at AMS?
66 A388 : When looking at the areal photo of FRA I showed in this post, you can see a very large wood/a lot of trees (it borders at the US AMC). Can't FRA use t
67 HT : Cutting a lot of tree around FRA has some negative history. Maybe you can recall, there were quite some battles (litterarily !) fought when rwy 18 wa
68 Post contains links and images HT : In reference to my own reply #46: Recently Mario Nonaka posted a superb aerial view of FRA taken from the North: View Large View MediumPhoto © Ma
69 BHMNONREV : Good overhead photo of the FRA/FRF complex.. Looking at this shot, it appears to me that there would be an ample amount of room to build another set o
70 HT : Apart from that I´m not sure what the other buildings on the far side of the Rhein-Main AB are (some of them should be civil cargo; at least one hote
71 Vunz : I'll check. Am I correct that C was renamed E and B was rename D?
72 FraT : On the south side of FRA airport are Cargo City Sued as well as the InterCity Hotel. In the discussion phase for the 4th runway there was also an ide
73 BuyantUkhaa : Yes, the original sequence was ABC (with D added in the 70s). Then, a new councourse was to be added before A; as this created some alfabetic problem
74 Vunz : Alright, that was my impression too, so it is not like Joost mentioned in reply 45.
75 A388 : The second areal photo looks great. It looks as if FRA is situated 'in the middle of the woods'. If FRA could use the areas in the woods they could ev
76 AMSSFO : Thanks this makes more sense, although I think they renamed it when adding G and planning the addition of B. Or did they add the first part of B at t
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...
Is The Paris Airshow Bigger Than Farnborough? posted Mon Jul 17 2006 02:14:18 by BOE773
CAL Now Bigger Than NW posted Sun May 28 2006 02:59:13 by CLE757
Widget Power ATL Bigger Than ORD...! posted Wed Jan 4 2006 00:19:59 by Lono
Is The 772 Really Bigger Than The 789? posted Mon Jun 13 2005 20:23:43 by Iberiadc852
Is The Airplane Bigger Than The Pilot? posted Thu Jun 2 2005 18:08:37 by Gopal
Why Nothing Bigger Than MD90 To ORD From ATL posted Thu Apr 14 2005 21:08:35 by Zone1
DCA....bigger Than A 757 Ever? posted Wed Jan 5 2005 01:49:16 by Erj145lr
To AMS Spotters, And FRA Too posted Fri Apr 18 2003 20:22:11 by OD720
AUS Is Bigger Than Sat? posted Wed Jul 31 2002 02:31:08 by KAUSpilot
Will Ryanair Be Bigger Than British Airways? posted Fri Jan 25 2002 07:18:21 by United Airline