Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
CNN - LAX Ranks At Top For Dangerous Runways  
User currently offlineLitz From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1755 posts, RR: 0
Posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 3415 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

On CNN.com,

http://www.cnn.com/2005/TRAVEL/11/25/runway.safety.ap/index.html

Interesting quote in there, where they describe the problem as being parallel runways, where landing aircraft are on the outboard runway, and have to cross the inner, where planes are taking off, to taxi to gates.

ATL has exactly the same setup, and therefore should have the same hazards described in the article. So why isn't it a problem there?

I fly out of ATL weekly (based in Atlanta, I'm a heavy DL flyer) and have often landed there and sat, waiting, along with 8-10 other planes, at the crossovers waiting for the line of departing airliners to clear before all of us are cleared across the inboard runway. System seems to work pretty well.

Obviously it relies on all the pilots actually STOPPING when/where they are supposed to, as mentioned in the article ... but considering ATL's so busy, why didn't it rate a mention in the article, and if not, what is different about its operations compared to LAX or the other california airports mentioned?

- litz

[Edited 2005-11-25 20:21:25]

[Edited 2005-11-25 20:21:54]

[Edited 2005-11-25 20:22:36]

[Edited 2005-11-25 20:23:45]

8 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineLaxintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 24871 posts, RR: 46
Reply 1, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 3338 times:

Someone has a thread going on the technical forum.

LAX Voted Worst Airport For Runway Incursions. (by Julesmusician Nov 25 2005 in Tech Ops)



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineAS739X From United States of America, joined Apr 2003, 6098 posts, RR: 23
Reply 2, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 3284 times:

Litz: to answer your question between LAX and ATL. ATL has taxiways in between the runways. LAX is very close to the FAA min's of seperation between runways. LAX 25R/L and 24R/L are around 750-800ft. apart from and obviously no room for a taxiway in between. Another reason may be the huge amount of foriegn carriers at LAX vs. ATL which or mostly domestic.

ASLAX



"Some pilots avoid storm cells and some play connect the dots!"
User currently offlineLitz From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1755 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 8 hours ago) and read 2967 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting AS739X (Reply 2):
Litz: to answer your question between LAX and ATL. ATL has taxiways in between the runways. LAX is very close to the FAA min's of seperation between runways. LAX 25R/L and 24R/L are around 750-800ft. apart from and obviously no room for a taxiway in between. Another reason may be the huge amount of foriegn carriers at LAX vs. ATL which or mostly domestic.

Where do the planes hold at LAX, then, if there's no taxiway?

As you noted, at ATL there's ample taxi-space between the runways; ATL can store 8-9 planes easily, sometimes 2 deep if they're smaller planes.

Is the problem described one where a plane has to land, then cross the departure runway (obviously in between departures), prior to the next plane landing?

(resulting in VERY careful choreography, I imagine!)

I guess I'd have to see LAX to understand ... that's one airport I haven't yet been to. Been to ONT and BUR, though ...

- litz


User currently offlineTimz From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 6796 posts, RR: 7
Reply 4, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 6 hours ago) and read 2900 times:

He meant there are no parallel taxiways between the LAX runways-- but there are taxiways between them, of course, and planes that have landed can wait on them to cross the parallel.

User currently offlineCkfred From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 5181 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 2 hours ago) and read 2740 times:

ORD is supposed to have 6 east-west runways, when the reconfiguration is completed years from now. One of the complaints from the controllers union is that the number of aircraft having to cross an active runway goes up a lot over the current configuration.

On the other hand, 5 of the 6 runways at ORD intersect with another runway. 22L-4R doesn't, but an aircraft departing 22L often has to hold short by a couple of hundred feet, because aircraft arriving on 27L fly over the taxiway to 22L. To me, this is a far more dangerous configuration that what is at ATL or LAX.


User currently offlineGo3Team From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3267 posts, RR: 16
Reply 6, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 1 hour ago) and read 2717 times:

Wouldn't DFW rate up there with the way their runways are setup? Theres are pretty close together as well.


Yay Pudding!
User currently offlineTokyoNarita From Palau, joined Aug 2003, 570 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (8 years 8 months 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 2554 times:

While not all of the incidents and accidents involved foreign carriers, I think that the language barrier between foreign pilots and the controller is sometimes very challenging especially when non-routine instruction is given. Consider the number of foreign carriers flying in and out of LAX. It is not quite the same scenario with DFW and ATL. The number of non-English speaking (not even as a second language) is probably safe to say one of the highest in the United States in LAX (maybe JFK too) The article does not mention anything of it but I think it may be a small contributing factor that someone can look into.

TokyoNarita.


User currently offlineThegooddoctor From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 523 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (8 years 8 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 2472 times:

Quoting Go3Team (Reply 6):
Wouldn't DFW rate up there with the way their runways are setup? Theres are pretty close together as well.

Uh, no. DFW has very large spaces between their runways when compared to LAX.

Quoting Litz (Thread starter):
I fly out of ATL weekly (based in Atlanta, I'm a heavy DL flyer) and have often landed there and sat, waiting, along with 8-10 other planes, at the crossovers waiting for the line of departing airliners to clear before all of us are cleared across the inboard runway. System seems to work pretty well.

PHX has the same setup for the south runways (land outboard, take off inboard), with aircraft waiting to cross all at once. It works well there, and usually there are aircraft at crossing points up and down the runway, so it happens pretty quicklyy. PHX also has a high frequency of runway incursions (or did) But, IIRC, it had mostly to do with the north runway?



The GoodDoctor
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...
Reasons For Needing To Be At Top Of Standby List.. posted Wed Oct 15 2003 06:44:06 by Zrs70
65000 Ft At 400kts For 8 Hours? posted Tue Oct 10 2006 19:07:52 by Jayspilot
Who Runs Term A At IAD For UA? posted Thu Aug 17 2006 19:32:42 by BDL2DCA
Malev Has Swapped Slots At LHR For LGW With BA posted Tue Jun 6 2006 16:24:38 by Richardw
A318 Landing At LCY For Test On 13/5/06? posted Fri May 12 2006 20:09:52 by Frankdjs
UAE 747 At LEX For KY Derby (Pic) posted Thu May 11 2006 14:43:16 by DeltaDC9
What New At CDG For This Summer? posted Sat Apr 22 2006 23:02:15 by Uralflyer
FAA Forcast LAX Demand At 112mil By 2025 posted Fri Mar 3 2006 07:34:00 by Laxintl
BA LAX Flights At LHR T1? posted Thu Feb 23 2006 17:47:44 by IFEMaster
AA Pilot Arrested At EGCC For Being Drunk posted Sat Feb 11 2006 16:42:24 by Chrisjake