Iowaman From United States of America, joined May 2004, 4403 posts, RR: 6
Reply 1, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 2801 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW FORUM MODERATOR
Why they are basing this around the 763 I have no idea. I don't know of any airline that would even consider running a 763 PVD-West Coast. 763's are becoming less and less frequent domestically anyways. At 8,100ft a WN 73G could easily make it cross-country, they already do to LAS and PHX.
Next flights: WN DSM-LAS-PHX, US PHX-SJD. Return: US SJD-PHX, WN PHX-MDW-DSM
RL757PVD From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 4674 posts, RR: 11
Reply 2, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 2753 times:
Quoting Iowaman (Reply 1): Why they are basing this around the 763 I have no idea. I don't know of any airline that would even consider running a 763 PVD-West Coast.
Well by the time the runway is built it is a possibility. Also, nothing says the 763 will be a PASSENGER plane! In addition, these studies are based off of the year 2020 forecast.
All airport plans/projects are based off an FAA approved forecast. The FAA approved the forecast/ masterplan stating that there would be over 500 763 transcons from PVD on an annual basis (little more than 1 daily), therefore it is a legitimate analysis. The FAA uses the most demanding operation conducting 500 annual itinerant operations as their "design aircraft", and a transocn 763 from PVD is a realistic design aircraft, whether its a UA 763 or a UPS 763, it still counts!
Now granted it could be different that a 763, long range planning is a difficult task, but a 763 is a good average airplane to use.
Experience is what you get when what you thought would work out didn't!
PVD757 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3413 posts, RR: 16
Reply 3, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 2713 times:
RL sums it up pretty well - the FAA master planning process doesn't discount the liklihood of what makes sense to us today - but rather they are planning for the 'worst case' scenario. If they undercut the length and economics change in 10 years, then they'll have to start all over again - that would cost millions compared to adding 500-1000 feet to an already 'planned' runway project.
When you build a bridge - you design it for the largest loads that will carry - the runway planning is similar...