Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Runway Extension At Tokyo Haneda  
User currently offlineCarpethead From Japan, joined Aug 2004, 2971 posts, RR: 3
Posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 4121 times:

Apparently, in the latest round of government action to boost the ailing economy, a plan has been put forth to extend one of the runways at Tokyo Haneda.
Probably one of the current 3,000m runway (Runway 34/16s) will be extended.
While 3,000m is good for most long-haul flights, the extra 500 or so meters will allow extra margin for those low flying A340s.
Let the competition begin on HND vs NRT in 2010.

6 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineKaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12523 posts, RR: 35
Reply 1, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 4078 times:

Good idea, but what would help even more is an extension of the opening hours for international flights, which (if I'm not mistaken) are still limited to between 2300 and 0600.

I recall, a few years ago, there was a disagreement over this, as a result of which the Yokohama prefecture refused to fund any improvements to HND until/unless the opening hours were extended. Has this been resolved?


User currently offlineCarpethead From Japan, joined Aug 2004, 2971 posts, RR: 3
Reply 2, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 3965 times:

The operating hours for routes longer than the longest domestic run is 2200 to 0700.
Other int'l routes of shorter duration will not have any restrictions on operating hours.

Once int'l operations start and HND gets more comfortable with the increased number of operations, there will surely be a big debate on how far to extend the range limitations and operating hours for long-haul int'l flights.


User currently offlineKtachiya From Japan, joined Sep 2004, 1794 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 3838 times:



Quoting Kaitak (Reply 1):
Yokohama prefecture

Just a minor correction. Yokohama is in Kanagawa prefecture but yes, its very true that Kanagawa threatened the ministry that they will not pay for the rwy if it weren't used partially for major frequencies.

But just same to be on the safe side, wouldn't extending on of the 34/16 and the 04/22 to be better? It rarely happens but I see 04 being used for takeoff. If this were the case, having some longhaul AC take-off from 34/16 and then having other domestic flights using 04/22 would cause headaches for ATC.

Interesting development though and of course my company is monitoring this closely.



Flown on: DC-10-30, B747-200B, B747-300, B747-300SR, B747-400, B747-400D, B767-300, B777-200, B777-200ER, B777-300
User currently offlineBlueShamu330s From UK - England, joined Sep 2001, 2988 posts, RR: 23
Reply 4, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 3800 times:



Quoting Carpethead (Thread starter):
While 3,000m is good for most long-haul flights, the extra 500 or so meters will allow extra margin for those low flying A340s.

 Yeah sure Another baseless swipe at the A340 on a.net.  no 



So I drive a 4x4. So what?! Tax the a$$ off me for it...oh, you already have... :-(
User currently offlineRFields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 7607 posts, RR: 32
Reply 5, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 3784 times:



Quoting Ktachiya (Reply 3):
It rarely happens but I see 04 being used for takeoff. If this were the case, having some longhaul AC take-off from 34/16 and then having other domestic flights using 04/22 would cause headaches for ATC.

This might work well. Yes there would be some issues for the use of Rwy 04 for takeoffs, but they are really pretty minor. A great many airports around the world use such a configuration with great success.

A longer runway on the 16/34 pair can add capability, but unless the traffic has diminished significantly since the last time I lived in Japan, which I doubt, the only way to add much capacity is to open another runway.


User currently offlineWarren747sp From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 1167 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 3100 times:

re-reply 4
No, it buys a peace of mind!



747SP
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...
Airport Runway Extension At Klan Almost Done posted Thu Sep 29 2005 01:34:07 by KarlB737
Runway Extension At EWR? posted Wed May 19 2004 04:39:06 by Cory6188
Spotting At Tokyo/haneda posted Thu Feb 26 2004 13:58:14 by Flying-b773
No Runway Extension At Guernsey. posted Mon Jan 26 2004 13:48:47 by Applepie81
Taxiway Extension At Luton Airport Runway? posted Wed Nov 22 2006 19:14:29 by 8herveg
Are They Talking Runway Extension Again At PVD? posted Mon Jun 16 2003 04:32:09 by John
CLE Runway Extension Complete posted Fri Feb 13 2009 00:07:33 by Greenair727
Runway Closed At DAY? posted Sun Jan 4 2009 19:33:18 by Gregarious119
AA Aircraft Off Runway 22L At ORD posted Wed Dec 24 2008 17:25:57 by AA777-200
International Flights From Tokyo Haneda posted Sun Dec 14 2008 06:09:15 by Mozart