Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
STN Renames Runways, Polar Shift To Blame.  
User currently offlineReadytotaxi From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2006, 3052 posts, RR: 3
Posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 9617 times:

They did this over Saturday night.
From the BBC news site.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/essex/8136307.stm

Now, how did I edit my FSim? Big grin


you don't get a second chance to make a first impression!
37 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineMk777 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 1193 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 9580 times:

Weren't the rwys at MAN changed from 24/6 to 23/5 for the same reason???


come fly with me
User currently offlineRFields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 7345 posts, RR: 32
Reply 2, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 9487 times:

Every airport in the world has changed or will change runways numbers at some time.

AMS had 1/19 runways, now it has 18/36 runways, etc...

This is a completely normal part of the world, has been for hundreds of years since man invented the compass.

The only thing the story shows is that a BBC reporter and editor failed 7th grade science. The story also missed the really big important work of changing runway designators - the new approach charts, departure charts, instrument certifications and such. Repainting the runways is the easy part.

As far as your FSim - it is either a 2003 or 2005 world. Live with it.  

[Edited 2009-07-07 06:33:13]

User currently offlineMandala499 From Indonesia, joined Aug 2001, 6590 posts, RR: 75
Reply 3, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 9270 times:

C'est la vie!

If you really want to change the runway numbers in FS, use an AFCAD tool and just change the runway number...

For the real life, the next Nav Database cycle issue will have it in place... if not already  Smile



When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
User currently offlineTharanga From United States of America, joined Apr 2009, 1848 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 9217 times:



Quoting RFields5421 (Reply 2):
The only thing the story shows is that a BBC reporter and editor failed 7th grade science.

What did they get so badly wrong? The wording is not great, but the article does quite clearly states that with magnetic pole drift, this sort of adjustment is made every so often. I don't think the article presents itself as anything more than a curiosity.

Maybe their description of pole reversal is not so good.


User currently offlineOlympus69 From Canada, joined Jun 2002, 1737 posts, RR: 7
Reply 5, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 8783 times:

As a matter of interest, where exactly is the North Magnetic Pole? My 1981 world atlas places it on Bathurst Island in the Canadian Arctic, at 76 degrees North, 102 degrees West. I don't suppose it has moved very far since then.

User currently offlineBoeing747_600 From United States of America, joined Oct 1999, 1290 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 8662 times:



Quoting Olympus69 (Reply 6):
As a matter of interest, where exactly is the North Magnetic Pole? My 1981 world atlas places it on Bathurst Island in the Canadian Arctic, at 76 degrees North, 102 degrees West. I don't suppose it has moved very far since then.

Its moved significantly away from the 1981 estimate. According to the wiki page on Magnetic North Pole:


In 2001, the North Magnetic Pole was determined by the Geological Survey of Canada to lie near Ellesmere Island in northern Canada at 81.3°N 110.8°W.

In 2005, it was estimated to be at 82.7°N 114.4°W in 2005.


Renumbering runways due to changes in Mag North is not uncommon. IAH's 15/33 L/R used to be 14/32 L/R up until 1997.


User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 24082 posts, RR: 22
Reply 7, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 8638 times:

Current LHR runways 09 and 27 (L and R) were once numbered 10 and 28.

User currently offlineBOStonsox From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 1973 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 8410 times:

So what happens when an airport has both 14/32 AND 15/33 (like at BOS)? I imagine that it would be so easy for the ATC to say "cleared to land on runway 14" and they go to the new 14 (formerly 15) when the ATC meant the old one, but I'm no expert.


2013 World Series Champions!
User currently offlineXT6Wagon From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 3322 posts, RR: 4
Reply 9, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 8394 times:



Quoting BOStonsox (Reply 9):
So what happens when an airport has both 14/32 AND 15/33 (like at BOS)? I imagine that it would be so easy for the ATC to say "cleared to land on runway 14" and they go to the new 14 (formerly 15) when the ATC meant the old one, but I'm no expert.

easy enough for them to inform the pilots that the runway had been renumbered. The real danger spot is after the inital change when the people start to assume everyone has experience with the change and start omiting the extra info and you get someone flying on old charts.


User currently offlineAircatalonia From Spain, joined Nov 2007, 541 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 8138 times:

It is not uncommon but the magnetic pole is definitely moving much faster now than in the past decades/centuries. It may all be a cyclical thing, but the the present speed of drifting is the fastest on records.

User currently offlineBoeing747_600 From United States of America, joined Oct 1999, 1290 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 7926 times:

Quoting BOStonsox (Reply 9):
So what happens when an airport has both 14/32 AND 15/33 (like at BOS)?

Here's what I suspect would be the most logical solution in such a situation:

Example:

Year 1: 1st Runway Heading: 144 deg - Runway Number 14
Year 1: 2nd Runway Heading 146 deg - Runway Number 15

Lets assume a 2 deg Mag Shift in 10 years. Now we have

Year 10: 1st Runway Heading: 146 deg - Runway Number 15L or 15R (depending on location)
Year 10: 2nd Runway Heading 148 deg - Runway Number 15R or 15L (depending on location)

At KBOS, the current RWYs 15R and 15L both have a current magnetic heading of 151 degN whereas RWY 14 has a magnetic heading of 141 degN.

If we assume that 151 is 150.5 rounded up and 141 is 141.49 rounded down, then a 4 deg change in Mag N would result in all 3 runways having an assigned number of 15.

15L/33R would remain 15L/33R
15R/33L would become 15C/33C
14/32 would become 15R/33L

[Edited 2009-07-08 12:28:56]

User currently offlineTharanga From United States of America, joined Apr 2009, 1848 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 7891 times:



Quoting Boeing747_600 (Reply 12):
Here's what I suspect would be the most logical solution in such a situation:

ah, but there are three runways with similar heading: there is already a 15 L and a 15 R, in addition to 14/32.

However they do it, it'll require extra care.


User currently offlineBoeing747_600 From United States of America, joined Oct 1999, 1290 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 7876 times:



Quoting Tharanga (Reply 13):
ah, but there are three runways with similar heading: there is already a 15 L and a 15 R, in addition to 14/32.

However they do it, it'll require extra care.

In anticipation of your question, I modified my earlier post Big grin


User currently offlineTimz From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 6709 posts, RR: 7
Reply 14, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 7770 times:



Quoting BOStonsox (Reply 9):
So what happens when an airport has both 14/32 AND 15/33 (like at BOS)?

Has that ever happened yet-- runways "X" and "X + 1" getting renumbered to runways "X + 1" and "X + 2" at the same airport?


User currently offlineLHR27C From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2004, 1279 posts, RR: 17
Reply 15, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 7734 times:

LCY has also just changed its runway designation from 10/28 to 09/27. A rather spectacular photo of the modifications in progress can be seen here: http://www.lcy.co.uk/Images/NewsRele...%20Redesignation%20trial%20run.jpg


Once you have tasted flight, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned forever skyward
User currently offlinePnwtraveler From Canada, joined Jun 2007, 2201 posts, RR: 12
Reply 16, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 7672 times:

YYZ's were last renumbered quite a while ago and the change was only by one digit. My guess would be that it would be time again in the not too distant future.

User currently offlineBravo1six From Canada, joined Dec 2007, 396 posts, RR: 2
Reply 17, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 7626 times:



Quoting Pnwtraveler (Reply 17):
YYZ's were last renumbered quite a while ago and the change was only by one digit. My guess would be that it would be time again in the not too distant future.

But wasn't that renumbering due to the third East/West runway being added? When the new runway was opened it became 24L/06R, the former 24L/06R became 24R/06L and the former 24R/06L became 23/05.


User currently offlineTimz From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 6709 posts, RR: 7
Reply 18, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 7582 times:



Quoting Pnwtraveler (Reply 17):
My guess would be that it would be time again in the not too distant future.

I guess the runways that change their magnetic orientation the fastest are the ones close to the magnetic poles, so maybe YYZ changes faster than I think-- but I'm guessing if the latest change was indeed due to magnetic drift the next one won't be needed in this century.

Has any airport had more than one renumbering from that cause?


User currently offlineOlympus69 From Canada, joined Jun 2002, 1737 posts, RR: 7
Reply 19, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 7535 times:

Toronto's YYZ underwent a rather confusing and complicated series of changes to its runway designations. I may not have the sequence of these changes quite right.

In the early 1990s there were 3 runways - I'll just use the SW/NW headings to make it simpler. There were 2 parallel runways separated from each other by about 2 miles. These were designated 23L and 23R. at exactly 90 degrees from them was runway 32, located toward the east side of the airport.

During the '90s 2 new runways were built. and I don't remember the sequence of construction. I think the first was 32L, situated about 4000ft west of the original 32, now 32R. Then came the change due to the shifting magnetic pole. 23 became 24 and 32 became 33.

Finally a third 24 was built fairly close to the one at the south end of the airport. Rather than rename them 24L, 24C and 24R It was decided to make the southerly pair 24L and 24R, and the single runway at the north end of the airport became 23.

As of 2005 - the date of the latest Canada Flight Supplement I have, the actual runway headings were 237 degrees and 327 degrees. Of course these changes occurred over a period of several years, so pilots and controllers had time to get used to one change before the next one came along.


User currently offlineDanvs From Brazil, joined Jul 2009, 249 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 7503 times:



Quoting Timz (Reply 19):
I guess the runways that change their magnetic orientation the fastest are the ones close to the magnetic poles

Not necessarily. It all has to do with the variation of magnetic declination.
Example:

Lisbon, Portugal: variation of 0°7 E /year;
Moscow, Russia: variation of 0°6 E /year;

Sao Paulo, Brazil: variation of 0°6 W / year;
Ushuaia, Argentina: variation of 0°4 W / year.

You can find an interesting map showing this variation through time (it's the last map):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_declination

You can also check the variation of magnetic declination by using this calculator:
http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/geomagmodels/struts/calcDeclination

C ya


User currently offlineTimz From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 6709 posts, RR: 7
Reply 21, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 7440 times:



Quoting Danvs (Reply 21):
Lisbon, Portugal: variation of 0°7 E /year;
Moscow, Russia: variation of 0°6 E /year;

Sao Paulo, Brazil: variation of 0°6 W / year;

Their magnetic north has shifted by 30 degrees since 1959? Or 3 degrees?

I checked the old charts-- YYZ shifted about 2.5 degrees between 1944 and 1995.


User currently offlineBoeing747_600 From United States of America, joined Oct 1999, 1290 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 7369 times:



Quoting Timz (Reply 14):
Has that ever happened yet-- runways "X" and "X + 1" getting renumbered to runways "X + 1" and "X + 2" at the same airport?

If you see my reply 11, it all depends on what the actual runway headings rounded to the closest integer tun out to be. So it may very well happen at BOS.


User currently offlineACDC8 From Canada, joined Mar 2005, 7637 posts, RR: 37
Reply 23, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 7348 times:

Not that any one cares, but YLW's was renumbered from 15/33 to 16/34 a few years ago.


A Grumpy German Is A Sauerkraut
User currently offlineDanVS From Brazil, joined Jul 2009, 249 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 7243 times:



Quoting Timz (Reply 21):
Their magnetic north has shifted by 30 degrees since 1959? Or 3 degrees?

3 degrees. However, I think it's possible that the variation itself can change over time (e.g. in 2009 it's 0°6W/year, in 2019 it will be 0°9W/year).


25 Tom355uk : Err..Are you sure about that?? I thought the declination was measured in minutes of arc? I.E. 50 years x 6 = 300 minutes of arc/60 (because 1 minute
26 Readytotaxi : It does seem a bit over the top to have a helicopter lift out a section when a bloke with a paint brush could have done the job cheaper.
27 Timz : He's apparently using some angle notation we're not familiar with. But some US charts show change in mag variation as degrees per year-- no reason th
28 Post contains links Viscount724 : North magnetic pole movement between 1831 and 2001 shown on following Canadian government diagram. Between 1901 and 2001 it moved 1100 km. Current ra
29 VV701 : The map provided in his link by Viscount 724 (Reply 28) shows just how far the magnetic north pole has moved. For numerical comparative purposes with
30 DanVS : You're absolutely right. I got these variation values through the calculator on the website I posted on reply 20. They say: Results include the seven
31 Gawzu : Speaking of STN again - does anyone know why the 05 threshold was displaced in the last year or two?
32 Post contains links DanVS : According to the last page of the presentation (link below), the runway was displaced for noise mitigation. http://www.southeastknp.co.uk/upload...Da
33 CPH-R : Except that's guaranteed to screw up your AI traffic - but that's for another part of the forum
34 PlaneInsomniac : " target=_blank>http://www.lcy.co.uk/Images/NewsRele...n.jpg I am pretty sure that's a fake. It certainly looks like one.
35 CPH-R : Looking at the apron, something is definantly up. Unless having a circus tent on the apron is the latest in lounge fads
36 LHR27C : Yep, after a couple of minutes I realised it was rather too spectacular to be true! That's the LCY Fun Day. However, the Fun Day took place two days
37 Gawzu : " target=_blank>http://www.southeastknp.co.uk/upload...n.pdf Thank you! Just what I was looking for...
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...
TSA: Airlines To Blame For Overzealous Screening posted Thu Jul 24 2008 15:40:30 by Glbltrvlr
Boeing Forecast Sees Shift To Larger Types posted Wed Jul 9 2008 07:23:41 by Aviationbuff
Pilot Error To Blame For Crash Of Unmanned Drone! posted Sat Nov 10 2007 13:23:30 by Ferengi80
Is FlyBe Trying To Blame SAS For Q400 Incidents? posted Wed Oct 31 2007 12:13:28 by Cumulus
Is Chap 11 To Blame? posted Wed Dec 14 2005 04:11:46 by Lufthansa
Human Error To Blame For Helios Crash posted Mon Nov 28 2005 02:16:12 by N328KF
FOD Is To Blame On Onur's AMS Flight posted Thu May 19 2005 15:55:35 by Bahadir
Crandall Is To Blame... posted Tue Apr 19 2005 16:17:21 by Jdaniel001
US Pilots Not To Blame! posted Fri Sep 17 2004 00:39:57 by Jonesy869
Jetstar Vandalism - Free Seating To Blame? posted Mon Aug 2 2004 05:19:35 by BD1959