Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Parallel Runways At LGA?  
User currently offlinenycdave From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 547 posts, RR: 1
Posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 3737 times:

To amuse myself, I've been playing around with maps and designs for LGA, trying to figure out what I would do if I were in charge of the redesign & rebuilding effort.

One question I have though is far beyond my expertise -- so I'm hoping someone here can share some insight!

How well could LGA operate with parallel runways? Or does the weather necessitate having at least one full-legnth crosswind runway available?

18 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlinerl757pvd From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 4694 posts, RR: 11
Reply 1, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 3619 times:

Quoting nycdave (Thread starter):
How well could LGA operate with parallel runways? Or does the weather necessitate having at least one full-legnth crosswind runway available?

Parallel runways need to be at least 4,300 ft apart (3,500 ft if staggered) to be of any real IFR use... hence why EWR goes to hell in a hand basket in bad weather, the airfield was not designed to support hub operations.

With the high volume of arrivals and departures, runway crossings (assuming no end around taxiway and that the terminal would not be in the middle) would give it probably about the same capacity as the current configuration



Experience is what you get when what you thought would work out didn't!
User currently offlinenycdave From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 547 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 3570 times:

Quoting rl757pvd (Reply 1):
Parallel runways need to be at least 4,300 ft apart (3,500 ft if staggered) to be of any real IFR use... hence why EWR goes to hell in a hand basket in bad weather, the airfield was not designed to support hub operations.

Well, obviously if I were going to try to shuffle things around at LGA to get parallel runways, I'd be doing it with the aim of being able to have simultaneous take-offs and landings  

Was more just curious as to whether the winds around there would result in too many shutdowns if you didn't have a crosswind alternative... I know that happens sometimes with JFK.


User currently offlineANITIX87 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 3308 posts, RR: 13
Reply 3, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 3537 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Keep in mind that LGA's operations depend a lot on JFK's. If you gave LGA parallel 13/31's (which is the more logical choice) then as soon as JFK switched to a 04/22 flow, you'd sort of be stuck and would possibly not be able to run simultaneous operations on both of LGA's parallel runways anyway. If the spacing worked fine, and you were able to at least land and takeoff with the same frequency, routings would be quite complex to get around and above JFK and EWR traffic. The fact that the three major airports in the region (JFK, LGA, EWR) have a runway 04/22 is a HUGE benefit to airspace operations in the region. JFK and LGA have 13/31 and EWR has 11/29 when it is needed. This allows much easier alignment of flight paths.

TIS



www.stellaryear.com: Canon EOS 50D, Canon EOS 5DMkII, Sigma 50mm 1.4, Canon 24-70 2.8L II, Canon 100mm 2.8L, Canon 100-4
User currently offlineIAHFLYR From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 4790 posts, RR: 22
Reply 4, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 3529 times:

Under current rules, parallel dependent ILS approaches can be conducted to runways with centerlines of at least 2,500' but not more than 4,300' apart using a 1.5 NM stagger between aircraft on the parallel runway. The 7110.65, paragraph 5-9-6 addresses this. Take a look at paragraph 5-9-8 and 5-9-9 for simultaneous independent approaches and you can find more ways to conduct ops.

Departures and arrivals on parallel runways paragraph 5-8-5 provides current criteria for simultaneous ops. May take a few minutes to digest but good information to get you working on LGA.  



Any views shared are strictly my own and do not a represent those of any former employer.
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21681 posts, RR: 55
Reply 5, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 3517 times:

Quoting nycdave (Reply 2):
Well, obviously if I were going to try to shuffle things around at LGA to get parallel runways, I'd be doing it with the aim of being able to have simultaneous take-offs and landings

There's no real need to have simultaneous landings, since unless you're going to have three runways, you'd need to allow for departures. And if you've got two runways, I'm not sure there's really much of an advantage to them being parallel vs. perpendicular from a capacity standpoint.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlinerl757pvd From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 4694 posts, RR: 11
Reply 6, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 3503 times:

Quoting nycdave (Reply 2):
Well, obviously if I were going to try to shuffle things around at LGA to get parallel runways, I'd be doing it with the aim of being able to have simultaneous take-offs and landings


If you wanted to build LGA to standards today it would take over most of Queens

Airports in the northeast should have at least 75% capacity capabilities in crosswind conditions

Operating normally on two widely spaces parallels with only one crosswind pretty much guarantees a nightmare on windy days



Experience is what you get when what you thought would work out didn't!
User currently offlineflyinryan99 From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 2008 posts, RR: 13
Reply 7, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 3488 times:

I drew something up about a year ago when there were discussions about new terminals and renovations and stuff. I came up with 4L/R and 22L/R staggered. I figured on taking out 13/31 to put a midfield type terminal where that runway currently stands. I envisioned taking out the AA hangars and terminals there to fit in the new runway and moved the AA hangar over to where the Marine Air Terminal is...I can scan it over and email it to you if you're interested. It was just an idea, nothing scientific by any means.

User currently offlineisitsafenow From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 4984 posts, RR: 23
Reply 8, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 3312 times:

At LGA I have said for decades that the 'new runway' should be in Flushing Bay and parallel 13/31.
If the they can put a runway in the water in Hong Kong and Japan, they can do it in NYC. The drawback is
the people living in Queens and around Flushing Bay complaining about NOISE in the hearings before the runway is built.
Dont forget the protests of the bird and fish lovers.
safe



If two people agree on EVERYTHING, then one isn't necessary.
User currently offlinenycdave From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 547 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 3129 times:

Interesting answers! Thanks guys! Hadn't even thought about the flexiblity a cross-runway offers when sharing airspace with two other giant airports... though that will make things trickier! Really wanted any design to be able to have two active runways at the same time to improve capacity and help clear delays (which im sure LGA will still get). I also think that with parallel runways you could worm your way around some of the community opposition by agreeing to cap total slots at the current level... never mind the fact that you'd have other communities thrilled to be getting LESS air traffic over THEIR neighborhoods! (especially if you decomissioned the crossing runway).

Other thoughts I had going into this:
-Minimize amount of fill/build-out needed (almost any build-out for a runway would close off Flushing Bay)
-Parallel runways (already mentioned)
-Remove hangers & outdated/underused facilities
-Do *something* with the MAT
-Consider using the space currently between 23rd Ave and the GCP (anything from re-routing of the GCP to building over it) -- the real estate there is (relatively) cheap and has businesses that could be offered compensating space nearby in willets point, or integrated into a new LGA facility (ie rental cars).
-Make an easy-as-possible space for future mass transit connection(s).


User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21681 posts, RR: 55
Reply 10, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 3065 times:

Quoting nycdave (Reply 9):
Really wanted any design to be able to have two active runways at the same time to improve capacity and help clear delays (which im sure LGA will still get).

LGA does have two active runways at the same time under most all conditions.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlinePITrules From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 3212 posts, RR: 6
Reply 11, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 3055 times:

Quoting nycdave (Thread starter):
To amuse myself, I've been playing around with maps and designs for LGA, trying to figure out what I would do if I were in charge of the redesign & rebuilding effort.

I like to do the same myself just for fun. This is what I came up with for LGA some time ago:

http://i644.photobucket.com/albums/uu162/JDawgphoto/lga-2.jpg

Quoting Mir (Reply 5):
There's no real need to have simultaneous landings, since unless you're going to have three runways, you'd need to allow for departures. And if you've got two runways, I'm not sure there's really much of an advantage to them being parallel vs. perpendicular from a capacity standpoint.

I agree no real advantage for LGA. But I'm thinking JFK... If LGA had two sets of perpendicular close parallel runways (think SFO), then LGA would be much more compatible with JFK without losing any capacity. LGA would simply align its configuration to what JFK is using, and only use one set of parallels at a time.



FLYi
User currently offlinerl757pvd From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 4694 posts, RR: 11
Reply 12, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 3051 times:

This idea of adding runways in NYC comes up a few times per year... many people on here are unfamiliar with the actual design critiera that goes along with the runway (many of which LGA is not currently in compliance with) such as the 1,000 ft safety areas and 2,500 ft Runway Protection Zone which should not contain any residences or buildings containing numbers of people off of each runway end. With these features added in, an 8,000 ft runway, now has an impact of over 14,000 ft.

Before proposing ideas like has been discussed in the past, flip through Chapters 2 and 3
http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/m.../Advisory_Circular/150_5300_13.pdf


There is only one place in New York where you can add a runway, meet the FAA requirements and have a price tag of under $10 billion dollars and that is at JFK with a close-in parallel just north of Runway 13L-31R, could probably get it to be somewhere in the 7,000-8,000 ft range.

Everything else would be no less rediculous than proposing a runway in Central Park.



Experience is what you get when what you thought would work out didn't!
User currently offlinenycdave From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 547 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 3004 times:

Quoting rl757pvd (Reply 12):
Everything else would be no less rediculous than proposing a runway in Central Park.

Damn! How did you know where I was going to put the 3rd runway!  

Actually in terms of protection zones, at the current 7000 legnth, 13/31 and a parallel on that course wouldn't be too bad -- certainly not so far off you couldn't get a waiver. Only prob I really see is the Riker's Island bridge. (by the way... PIT, good luck getting any of THAT land out of the hands of the dept of corrections!)

Quoting Mir (Reply 10):
LGA does have two active runways at the same time under most all conditions.

LGA really has take-offs and landings going on simultaneously on both runways currently? Didn't know they could do that! cool!


User currently offlineIAHFLYR From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 4790 posts, RR: 22
Reply 14, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 2867 times:

Quoting nycdave (Reply 13):
LGA really has take-offs and landings going on simultaneously on both runways currently? Didn't know they could do that! cool!



As long as the tower can shoot the gap between the traffic landing/departing with the other runway all is good.

[Edited 2010-11-09 13:14:54]


Any views shared are strictly my own and do not a represent those of any former employer.
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21681 posts, RR: 55
Reply 15, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 2857 times:

Quoting nycdave (Reply 13):
LGA really has take-offs and landings going on simultaneously on both runways currently?

Oh yeah. Landings on one, departures on the other, and the tower controllers will "shoot the gap" between arrivals to get the departures out. No flight paths cross in the most common configurations due to the way the runways are set up, so all you have to worry about is making sure that one aircraft is through the intersection before the other starts the takeoff roll or comes over the threshold for landing.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlinenycdave From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 547 posts, RR: 1
Reply 16, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 2756 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 15):
Oh yeah. Landings on one, departures on the other, and the tower controllers will "shoot the gap" between arrivals to get the departures out. No flight paths cross in the most common configurations due to the way the runways are set up, so all you have to worry about is making sure that one aircraft is through the intersection before the other starts the takeoff roll or comes over the threshold for landing.

-Mir

Awesome. Obviously been way too long since I've been to any of the great spotting places out near LGA!  


User currently offlineisitsafenow From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 4984 posts, RR: 23
Reply 17, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 2589 times:

Quoting nycdave (Reply 13):
LGA really has take-offs and landings going on simultaneously on both runways currently? Didn't know they could do that! cool!

At ORD, in the past at certain times when the wind was right, you have departures off 32R and arrivals on 27R.
Using the two runways at LGA would be quite similar ops.
safe   



If two people agree on EVERYTHING, then one isn't necessary.
User currently offlineN62NA From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4520 posts, RR: 7
Reply 18, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 2560 times:

Quoting nycdave (Reply 13):
LGA really has take-offs and landings going on simultaneously on both runways currently? Didn't know they could do that! cool!

And you live in NYC?

You really should take a little field trip out to LGA one afternoon and watch!  


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...
DL,US Outmaneuver WN At LGA posted Tue Mar 23 2010 10:12:31 by bjorn14
Fuel Spill At LGA posted Wed Feb 24 2010 17:11:51 by B6A322
A Proposal: AA Takes Over The US Terminal At LGA posted Wed Feb 10 2010 16:02:16 by RJpieces
Airtran Aborted Takeoff At LGA posted Wed Nov 25 2009 20:33:28 by Darthluke12694
Slot Swap At LGA? posted Thu Nov 12 2009 21:45:40 by Blueman87
How To Find Out What Runways At ORD... posted Sun Oct 18 2009 05:39:15 by Boots00
Possible Effect Of No More Perimeter Rule At LGA posted Tue Jul 28 2009 09:30:39 by RJpieces
BirdStrike At LGA posted Tue Jun 30 2009 09:15:34 by Planereality
WN Seeking More Slots At LGA posted Thu Mar 26 2009 10:58:50 by Enilria
US Airways Base At LGA-Sustainable? posted Mon Mar 2 2009 07:53:49 by CXA330300