Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
YHZ To Get Bigger Runway...why?  
User currently offlinebmacleod From Canada, joined Aug 2001, 2384 posts, RR: 0
Posted (3 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 3853 times:

The Canadian government have announced funding to increase the runway length at YHZ.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-s.../21/ns-halifax-airport-runway.html

But why is a longer runway needed? The runway at 8,800ft. is certainly big enough to handle 744s as indicated on 9/11 as well as a former Atlas Air cargo routing. There was even a one time AC 77W 3 years ago.

I understand with foggy and bad weather a bigger runway is better but does Halifax have the pax/cargo market to support such a project?

[Edited 2011-02-22 10:52:11]


The engine is the heart of an airplane, but the pilot is its soul.
14 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineXT6Wagon From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 3432 posts, RR: 4
Reply 1, posted (3 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 3785 times:

Bigger is allways better. Runway lengths in use are a tradeoff between cost and need. If cost wasn't a factor runways would be much longer and wider than they are now. Sadly runways are massively expensive and thus we can't have 15K ft runways for everything.

Extra length pays big in extra safety by providing extra margin for rejected takeoffs and difficult landing conditions.


User currently offlineAADC10 From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 2103 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (3 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 3765 times:

It is not a runway for YYZ, it is for YHZ. While 8,800 feet is enough for almost any aircraft, it does not leave much margin or allow for future aircraft and may be inadequate on a hot day. Since the U.S. often diverts suspicious aircraft to Halifax, it will need to be able to handle aircraft that would not necessarily be scheduled there. Most major airports prefer to have at least 11-12,000 ft runways.

User currently offlineNavigator From Sweden, joined Jul 2001, 1229 posts, RR: 14
Reply 3, posted (3 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 3657 times:

This is what they say:

"The extension β€” from 2,682 metres to 3,200 metres β€” will allow the airport to handle larger wide-body and heavy aircraft."

And I think this is very relevant indeed if they want to handle any widebody planes at maximum take off weight. With 2 682 meters available you will have weight restrictions on most widebody operations on longer sectors.

So I think the answer is simple, they need that extension.



747-400/747-200/L1011/DC-10/DC-9/DC-8/MD-80/MD90/A340/A330/A300/A310/A321/A320/A319/767/757/737/727/HS-121/CV990/CV440/S
User currently offlineBMIFlyer From UK - England, joined Feb 2004, 8810 posts, RR: 58
Reply 4, posted (3 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 3601 times:

Quoting bmacleod (Thread starter):

A longer runway may have prevented the MK airlines crash in 2004

[Edited 2011-02-22 11:50:03]


Sometimes You Can't Make It On Your Own
User currently offlineconnies4ever From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 4066 posts, RR: 13
Reply 5, posted (3 years 10 months 1 week 2 days ago) and read 3442 times:

Quoting bmacleod (Thread starter):
I understand with foggy and bad weather a bigger runway is better but does Halifax have the pax/cargo market to support such a project?

It doesn't have the pax/cargo market to support the project.

Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 1):
Bigger is allways better. Runway lengths in use are a tradeoff between cost and need.

Substantial cost with almost no need. YHZ's only overseas sked is to LHR daily, unless you count Icelandair to Reykjavik. Pretty short sectors so no one near MTOW. Some charters of course.

Quoting Navigator (Reply 3):
And I think this is very relevant indeed if they want to handle any widebody planes at maximum take off weight. With 2 682 meters available you will have weight restrictions on most widebody operations on longer sectors.

See above.

The reason this project is going ahead is that it is Election Year in Canada, and Mr Harper is desperate to get a majority, otherwise he will shortly be kicked out by his own party. Let the spending orgy begin (if it already hasn't).



Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
User currently offlinecyeg66 From Canada, joined Feb 2011, 210 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (3 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 3318 times:

Quoting connies4ever (Reply 5):
The reason this project is going ahead is that it is Election Year in Canada, and Mr Harper is desperate to get a majority, otherwise he will shortly be kicked out by his own party. Let the spending orgy begin (if it already hasn't).

Indeed. Harper's been flashing the cash all over Alberta for the past number of years already.... Oh wait, no he hasn't. He's been to Alberta to fill his bags with cash and to reallocate it toward make-work projects out East 'cause he knows he can take the food from our mouths and most of us will still vote his party into power. (He stole that play from the Grits' playbook!) So really, we're the idiots. On a positive note: It's nice to hear of an airport actually get "help" from the gov't and not "fleeced" by the gov't.



slow to 160, contact tower, slow to 160, contact tower, slow to....ZZZZZZZ......
User currently offlineC172Akula From Canada, joined Mar 2001, 1010 posts, RR: 4
Reply 7, posted (3 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 3182 times:

Just curious, why are the Feds giving 32% of the total project cost and nothing for the YYC parallel runway? Bueller? Bueller?

User currently offlinethenoflyzone From Canada, joined Jan 2001, 2685 posts, RR: 11
Reply 8, posted (3 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 2915 times:

Quoting C172Akula (Reply 7):
Just curious, why are the Feds giving 32% of the total project cost and nothing for the YYC parallel runway? Bueller? Bueller?

Because Harper has Alberta in his back pocket....that's why ! No need to waste money there.

Thenoflyzone



us Air Traffic Controllers have a good record, we haven't left one up there yet !!
User currently offlinethenoflyzone From Canada, joined Jan 2001, 2685 posts, RR: 11
Reply 9, posted (3 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 2892 times:

Quoting BMIFlyer (Reply 4):

A longer runway may have prevented the MK airlines crash in 2004

  

Although not necessarily needed, i do agree with the idea that a 10,500 ft runway is always good to have, even if YHZ only has a 763 to LHR to justify it. Mind you, i'm sure WestJet will be pleased with this news, on their regular runs to YYC and YEG. Those transcons often need longer pavement too.

Not to mention it does come in handy on hot and humid days and 8,800 feet is often too thigh with the poor braking YHZ can have during the winter months.

We sort of have the same situation in YOW. Runway 25 is preferred, and at only 8,000 feet, a lot of airlines prefer runway 32, often for shorter taxi times, but mostly for the extra length. i know AC A321's to YVR often request runway 32. I'm sure if AC had flights from YHZ to YVR, they would also support the runway extension at YHZ.

Thenoflyzone

[Edited 2011-02-22 18:52:46]


us Air Traffic Controllers have a good record, we haven't left one up there yet !!
User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 26029 posts, RR: 22
Reply 10, posted (3 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 2845 times:

Quoting connies4ever (Reply 5):
Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 1):
Bigger is allways better. Runway lengths in use are a tradeoff between cost and need.

Substantial cost with almost no need. YHZ's only overseas sked is to LHR daily, unless you count Icelandair to Reykjavik. Pretty short sectors so no one near MTOW. Some charters of course.

YHZ also gets quite a few medical emergency diversions on transatlantic flights. I don't know whether 8,800 ft. is enough for YHZ-DXB, or YHZ-DEL, for example.

Quoting thenoflyzone (Reply 9):
Mind you, i'm sure WestJet will be pleased with this news, on their regular runs to YYC and YEG. Those transcons often need longer pavement too.

AC also operates YHZ-YYC nonstop during the peak summer period.


User currently offlineconnies4ever From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 4066 posts, RR: 13
Reply 11, posted (3 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 2523 times:

Quoting thenoflyzone (Reply 8):
Because Harper has Alberta in his back pocket....that's why ! No need to waste money there.

Don't they have some type of ordnance in Alberta that if you ever voted Lib or NDP you lost your right to permanent residency ?  



Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
User currently offlineapodino From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 4317 posts, RR: 6
Reply 12, posted (3 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 2360 times:

One thing to keep in mind is that YHZ is a common ETOPS alternate for a lot of transatlantic flights. A longer runway helps with this.

What they really need is some sort of ILS to 32, because the winds seem to favor that runway a lot. Oh, and operators using the airport that are CAT II would help as well.


User currently offlineCoronado990 From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 1614 posts, RR: 2
Reply 13, posted (3 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 2229 times:

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 10):
YHZ also gets quite a few medical emergency diversions on transatlantic flights
Quoting apodino (Reply 12):
One thing to keep in mind is that YHZ is a common ETOPS alternate for a lot of transatlantic flights. A longer runway helps with this.

Exactly. And they'll be coming in heavy if they are starting off from the U.S. east coast. The SR111 accident comes to mind.



Uncle SAN at your service!
User currently offlineTinosky From Canada, joined Mar 2010, 103 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (3 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 2210 times:

Quoting C172Akula (Reply 7):
Just curious, why are the Feds giving 32% of the total project cost and nothing for the YYC parallel runway? Bueller? Bueller?

Let's face it, YYC could sure use a hand with it's big project, but, Alberta also has more "Cash" to throw out there. I doubt Nova Scotia has near the amount that Alberta has. With oilsands etc.

TInosky~


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...
Ybbn To Get New Runway? posted Tue Apr 18 2006 16:35:13 by Jbguller
AeroLitoral To Get Bigger RJ's posted Thu Feb 16 2006 17:36:35 by EddieDude
MUC To Get Third Runway posted Wed Jul 27 2005 00:03:32 by Johnnybgoode
Aloha To Get A Bigger A/c For West Coast Ops? posted Thu May 10 2001 20:04:11 by 777kicksass
Why Does Eva Air Go Through Bkk To Get To Europe? posted Sat Jan 1 2011 21:02:38 by jgw787
Why So Long To Get Into Skyteam? posted Fri Mar 31 2006 23:15:15 by RobertS975
Cheapest Way To Get From PRG To YYZ And Back posted Sun Feb 13 2005 13:30:13 by Duke
Westjet Struggling To Get Into YYZ. posted Fri Mar 15 2002 00:45:50 by Fly_yhm
Best Way To Get To YOW From YYZ posted Sun Oct 21 2001 02:22:56 by Gmonney
Is The A3XX Going To Get Off The Runway? posted Tue Feb 15 2000 02:26:15 by Piperman