Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
CLT To Build New Runway  
User currently onlineUSAirALB From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 3058 posts, RR: 2
Posted (2 years 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 10246 times:

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/201...charlotte-douglas-plans-fifth.html

Construction likely to begin in 2014, will be 12000, and will "allow flights to the Pacific Rim and deep into Europe", and the new runway will be used as a noise abatement runway. Will be CLT's fourth parallel runway.

Also, according to the article, "The airport has long planned to build a new international concourse on the surface parking lots for rental cars, just north of Concourse A. Orr said that project will be built when there is demand.

But he said Monday he plans to build a small portion of that new international concourse, which would be initially used for domestic flights by Delta, United and Southwest. The four new satellite gates would be connected to the main terminal by a new walkway."


E135/E140/E145/E70/E75/E90/CR2/CR7/CR9/717/732/733/734/735/73G/738/739/752/753/762/772/319/320/321/333
53 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineHPRamper From United States of America, joined May 2005, 4057 posts, RR: 8
Reply 1, posted (2 years 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 10184 times:

I didn't know the runway lengths at CLT were what was holding it back from all those long haul flights.

User currently offlinerfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 7607 posts, RR: 32
Reply 2, posted (2 years 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 10144 times:

Rwy 18C/36C - 10,000 ft
Rwy 18R/36L - 9,000 ft
Rwy 18L/36R - 8,676 ft - with an arresting gear at the departure end of 36R
Rwy 5/23 - 7,502 ft

http://www.airnav.com/airport/KCLT


User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7445 posts, RR: 17
Reply 3, posted (2 years 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 10015 times:

Quoting USAirALB (Thread starter):
Construction likely to begin in 2014, will be 12000, and will "allow flights to the Pacific Rim and deep into Europe", and the new runway will be used as a noise abatement runway. Will be CLT's fourth parallel runway.

Hmmm Are they banking on a positive outcome of the potential AA/US merger (if that disaster happens)?



次は、渋谷、渋谷。出口は、右側です。電車とホームの間は広く開いておりますので、足元に注意下さい。
User currently offlineHPRamper From United States of America, joined May 2005, 4057 posts, RR: 8
Reply 4, posted (2 years 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 9947 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 3):
Hmmm Are they banking on a positive outcome of the potential AA/US merger

Last I read, the airport director expects big things even without a merger...he even seems to think CLT would thrive without US there.


User currently offlineDashTrash From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 1527 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (2 years 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 9923 times:

So the new runway is going to be in the middle of 18C and 18R? The way the article is written it sounds like they're taking a mulligan on the recently built runway.

User currently onlineflyguy89 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 1914 posts, RR: 9
Reply 6, posted (2 years 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 9899 times:

A good move that I hope will alleviate the congestion developing there.

Quoting USAirALB (Thread starter):
Also, according to the article, "The airport has long planned to build a new international concourse on the surface parking lots for rental cars, just north of Concourse A. Orr said that project will be built when there is demand.

Very wise. Orr is definitely overly excited about the future of CLT, but for CLT's sake I'm happy to see that his actions have erred on the side of prudence.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 3):
Quoting USAirALB (Thread starter):
Construction likely to begin in 2014, will be 12000, and will "allow flights to the Pacific Rim and deep into Europe", and the new runway will be used as a noise abatement runway. Will be CLT's fourth parallel runway.

Hmmm Are they banking on a positive outcome of the potential AA/US merger

In past statements Orr has very much said so, though I hope he's not letting the sweet nothings Doug Parker is no doubt whispering into his ear dictate his decisions.


User currently offlinesimairlinenet From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 912 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (2 years 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 9899 times:

Quoting USAirALB (Thread starter):
Construction likely to begin in 2014, will be 12000, and will "allow flights to the Pacific Rim and deep into Europe", and the new runway will be used as a noise abatement runway.

While I don't think the fate will be the same, CVG used a potential NRT flight to justify their runway about 12 years ago.


User currently offlineHPRamper From United States of America, joined May 2005, 4057 posts, RR: 8
Reply 8, posted (2 years 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 9836 times:

Another runway isn't going to solve the congestion, which is largely the result of constricted taxiways.

User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7445 posts, RR: 17
Reply 9, posted (2 years 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 9833 times:

Quoting simairlinenet (Reply 7):
While I don't think the fate will be the same, CVG used a potential NRT flight to justify their runway about 12 years ago.

Woah crap! I never heard about that! I guess that explains a lot!

Just to be sure, (I trust you but...) do you have a link about this?



次は、渋谷、渋谷。出口は、右側です。電車とホームの間は広く開いておりますので、足元に注意下さい。
User currently offlineamccann From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 175 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (2 years 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 9775 times:

Maybe I'm being naive but why would CLT airport build an entirely new runway as opposed to lengthening an existing runway?

Google Map of KCLT

I will admit, I do not know the topography of the land at/around the CLT airport however it would appear they could lengthen the recently built runway (18R-36L) by relocating Old Dowd Rd and possibly Wallace Neel Rd. Again, maybe I am being naive, but that seems like a much more easy and fiscally responsible decision.



What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. - Ronald Reagan
User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7445 posts, RR: 17
Reply 11, posted (2 years 1 day ago) and read 9672 times:

Quoting amccann (Reply 10):
I will admit, I do not know the topography of the land at/around the CLT airport however it would appear they could lengthen the recently built runway (18R-36L) by relocating Old Dowd Rd and possibly Wallace Neel Rd. Again, maybe I am being naive, but that seems like a much more easy and fiscally responsible decision.

I guess I agree, given that I only see that runway being positioned to the west of the current 3. It's kind of a bad location, IMHO, but I've actually never been into CLT so I'm not necessarily qualified to criticize an idea  



次は、渋谷、渋谷。出口は、右側です。電車とホームの間は広く開いておりますので、足元に注意下さい。
User currently onlineflyguy89 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 1914 posts, RR: 9
Reply 12, posted (2 years 23 hours ago) and read 9515 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 9):
Quoting simairlinenet (Reply 7):
While I don't think the fate will be the same, CVG used a potential NRT flight to justify their runway about 12 years ago.

Woah crap! I never heard about that! I guess that explains a lot!

Just to be sure, (I trust you but...) do you have a link about this?

I don't believe NRT was specifically mentioned, but yeah, one of the main points they were touting about it was that it would allow trans-Pacific flights to land and take-off. Perhaps not an unthinkable proposition at the time as DL did apply to fly CVG-PEK, but it was pretty poor planning. To be fair though, it did all work out in the end as it's now extensively used by DHL for flights as far as Hong Kong, Seoul, and Bahrain.


User currently offlinesouthwest737500 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (2 years 19 hours ago) and read 9332 times:

Awesome, this is great news, the airport is getting busier every year.

User currently offliner2rho From Germany, joined Feb 2007, 2618 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (2 years 18 hours ago) and read 9215 times:

CLT already has three independent runways which should allow it to easily handle 120 movements an hour. That should be enough for an airport of 38 million pax/year... CLT ranks 6th busiest worldwide in terms of aircraft movements (529,000) but only 25th in terms of passengers (38million) (2010 data). I think the first thing to work on is to encourage an increase in average a/c size (by fee structure, incentives, slot restrictions, etc), to handle more pax with the same movements. The 5th runway can still be considered for the long-term, but I would start with optimizing current operations first.

Quoting amccann (Reply 10):
would appear they could lengthen the recently built runway (18R-36L)

Indeed, lengthening that rwy seems a no-brainer, and could be done quickly for little money.


User currently offlinebobnwa From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 6465 posts, RR: 9
Reply 15, posted (2 years 17 hours ago) and read 9152 times:

Quoting southwest737500 (Reply 13):
Awesome, this is great news, the airport is getting busier every year.
Quoting HPRamper (Reply 8):
Another runway isn't going to solve the congestion, which is largely the result of constricted taxiways.


I agree with HPRamper, that another runway is not what CLT needs, but new and improved taxiways are needed.


User currently offlinesimairlinenet From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 912 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (2 years 17 hours ago) and read 9115 times:

Quoting flyguy89 (Reply 12):
don't believe NRT was specifically mentioned, but yeah, one of the main points they were touting about it was that it would allow trans-Pacific flights to land and take-off. Perhaps not an unthinkable proposition at the time as DL did apply to fly CVG-PEK, but it was pretty poor planning.

Thanks for the correction.

Quoting flyguy89 (Reply 12):
To be fair though, it did all work out in the end as it's now extensively used by DHL for flights as far as Hong Kong, Seoul, and Bahrain.

And the good counter!

Sadly, the new runway at STL built for TWA is now not justified...


User currently offlinerfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 7607 posts, RR: 32
Reply 17, posted (2 years 17 hours ago) and read 9039 times:

Quoting DashTrash (Reply 5):
So the new runway is going to be in the middle of 18C and 18R? The way the article is written it sounds like they're taking a mulligan on the recently built runway.

I was surprised that the newest runway was built 4,300 feet west of the older runways. I had assumed the idea of putting it at the limit of possible western expansion was so that a new terminal complex and better traffic flow taxiways could be built between the newest runway and the now 18C.

Guess I was wrong.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 11):
I guess I agree, given that I only see that runway being positioned to the west of the current 3.

They can't go west of the current runway. They can't move the freeway. The farther west they go, the closer to the lake - the worse the terrain issues become. The expense of a new runway could double or more in that terrain.

Quoting amccann (Reply 10):
Maybe I'm being naive but why would CLT airport build an entirely new runway as opposed to lengthening an existing runway?

They could take the newest runway to 12,500 ft easily and the center runway to 14,000 ft easily. However the extensions would have to be all on the south ends of the existing runways. There is no real room for expansion to the north.


User currently offlineDashTrash From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 1527 posts, RR: 2
Reply 18, posted (2 years 16 hours ago) and read 8939 times:

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 17):
I was surprised that the newest runway was built 4,300 feet west of the older runways. I had assumed the idea of putting it at the limit of possible western expansion was so that a new terminal complex and better traffic flow taxiways could be built between the newest runway and the now 18C.

Guess I was wrong.

Same here. Could be that 4300ft isn't enough distance.


User currently offlinerfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 7607 posts, RR: 32
Reply 19, posted (2 years 16 hours ago) and read 8881 times:

I think 4,300 ft is enough. The original N/S runway pair is about 4,950 ft apart. The taxiway network is constricted by not being able to go to the north around the terminal.

ATL - the terminal and taxiways fit between two runways about 4,400 ft apart

LAX - the terminal and taxiways fit between two runways about 4,550 ft apart

LHR - the terminal and taxiways fit between two runways about 4,625 ft apart

(Distances are from Google Earth and are runway centerline to runway centerline)

[Edited 2012-08-28 06:21:41]

User currently offlinesaab2000 From Switzerland, joined Jun 2001, 1610 posts, RR: 11
Reply 20, posted (2 years 16 hours ago) and read 8883 times:

CLT does not need a new runway. They do need to rework some taxiways and allow flights from the back side of the D concourse and the entire E concourse gates access to 18R and 18C without having to go around the whole airport. This would involve major reworking of parking and roadways but the fact is that there is a major bottleneck in CLT due to very poor foresight and design. Much of the congestion of CLT is on the ground.

The other thing which would greatly help would be a revision of the noise abatement policies which have only one runway in use during some of the busiest times of the day.

More runways sound great but the reality is it's not needed. If they really want a half dozen long haul flights per day deep into Europe or to the Pacific region they should lengthen an existing runway. There's no need to spend hundreds of millions on a 12000 foot runway in CLT when they don't use their current facility at even close to its potential.

And ATC needs to be run better too. They can't handle the existing traffic they have very well as it is.

Taxpayers should be aghast at these plans.



smrtrthnu
User currently offlineN202PA From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 1562 posts, RR: 3
Reply 21, posted (2 years 15 hours ago) and read 8787 times:

Is this one of those situations where there's Federal use-it-or-lose-it money that's being used to bankroll the project?

User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 22923 posts, RR: 20
Reply 22, posted (2 years 15 hours ago) and read 8753 times:

Quoting saab2000 (Reply 20):
CLT does not need a new runway. They do need to rework some taxiways and allow flights from the back side of the D concourse and the entire E concourse gates access to 18R and 18C without having to go around the whole airport. This would involve major reworking of parking and roadways but the fact is that there is a major bottleneck in CLT due to very poor foresight and design. Much of the congestion of CLT is on the ground.

I agree with you. I wonder if there is a way to make the D/E situation better without ripping out all of the terminal infrastructure. Would something like chopping 18R off at Alpha (perhaps with an extension to the south, or perhaps not) and using 23 as the primary arrival runway on that side in a south flow work? Then, they could use Delta and C12 for "inbound" traffic to the ramp and C for "outbound" traffic to the ramp.



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlinebobnwa From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 6465 posts, RR: 9
Reply 23, posted (2 years 15 hours ago) and read 8676 times:

Quoting saab2000 (Reply 20):
Taxpayers should be aghast at these plans.

I'm not sure it will bother the CLT taxpayers one bit as the funds for it will probably come from bonds and the federal government.


User currently offlinesaab2000 From Switzerland, joined Jun 2001, 1610 posts, RR: 11
Reply 24, posted (2 years 14 hours ago) and read 8605 times:

Quoting bobnwa (Reply 23):
I'm not sure it will bother the CLT taxpayers one bit as the funds for it will probably come from bonds and the federal government.

Well, at a time when we see several other nearly dead airports (CVG and PIT come to mind) huge expansion is a waste when there's little need for it. Someone pays for this stuff and it's usually taxpayers.

A couple years ago GSO built a new runway. Yeah, that was needed.   That's a small airport in terms of passengers. Why the need for a second, long, parallel runway? Guess the senators bring home the bacon for local jobs on make-work projects.

I'm not against aviation (I work in it) but these plans need to be tempered against reality I think. And the reality is that it's not needed and I'm a frequent user of the CLT facility. They need changes, but not growth of the number of runways. Longer runway and revised taxi routes, yes, but more runways, no. That's my opinion and I'm sticking to it.



smrtrthnu
25 enilria : INSTRUCTIONS 1) Open pipe 2) Insert dream into pipe. Either way they won't get those flights. CLT will be de-emphasized in a merger. Those routes won
26 apodino : 23 already is the primary landing runway in a south config on that side. One big problem that CLT has is the fact that ATC will just guide planes to
27 airbazar : Because their biggest problem is congestion so a new runway should alleviate that. I would expect that that will be bundled with the construction of
28 jfklganyc : Why is CLT an "at risk" airport in terms of expansion? It is a "hub" airport that has more movements than the population of the city and surrounding b
29 HPRamper : Several years back, Fedex built a hub facility at GSO that was supposed to be the southeast equivalent of the AFW, OAK or EWR regional hubs. Right ab
30 PITrules : From a related article a few months ago, IIRC the plan is to close 5/23 after the new runway is built. This will allow for a dual taxiway system to b
31 saab2000 : This is correct. I am a pilot who flies in and out of CLT a lot and there are many things that should be done to improve efficiency before they spend
32 saab2000 : This idea has merit.
33 Post contains images PHX787 : Thanks guys for the clarification. I keep forgetting we have 747s landing there now back on topic: Maybe CLT needs to have a survey of the pilots who
34 USAirALB : I think the reason for the fifth runway is not to ease congestion, but rather the noise. I live in Charlotte and have friends that live by the airport
35 apodino : I was just reading an article in the Charlotte Observer...apparently one of the reasons for the new runway is because 18R-36L was only supposed to be
36 USAirALB : Exactly...just what my other post said. I wonder if other people actually took the time to read the article.... Anyway, according to the article, it
37 Aesma : LHR, 2 runways. CLT, 5 runways. Yep, makes sense !
38 PITrules : Because the UK lacks the political ability to get anything done regarding London runway capacity every other airport in the world should suffer like
39 southwest737500 : I don't get why everyone says we don't need another runway. Mark my word. WE DO NEED THIS RUNWAY! It's Great for CLT. Who cares about the US/AA possib
40 Flighty : Yes, but they "regulate things" in England. Our solution is 5 runways. Insert Mel Gibson: "Ffrreeeeedooooooooom!!!!!"
41 Post contains images saab2000 : I can't think of anything better than to let pilots run the world of aviation! After all, we know everything there is to know!
42 flylku : Yeah, it must be "shovel ready" ergo the 2014 start date!
43 Post contains links and images amccann : Aside from the following issues; 1 Improper ATC and ramp control communication/coordination 2 Lack of maneuvering space around concourses D and E 3 No
44 flyguy89 : Well apparently it's not. Per my comment earlier I thought it was needed to alleviate congestion, but as others have stated, the runways aren't the i
45 USAirALB : Please, look closely at the article. They are NOT building it for transpac flights, but rather because of noise complaints... I feel terrible for the
46 Post contains images Surfandsnow : Sounds like a great idea to me. $160 million for a brand new parallel runway? What a bargain! The folks at SEA paid about 7 times that for their new p
47 Cubsrule : Taxiway congestion on the west side of the airfield really isn't too much of a problem, and aircraft move from 18R and 36L to the ramp without too mu
48 southwest737500 : I wonder if this will take out the overlook
49 Post contains links and images rduddji : Does anyone else see the irony in building another runway to *decrease* airport noise... In all seriousness, if they are building another runway solel
50 Cubsrule : His point has some historic support, especially in the southeast. BNA and RDU are both probably better off for having lost their hubs. But I don't th
51 CV880 : They got approval to lengthen 18C-36C to 12000' back in 2000 but deferred it for years. I recently sent them an email about it and the response was t
52 Post contains images r2rho : All good examples of ground congestion which is the real issue. D/E are built in a terribly ackward way. A potentially simpler idea than building tax
53 USAirALB : E should have been built disconnected to the terminal...I have no idea why it was not built that way (probably to save money). I know there were plan
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...
Peru To Build A New Cusco Airport posted Thu Aug 23 2012 10:33:09 by STT757
CLT To Open New East Terminal On Saturday posted Wed Jun 27 2012 10:32:04 by USAirALB
CLT Ops Since New Runway Opened posted Tue Jun 15 2010 17:38:35 by 727LOVER
Airbus To Build New Higher Weight A380 Variant posted Tue May 18 2010 06:18:35 by aviationbuff
Feds Clear PFN To Build New $330 Million Airport posted Wed Aug 22 2007 20:51:25 by KarlB737
KIX To Open New Runway Tomorrow (8/2) posted Wed Aug 1 2007 12:50:22 by Carpethead
$17 Billion To Build New Airport At San Diego posted Wed Apr 19 2006 19:43:38 by KarlB737
Ybbn To Get New Runway? posted Tue Apr 18 2006 16:35:13 by Jbguller
Boeing To Build New Super Jet To Challenge A380 posted Sun Apr 10 2005 04:47:47 by Btblue
PHL Looking At Plans To Build New Terminals posted Mon Aug 11 2003 18:02:52 by US AIRWAYS