Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
6th DEN Runway "Very Important" Officials Say  
User currently offlineBA From United States of America, joined May 2000, 11151 posts, RR: 59
Posted (11 years 11 months 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 1232 times:

Interesting article:

http://www.denverpost.com/framework/0%2C1918%2C36%257E417%257E626755%2C00.html

It looks like it's main goal is to improve efficiency and reduce delays.....

The other important goal about it is Denver will be able to have non-stop service to Asia finally.

Regards


"Generosity is giving more than you can, and pride is taking less than you need." - Khalil Gibran
14 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineDonder10 From Canada, joined Oct 2001, 6659 posts, RR: 22
Reply 1, posted (11 years 11 months 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 1212 times:

Do you think the demand is there for a flight direct to Asia?I don't really know too much about Denver itself apart from the airport and the baseball team!:P

User currently offlineBA From United States of America, joined May 2000, 11151 posts, RR: 59
Reply 2, posted (11 years 11 months 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 1205 times:

Donder10,

I think there is demand for a NRT flight, but that's it.

Denver has a lot of trade connections with Japan so this flight would be filled almost completely with business travelers.

Denver has a "good" sized Japanese population, so that would help a little bit aswell.

During the summer, Colorado is FULL of Japanese tourists. It is just amazing. You see many Japanese with there high-tech cameras and camcorders during the summer.

During the summer, the route would have an added boost from tourism.

Over the past few years a research was done on the feasability for a NRT-DEN flight, and the demand was there.

Both JAL and ANA have expressed interest in operating the route, and according to most airline analysts the route is feasible, and will happen.

If ANA turns out to be the operator to DEN, then it will have the added feed from United Airlines since they are both partners.

Denver does also want HKG service, but I don't see it happening this decade. Maybe the next, but not this decade.

Regards



"Generosity is giving more than you can, and pride is taking less than you need." - Khalil Gibran
User currently offlineDonder10 From Canada, joined Oct 2001, 6659 posts, RR: 22
Reply 3, posted (11 years 11 months 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 1199 times:

I had heard NH mentioned before -probabrly from you! NRT fits the bill well in terms of range/demand then which is good.As soon(IF) Bermuda 2 is scrapped ,then UA will add LHR to DEN's international routes.Hopefully,not too far away

User currently offlineWilliam From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 1239 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (11 years 11 months 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 1185 times:

What a JOKE! ATL has more operations than DEN yet can operate efficiently. DEN has one of the best laid out runways,and they are having delays with FIVE runways!!!!!! The n/s runways are spaced far enough apart for three aircraft to land at the same time even on IFR.

I read another "story" on this sixth runway request some time back. DEN airport has federal(thats yours and mine money)money sitting there. They must spend on it on improvement in operations,or RUNWAYS. Now if they do not spend it by a certain date.......POOF!..... It goes back to the government......God forbid that money should go to an airport that could really use it..........


User currently offlineBA From United States of America, joined May 2000, 11151 posts, RR: 59
Reply 5, posted (11 years 11 months 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 1162 times:

William,

It's not that simple. Since there are infact only 5 runways, only 2 can be used for take-offs, 3 for landing, or vice versa. Which turns out to be somewhat of a problem. For example if 3 are used for landing, there is currently more capacity to handle while take-off capacity is less. This 6th runway will even it out.

Also, 2 of the 5 runways go east-west which are usually useless during winter storms as planes will need to depart north-south. This 6th runway will be north-south which will mean Denver will have 4 north-south runways which are used much much more than the east-west runways.

Regards



"Generosity is giving more than you can, and pride is taking less than you need." - Khalil Gibran
User currently offlineRayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 7928 posts, RR: 5
Reply 6, posted (11 years 11 months 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 1149 times:

I think once the 16,000 ft. runway is open expect very likely NH to fly NRT-DEN using 747-400's.

User currently offlineWilliam From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 1239 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (11 years 10 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 1097 times:

Its good that DEN can afford to be pro active and has the money to build a sixth runway. My contention is,even taking the current runway configuration into account,with the # of operations DEN has,it should be able to operate delay free(if the weather is perfect across the nation).

User currently offlineWilliam From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 1239 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (11 years 10 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 1091 times:

See how far DEN is down the list of busiest airports operational wise.

http://www.airports.org/traffic/busiest.html

I know DEN has problems with nasty winds coming off the mountains,but with that .......look at the numbers on the operation side. Sorry UA,you cannot schedule 40 aircraft to depart at the same time and expect them too without delays.


User currently onlinePW100 From Netherlands, joined Jan 2002, 2325 posts, RR: 12
Reply 9, posted (11 years 10 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 1085 times:

William

I would think that denver has also to cope with a lot more snow than ATL. Having three parallel runways effectively means in winter times that you have only two... Basically anyone time [at least] one of the parallel runways will be out for snow clearing reasons. So having this fourth parallel runway will greatly increase Denvers on time performance, even in snowy conditions [which can not be said for ATL...].

As for Asian flights...it's basically an chicken/egg situation, which was first?
Without the runway the airlines won't operate Asia flights due to reduced payload capability [hot & high]/without the Asia routes Denver doesn't need the humongously long runway...someone has to break the circle!

BTW I believe that the DEN masterplan ultimately calls for 8 [!!!] parallel runways [effectively 6 parallel runways with 2 spares standing by if snow clearing is required] and four parallel crosswind runways. This airport was smartly designed with the next 100 years in mind! They certainly made sure that the new airport would not see the problems that Stapleton saw. Now they only have to cope with those cracking runways...
So don't be surprised to see DEN overtaking ATL [in about sixty years or so].

PW100



Immigration officer: "What's the purpose of your visit to the USA?" Spotter: "Shooting airliners with my Canon!"
User currently offlinePtica2000 From Slovenia, joined Nov 2000, 142 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (11 years 10 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 1074 times:

That is funny. Why the hell 6 runways. Why do they need 6 runways for only 38 million passengers. Look Heathrow. They have only three runways, only two are used for landings and they can handle 60 million.

The organisation on this airport is horrible. And no, you can't have 40 airplanes to depart at the same time. I mean yes, you can have, but something is wrong with your organisation. I suggest airport authorities drawing a new organisation plan.

With 6 runways they should easily operate 120 million pax and not only 40 as now. Also snow is not problem. Frankfurt also knows snow and they clean it every time on the time.



User currently onlinePW100 From Netherlands, joined Jan 2002, 2325 posts, RR: 12
Reply 11, posted (11 years 10 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 1066 times:

Ptica2000

40 airplanes departing at the same time has nothing to do with airport organisation or management. It's all up to the airlines planning their flights properly.
CO does the same at EWR, scheduling 50 flights or so to depart within a 5 minute time frame at 09.00. That is just not going to happen! And ironacally it is Bethune who's complaining of all those delays at EWR. Hell, with that kind of scheduling he's asking for it!!
The same at DEN. It's all up to the airlines to schedule their flights!
There is a instrument which could prevent these issues. It's called "slots". If this instrument is applied, it will prevent airlines from overscheduling. But this does seem to be a popular instrument popular in the US.

As for the number of runways: LHR does handle 60 Million pax a year, but this is achieved with approx 420,000 flights a year, resulting in 142 pax per flight [not taking into account large numbers of freighters amongst the 420,000!]. Go visit LHR between 05.00 and 10.00 hrs local time. You'll notice a massive amount of 744s/777s landing at LHR. The same massive amount of 744s/777s will depart between 10.00 and 17.00. Now, justy how many 744s and 777s does DEN see on a daily basis? The average number of pax per flight at DEN is around 75 [ATL, megahub, sees about 87 pax per movement].

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Søren Geertsen
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Gary Watt


Furthermore, LHR does not have waves like DEN and other US hubs have. Basically LHR has only one departing wave. It starts at 07.30 and ends at 22.30. LHR will only allows take-offs from one runway at the time. The other runways is used exclusively for inbound traffic. Therefore LHR max out at 450,000 movements a year. If used in mixed mode, and with much more smaller traffic, two parallel runways can handleup to 600,000 movements a year [just look at PHX prior to opening their third runway].

To take it one step further. Tokyo Narita handles approx 27 mil pax a year with only 135,000 movements, which equals to a whopping 203 pax per flight. And that is not even taking into account all that cargo traffic among the 135,000 movements!!

ERGO CONCLUSIO: When judging runway efficiency, don't look at pax numbers, look at aircraft movements, and consider the type of operations [hubbing!].
I don't know the 2001 numbers but in 2000 DEN saw over 500,000 aircraft movements. This would justify 3 operational parallel runways, which would require 4 parallel runways in adverse weather conditions to cope with traffic without serious delays...

Kind regards,
PW100



Immigration officer: "What's the purpose of your visit to the USA?" Spotter: "Shooting airliners with my Canon!"
User currently offlineBA From United States of America, joined May 2000, 11151 posts, RR: 59
Reply 12, posted (11 years 10 months 4 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 1051 times:

PW100 hit the nail right on the head. DEN was built in mind for the distant future. This airport could very well possibly be the airport for Denver in 100 years from now.

The master plan calls for a total of 12 runways and 6 concourses all the same size as United's massive Concourse B.

DEN will be seeing the first pre-9/11 increase in the country this June also. Traffic in June will be .6% above June of last year, and in July will be 1.8% above July of last year. Other major airports in the US are expected to be 3% to 5% below pre-9/11 levels this summer.

Also this summer, United will only be 3.2% below pre-9/11 levels which really isn't that bad. United is only 40 or so flights away from pre-9/11 levels in DEN and it is predicted by sometime mid to late next year that UA will exceed pre-9/11 levels.

Denver has already gained 6 new airlines since last year, two of which came after 9/11. Frontier Airlines has massively stepped up its operations and has already exceeded pre-9/11 levels by some 10 flights not including Frontier JetExpress. For the first time, they have claimed 10% of the air traffic in DEN.

DEN will also be expanding Concourse A with 16 additional gates due to the rapid growth even after 9/11.

The future is looking bright for DEN. Eventually airlines will realize that they will need to expand beyond congested airports such as ORD, and will look into opening hubs in more modern and larger airports such as DFW and DEN.

Just recently DEN became the 5th busiest airport in the US from 6th place.

Here's another article about the new runway if anyone is interested:
http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1918,36%7E53%7E632155,00.html?search=filter

Regards



"Generosity is giving more than you can, and pride is taking less than you need." - Khalil Gibran
User currently offlineBlink182 From Azerbaijan, joined Oct 1999, 5476 posts, RR: 15
Reply 13, posted (11 years 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 1014 times:

I think this is impressive and stuff, but why doesn't DEN put most of their runways going north and south? DFW has 90% of theirs in this direction and ATL has 100% of theirs in this direction, and delays are normally kept to a minimum.

While I think that the 16000 foot runway will eventually be used, there is one key note here that it seems that DEN keeps advertising, but it doesn't work:

Just because you build it, doesn't mean they come. Yeah, I am sure ANA will come once the runway is finished, but they won't be flying 3x daily 744s into that airport. I am sure a daily or 5x weekly 777 would be the main result, with most of the profits coming from United connections.

Also, eventually DEN will be congested, and it is now to an extent, and 100 years from now, it won't have all of that open land available. I won't go into details, but it is starting to become that way at DFW, and if it happens at DFW, it will happen at DEN sometime or another.

blink






Give me a break, I created this username when I was a kid...
User currently offlineBA From United States of America, joined May 2000, 11151 posts, RR: 59
Reply 14, posted (11 years 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 1009 times:

Blink182,

Good questions.

First of all, here is a diagram of the layout of Denver Int'l:


The blue runway is the 16,000ft. under construction right now.

The 16,000ft. runway was part of the original plans for the airport. It's focus was not just to allow heavier, larger planes to fly to Denver, but also to have an even number of north-south parallel runways to allow a proper balance of take-offs and landings.

The reason why there are 2 East-West runways is because a lot of the traffic to Denver comes from the West and also from the East. This will allow faster approaches and decents for those flights that are coming from the East and West. Without them, Planes would need to come from the north of Denver or from the south, and make a sharp turn to land on the north-south runways.

However, the east-west runways are very rarely used for landings. They are almost always used for take-offs. Runway 7/25 is used for take-offs heading towards the west, while the Runway 8/26 is used for take-offs towards the east.

Only once I landed on Runway 7/25. All other times my landings have been on the north-south parallel runways.

Just because you build it, doesn't mean they come. Yeah, I am sure ANA will come once the runway is finished, but they won't be flying 3x daily 744s into that airport. I am sure a daily or 5x weekly 777 would be the main result, with most of the profits coming from United connections.

One of the main reasons why Denver hasn't been very popular with international carriers is because of the economics. If they cannot operate fully loaded aircraft to Denver, then they don't want it.

The 16,000ft. runway will allow airlines to fly 747s and any other widebody aircraft with a full load and this will help attract airlines. No more weight restriction.

Asia service isn't possible non-stop from Denver period at the moment. The new runway will make it possible which will attract airlines.

The fact that 2 Asian carriers have expressed quite a bit of interest BEFORE the runway construction even started is promising. You are right, the 16,000ft. runway will not be a magnet for international carriers. Int'l carriers are not going to say "Oh cool! A 16,000ft. runway in Denver! Lets fly there!"

However it will encourage them as they will be able to fly there planes with a full load.

Europe is not too big of an issue, Asia is the key problem here.

Also, eventually DEN will be congested, and it is now to an extent, and 100 years from now, it won't have all of that open land available. I won't go into details, but it is starting to become that way at DFW, and if it happens at DFW, it will happen at DEN sometime or another.

You are right, DEN will eventually become congested. That is why there is a lot of land which is owned by the city. The full plan calls for a total of 12 runways by as early as 2030 and a total of 6 concourses.

DEN was built in mind for the future. It's currently the best laid out airport in North America according to experts. The way the runways are placed and the distance they are from the gate areas allow for excelent efficiency. When all 5 runways in DEN are used, the airport is a breeze to go through. Almost no waiting time.

Regards



"Generosity is giving more than you can, and pride is taking less than you need." - Khalil Gibran
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...
U Of M Say "No" To NW posted Wed Oct 12 2005 19:35:22 by NWA757boy
Unions Always Say The Offer Is "insulting" Why? posted Thu Aug 25 2005 16:10:49 by Clickhappy
Feds Say "no" To NW DCA/DSM Flights posted Wed Aug 11 2004 15:57:37 by Alphascan
JFK Tower Controller Asks Pilot To Say "hi" To Pax posted Sun Sep 29 2002 01:09:08 by Bobcat
Time To Say "adieu" To The 727 posted Tue Apr 9 2002 20:47:32 by Cruising
Very Cool Bit Of "old" News On AA (int'l Routes): posted Thu Nov 8 2001 23:26:36 by MAH4546
Imagine: The "wireless" Airplane posted Mon Dec 18 2006 16:08:28 by Tockeyhockey
New US "buttons" posted Mon Dec 18 2006 07:35:42 by Bridogger6
"naked" 737 In Bermuda posted Sat Dec 16 2006 01:39:42 by Lostturttle
BA "Premier" Executive Club posted Thu Dec 14 2006 17:14:00 by VirginA346