SailorOrion
Topic Author
Posts: 1959
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2001 5:56 pm

ORD: Runways To Be Renamed This Summer

Tue May 29, 2007 9:52 pm

I just discovered that ORD will rename its existing runways already this year, I presume to reduce confusion once new runways open. Schedule is as follows:

Current runway 9R/27L becomes 10/28 on July 5th.

Two months later, current runway 9L/27R becomes 9R/27L (30th August).

The new runway will then be named 9L/27R.

I'm wondering why there are only two months between the two first "renamings", and why the intermediate 10/28 instead of 10L/28R right away.

SailorOrion
 
airfinair
Posts: 563
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 1999 11:36 pm

RE: ORD: Runways To Be Renamed This Summer

Tue May 29, 2007 10:12 pm

Interesting news. Can you please provide a source for your information? I haven't seen anything on this locally.
ORD,MDW,IND,ARB,AMS,AUS,ANQ,DTW,DEN,PHL,PIT,MIA,GPT,SAN,PHX,LAX,SFO,OAK,SEA,LAS,SLC,SMF,ATL,MEM,BOS,MHT,JFK,EWR,LGA,NASâ
 
71Zulu
Posts: 1613
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 12:42 am

RE: ORD: Runways To Be Renamed This Summer

Tue May 29, 2007 10:17 pm

Clickable links only please!
 
SailorOrion
Topic Author
Posts: 1959
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2001 5:56 pm

RE: ORD: Runways To Be Renamed This Summer

Tue May 29, 2007 10:20 pm

Sorry, I somehow neglected to add the source link. What puzzles me is that the link clearly says that "by the end of 2011", O'Hare will have FOUR parallel east-west runways". What about the other two? Will they just open later or are they scrapped from the plans? What about Phase II of the OMP?

SailorOrion

[Edited 2007-05-29 15:20:37]
 
airportplan
Posts: 319
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2004 12:36 am

RE: ORD: Runways To Be Renamed This Summer

Tue May 29, 2007 10:21 pm

Quoting Airfinair (Reply 1):
Interesting news. Can you please provide a source for your information? I haven't seen anything on this locally

The City of Chicago has an entire website detailing the runway changes. http://www.flychicago.com/ohare/runways/
 
71Zulu
Posts: 1613
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 12:42 am

RE: ORD: Runways To Be Renamed This Summer

Tue May 29, 2007 10:25 pm

Quoting SailorOrion (Reply 3):
...says that "by the end of 2011", O'Hare will have FOUR parallel east-west runways". What about the other two?

Looks like they will build an aditional runway east-west runway to the south of the current 9R-27L (soon to be renamed 10/28) so you will end up with 9L-27R & 9R-27L on the north side and 10L-28R & 10R-28L on the south side.

Quoting Fly Chicago link:
By the end of 2011, the Airport will have four parallel east-west runways, two on the north side of the main terminal core area and two on the south. In the future, all runways north of the terminal will be referred to as 9-27 Runways and all runways south of the terminal will be 10-28 Runways. The two north side runways will be named 9L-27R and 9R-27L, and the south side runways will be named 10L-28R and 10R-28L.


[Edited 2007-05-29 15:27:27]
Clickable links only please!
 
airportplan
Posts: 319
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2004 12:36 am

RE: ORD: Runways To Be Renamed This Summer

Tue May 29, 2007 10:30 pm

Quoting AirportPlan (Reply 4):
Sorry, I somehow neglected to add the source link. What puzzles me is that the link clearly says that "by the end of 2011", O'Hare will have FOUR parallel east-west runways". What about the other two? Will they just open later or are they scrapped from the plans? What about Phase II of the OMP?

All four new parallel runways are still in the plan. But the last new runway probably won't be completed until around 2015. No big deal because the majority of the delay reduction comes from the first runway. The new western terminal is still in the plan but it has not been defined or financed yet.

[Edited 2007-05-29 15:31:09]
 
ANITIX87
Posts: 2958
Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2005 4:52 am

RE: ORD: Runways To Be Renamed This Summer

Tue May 29, 2007 11:04 pm

Some questions out of sheer curiosity.

How did they determine which direction to make the parallen runways. Why not have 14/32 and 15/33 instead, for example. Is 9/27 the most commonly used direction at ORD? Did Midway have anything to do with it? Winds? Space? Etc? I'm just curious, since it seems like 14R/32L is currently the longest runway.

Also, why put the northern-most runway so far away? Couldn't they put it much closer and still use it for parallel approaches or departures? I mean, SFO's runways are really close and they use them together anyway. I'm just surprised, since it seems useless to have a runway that far away. Reducing congestion does nothing if taxy times take longer anyway. It's like the Polderbaan at AMS.

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
 
727LOVER
Posts: 6680
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2001 12:22 am

RE: ORD: Runways To Be Renamed This Summer

Tue May 29, 2007 11:33 pm

Are you kidding me???!!!!! I've been active around ORD for 3 days, and I've the numbers all in my head. Now I have to throw that knowledge out the window. When does the new runway open?
Love Trumps Hate
 
SailorOrion
Topic Author
Posts: 1959
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2001 5:56 pm

RE: ORD: Runways To Be Renamed This Summer

Tue May 29, 2007 11:37 pm

Quoting AirportPlan (Reply 6):
All four new parallel runways are still in the plan. But the last new runway probably won't be completed until around 2015.

That's good to know  Smile

Quoting AirportPlan (Reply 6):
No big deal because the majority of the delay reduction comes from the first runway.

Delay reduction, of course. But the capacity enhancement will then come from the reconfiguration of the rest, right? Main idea is to have three arrival streams in bad weather with the new one. Question: Will the three parallel arrival streams also be the preferred operation during bad weather? Or will they use converging / LAHSO approaches in these conditions until the other new runways are operational. (when will 10C/28C come online?)

Quoting ANITIX87 (Reply 7):
How did they determine which direction to make the parallen runways. Why not have 14/32 and 15/33 instead, for example. Is 9/27 the most commonly used direction at ORD? Did Midway have anything to do with it? Winds? Space? Etc? I'm just curious, since it seems like 14R/32L is currently the longest runway.

From what I've read, it is a wind issue (best converage with 9/27 and 4/22), but also a question of space. Modifying the current layout to the new one takes only little additional space. would you want to build 6 parallel 14/32s things would be REALLY nasty from a land acquisition point of view.

Quoting ANITIX87 (Reply 7):
Also, why put the northern-most runway so far away? Couldn't they put it much closer and still use it for parallel approaches or departures?

Nope. If you did that, you'd get yet another "fair weather airport" of which the US has so many (SFO, ORD now, BOS, etc). To ensure proper capacity you need spacing. 5000ft of it if possible, but no less than 4300ft (if FMA and PRM installed afaik).

SailorOrion
 
SailorOrion
Topic Author
Posts: 1959
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2001 5:56 pm

RE: ORD: Runways To Be Renamed This Summer

Tue May 29, 2007 11:38 pm

Quoting 727LOVER (Reply 8):
When does the new runway open?

November 2008, designated 09L/27R.

SailorOrion
 
Caspian27
Posts: 190
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2005 3:48 am

RE: ORD: Runways To Be Renamed This Summer

Wed May 30, 2007 12:27 am

Quoting ANITIX87 (Reply 7):
Also, why put the northern-most runway so far away? Couldn't they put it much closer and still use it for parallel approaches or departures? I mean, SFO's runways are really close and they use them together anyway. I'm just surprised, since it seems useless to have a runway that far away. Reducing congestion does nothing if taxy times take longer anyway. It's like the Polderbaan at AMS.



Quoting SailorOrion (Reply 9):
Nope. If you did that, you'd get yet another "fair weather airport" of which the US has so many (SFO, ORD now, BOS, etc). To ensure proper capacity you need spacing. 5000ft of it if possible, but no less than 4300ft (if FMA and PRM installed afaik).

Right on the money. It greatly reduces capacity in bad weather. This is why the runways at DEN are spaced so far apart.
Meanwhile, somewhere 35,000 ft above your head...
 
OPNLguy
Posts: 11191
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 1999 11:29 am

RE: ORD: Runways To Be Renamed This Summer

Wed May 30, 2007 1:24 am

Quoting ANITIX87 (Reply 7):
Also, why put the northern-most runway so far away? Couldn't they put it much closer and still use it for parallel approaches or departures? I mean, SFO's runways are really close and they use them together anyway.

SFO is a perfect example of why you don't want them close together. Sure, they use them both, but only when the weather is good. Toss in anything lower than about a 2,100 ft. cloud ceiling or less than 4 miles of visibility, and they revert to a single runway and big delays ensue. You need 2500 feet between the runway centerlines for parallel ILS approaches (aircraft staggered on approach) and 4300 feet for simultaneous ILS approaches (aircraft wingtip-to-wingtio on approach), and that's why the new runways at ORD have to be that far apart...
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
 
Boeing7E7
Posts: 5512
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: ORD: Runways To Be Renamed This Summer

Wed May 30, 2007 6:40 am

Quoting SailorOrion (Thread starter):
I'm wondering why there are only two months between the two first "renamings", and why the intermediate 10/28 instead of 10L/28R right away.

Allows for flight crew familiarity and it follows the chart revision cycles.

Quoting ANITIX87 (Reply 7):
How did they determine which direction to make the parallen runways. Why not have 14/32 and 15/33 instead, for example. Is 9/27 the most commonly used direction at ORD? Did Midway have anything to do with it? Winds? Space? Etc? I'm just curious, since it seems like 14R/32L is currently the longest runway.

Winds and length have nothing to do with it other than to determine the prefered initial orientation. It's an issue of "wind coverage" and the target is generally in the 90% range. As to heading, a single, double or triple will have the same heading and be designated 9R, 9C,and 9L which would mean the actual heading is "closest or spot" on to a runway heading of 090 (ie your heading is 089 degrees = a runway heading of 9/27. When you go to four or more, you up-tick the number so that you have 9R and 9L and 10R and 10L, or if you have six parallels 9R, 9C, 9L and 10R, 10C and 10L or a combination there of, even if all runways are parallel.
 
FriendlySkies
Posts: 3540
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2004 3:57 pm

RE: ORD: Runways To Be Renamed This Summer

Wed May 30, 2007 8:32 am

Quoting ANITIX87 (Reply 7):
How did they determine which direction to make the parallen runways. Why not have 14/32 and 15/33 instead, for example. Is 9/27 the most commonly used direction at ORD? Did Midway have anything to do with it? Winds? Space? Etc? I'm just curious, since it seems like 14R/32L is currently the longest runway.

Well...I flew into ORD 5 times this spring, and 4/5 times landed on 27L. That extremely unscientific example provides some support that it is the most frequently used direction.

To be honest, almost every time I fly into ORD or even spot near it, 9R or 27L is being used for landings. 14s are used a lot too...

Also, the terminal layout and surrounding area would make it very difficult to have 6 parallel 14/32 runways.
 
BA777ER236
Posts: 170
Joined: Wed Sep 27, 2006 1:18 am

RE: ORD: Runways To Be Renamed This Summer

Wed May 30, 2007 3:48 pm

Quoting ANITIX87 (Reply 7):
How did they determine which direction to make the parallen runways. Why not have 14/32 and 15/33 instead, for example. Is 9/27 the most commonly used direction at ORD? Did Midway have anything to do with it? Winds? Space? Etc? I'm just curious, since it seems like 14R/32L is currently the longest runway.

14R/32L may be the longest piece of concrete, but it is virtually never used as such! When using 32L for departures, then it is only available (without special request i.e. very 'heavy' departure) from intersection T10 or W. This is essentially points N of 27L/09R. When ldg 14R then usually LAHSO (Land & Hold Short Ops) is enforced i.e. vacate before 'W'. In both cases this leaves 27L/09R clear for uninterrupted operations, and effectively makes it the longest available rwy @ ORD.
It is also the closest rwy to the international terminal. All-in-all that makes 27L/09R (soon to be 28/10) the most widely used and important rwy @ ORD.

Any new NW'ly rwy would have to be well to the NW of the terminals, and arranged so that T/O and LDG paths do not interfere with 28/10 (for above reasons). Any new rwy to the E of 14L/32R, would be miles away from any proposed terminal development, and IIRC would be in a fairly built up area towards the city.

Overall, the most effective and prevailing configuration at ORD, in my experience is: LDG - 22R/27L/27R and T/O - 22L,27R,32L (T10), and 32R, and the new rwy 09L/27R would IMHO enhance that configuration, and not impede it.

Cheers
 Smile
Flying would be easy if it wasn't for the ground
 
SailorOrion
Topic Author
Posts: 1959
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2001 5:56 pm

RE: ORD: Runways To Be Renamed This Summer

Wed May 30, 2007 4:53 pm

Quoting BA777ER236 (Reply 15):
Overall, the most effective and prevailing configuration at ORD, in my experience is: LDG - 22R/27L/27R and T/O - 22L,27R,32L (T10), and 32R, and the new rwy 09L/27R would IMHO enhance that configuration, and not impede it.


I'm sorry, but that's not entirely correct, it "only" the most efficient arrival configuration. Most used configuration is Plan X (about 40%), then Plan Weird (about 35%) and then Plan B (15%). The rest are the parallel 27s (used for CAT I) and parallel 14s (used for CAT II/III). Today, parallel 27s are used for all IFR conditions. I'm not sure how often the Modified Plan B is used nowadays; the percentages above are "historic" data.

Plan ; Main Arrival Runways, Overflow Arrival Runways, Main Departure Runways, Overflow Departure Runways, LAHSO options, long runways

X , 4R + 9R, 9L, 32L (T10) + 9L + 4L, 32R, 9R H/S TWY S, 32R + 32L full length (problematic)
Weird, 27L / 27R, 22R, 22L + 32L (T10), 32R, 22R H/S 27R, 32R + 32L full length (not so nice)
B, 14R + 22R, 22L, 27L + 22L, 14L, no LAHSO (afaik), 14L + 14R full length + 27L
B Modified, 14R + 9R, 22R, 14L + 22L, 9L, 14R H/S 9R + 22R H/S 9L, 14L + 14R full length (problematic)
27s, 27L + 27R, none, 32L (T10) + 32R + 22L, none, no LAHSO, 32R + 32L full length (not so nice)

Just to spit in some numbers.
Plan; max AAR, max ADR, max TOTAL (all number simulated)
X, 112, 136, 216
Weird, 118, 112, 213
B, 105, 123, 206
B Mod, 117, 107, 213
27s, 83, 109, 183 (CAT I)

SailorOrion
 
Boeing7E7
Posts: 5512
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: ORD: Runways To Be Renamed This Summer

Wed May 30, 2007 5:11 pm

Quoting FriendlySkies (Reply 14):
Also, the terminal layout and surrounding area would make it very difficult to have 6 parallel 14/32 runways.

Plenty for the 9/27's:

http://egov.cityofchicago.org/city/w...ation+Program&deptMainCategoryOID=
 
bimmerkid19
Posts: 284
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2006 4:43 pm

RE: ORD: Runways To Be Renamed This Summer

Wed May 30, 2007 6:06 pm

Quoting ANITIX87 (Reply 7):
it seems useless to have a runway that far away.

Look at the Polderbaan at AMS , When you land/take off from that runway, you either have a long ways to taxi to the runway or to the terminal. http://www.airliners.net/open.file/0799658/L/
Big version: Width: 580 Height: 580 File size: 46kb


[Edited 2007-05-30 11:09:32]
Last flights: LH 3738 MUC - ZRH , LH 3749 ZRH - MUC . Upcoming: EK 50 MUC - DXB 3-aug. and EK 322 DXB - ICN 7- Aug.
 
SailorOrion
Topic Author
Posts: 1959
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2001 5:56 pm

RE: ORD: Runways To Be Renamed This Summer

Thu May 31, 2007 12:04 am

Quoting BA777ER236 (Reply 15):
14R/32L may be the longest piece of concrete, but it is virtually never used as such!

That much is certain. In the most used configuration, Plan X, getting 32L in full length is nothing short of nasty. First of all, you need to get to the runway which results in a not-so-nice runway crossing at F (for example). Not so nice, because 9R has all those beautiful high-speed taxiways that allows a 2.5nm spacing on 9R finals, so crossing windows are tight, especially for a widebody that needs 13000ft of concrete. Now if there are lots of arrivals (like most of the time  Smile), you have a bunch of arrivals to 9L as well. Now with the 32L departure in place, the approach and tower ATC must make sure that there's an increased gap in the 9R approaches (because you've got to take 300tons of stuff from the 32L threshold to the 32L/9R intersection BEFORE the next arrival is too close) plus synchronize that gap with a gap on the 9L arrivals. Plus you need to check for wake turbulence issues as the 32L departure might be airborne before crossing the 9L centerline.

That's why pilots are "encouraged" to make every effort to find out whether 13000ft are really needed. In Plan X, 32R is a departure runway anyway and 9R can be used for a heavy departure as well. Both are 10000ft in length. Also, 32L from M is 10000ft.

I think the example above shows why ORD badly needs the extension to 9R/27L: It greatly adds to operational flexibility, and one heavy departure to the Pacific Rim won't wreak havoc on overall airport performance.

SailorOrion
 
BA777ER236
Posts: 170
Joined: Wed Sep 27, 2006 1:18 am

RE: ORD: Runways To Be Renamed This Summer

Thu May 31, 2007 12:40 am

Quoting SailorOrion (Reply 16):
I'm sorry, but that's not entirely correct, it "only" the most efficient arrival configuration. Most used configuration is Plan X (about 40%), then Plan Weird (about 35%) and then Plan B (15%). The rest are the parallel 27s (used for CAT I) and parallel 14s (used for CAT II/III). Today, parallel 27s are used for all IFR conditions. I'm not sure how often the Modified Plan B is used nowadays; the percentages above are "historic" data.

OK, I accept your comprehensive figures, I was only going on my own experience of operating in and out over the last 3 yrs.

Quoting SailorOrion (Reply 19):
Also, 32L from M is 10000ft.

And despite the above, you are absolutely right, wherever I said 'W' in my post, I meant 'M'. Must be getting old!

Cheers
 Smile
Flying would be easy if it wasn't for the ground
 
SailorOrion
Topic Author
Posts: 1959
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2001 5:56 pm

RE: ORD: Runways To Be Renamed This Summer

Thu May 31, 2007 12:52 am

Quoting Bimmerkid19 (Reply 18):
Look at the Polderbaan at AMS , When you land/take off from that runway, you either have a long ways to taxi to the runway or to the terminal.

Well, yes. But neither does AMS have triple or even quadruple parallel arrivals, nor does it have nearly as many operations as ORD (950k vs 450k)  Smile

Quoting BA777ER236 (Reply 20):
And despite the above, you are absolutely right, wherever I said 'W' in my post, I meant 'M'.

Hehe, thought so, as I didn't see 'W' intersecting 32L in the first place  Smile

SailorOrion
 
bimmerkid19
Posts: 284
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2006 4:43 pm

RE: ORD: Runways To Be Renamed This Summer

Thu May 31, 2007 4:44 am

Quoting SailorOrion (Reply 21):
nearly as many operations as ORD (950k vs 450k)

oh really, i thought there would be tons more people flying to AMS to walk the streets in Amsterdam and "enjoy" life and feel "good" after having a few "special brownies" or something of the sort ..  Wink
Last flights: LH 3738 MUC - ZRH , LH 3749 ZRH - MUC . Upcoming: EK 50 MUC - DXB 3-aug. and EK 322 DXB - ICN 7- Aug.
 
apodino
Posts: 3030
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 2:11 am

RE: ORD: Runways To Be Renamed This Summer

Thu May 31, 2007 6:13 am

Quoting SailorOrion (Reply 16):
Just to spit in some numbers.
Plan; max AAR, max ADR, max TOTAL (all number simulated)
X, 112, 136, 216
Weird, 118, 112, 213
B, 105, 123, 206
B Mod, 117, 107, 213
27s, 83, 109, 183 (CAT I)

Those may be simulated, but they are also highly optimistic. Here is what the actually AARs are that ATC uses.

X: 100
Weird: 96 with LAHSO, 80 without LAHSO
B: 90
B Mod: 92 I think
27's: 80
IFR: 60
 
SailorOrion
Topic Author
Posts: 1959
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2001 5:56 pm

RE: ORD: Runways To Be Renamed This Summer

Thu May 31, 2007 3:37 pm

Quoting Apodino (Reply 23):
Those may be simulated, but they are also highly optimistic. Here is what the actually AARs are that ATC uses.

Of course the real world numbers are slightly different. First of all, I'm not sure whether the "actual" AAR have some operations to spare for delays, then there's always the question of aircraft mix and finally, the very high AARs given always have a negative effect on the departure rates.

SailorOrion
 
SailorOrion
Topic Author
Posts: 1959
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2001 5:56 pm

RE: ORD: Runways To Be Renamed This Summer

Thu May 31, 2007 4:19 pm

There's something else I've noticed:
There were talks about "relocating" the current 9L/27R a couple of feet to the north in order to be able to construct an additional ADG V taxiway just north of the terminal core. What's the status on this plan?

Also, it's quite interesting to see that many taxiways are not ADG VI or ADV V compatible (especially in IFR scenarios). What's the current share of those aircraft in overall ORD operations?

Also, only the two "Center" runways seem to be A380 compatible. What about an A380 that needs the full 13000ft then?

SailorOrion

[Edited 2007-05-31 09:26:59]
 
WestJetYQQ
Posts: 2763
Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2007 1:31 pm

RE: ORD: Runways To Be Renamed This Summer

Thu May 31, 2007 4:31 pm

Ahhh, Interesting news.

The main runway here at YQQ was renamed last year. It was 11/29 and is now 12/30. I think things like this effect flight simmers more than anyone.  Wink
Will You Try to Change Things? Use the Power that you have, the Power of a Million new Ideas.
 
A342
Posts: 4017
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 11:05 pm

RE: ORD: Runways To Be Renamed This Summer

Fri Jun 01, 2007 5:32 am

A little bit off-topic, but looking at the current airport diagram, where's runway 18/36? The great circle mapper still lists ORD as having seven runways, but I can count only six! Also, maybe a year ago, a German aviation magazine had a report about ORD, and 18/36 still existed.
Is it just me, or has it been "downgraded" to taxiway GG?
Exceptions confirm the rule.
 
airportplan
Posts: 319
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2004 12:36 am

RE: ORD: Runways To Be Renamed This Summer

Fri Jun 01, 2007 6:22 am

Quoting A342 (Reply 27):
A little bit off-topic, but looking at the current airport diagram, where's runway 18/36? The great circle mapper still lists ORD as having seven runways, but I can count only six! Also, maybe a year ago, a German aviation magazine had a report about ORD, and 18/36 still existed.
Is it just me, or has it been "downgraded" to taxiway GG?

18/36 was downgraded to a taxiway in the late 1990s.
 
A342
Posts: 4017
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 11:05 pm

RE: ORD: Runways To Be Renamed This Summer

Fri Jun 01, 2007 6:37 am

Quoting AirportPlan (Reply 28):
18/36 was downgraded to a taxiway in the late 1990s.

Already in the 1990s? Ok, thanks.
Exceptions confirm the rule.
 
SailorOrion
Topic Author
Posts: 1959
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2001 5:56 pm

RE: ORD: Runways To Be Renamed This Summer

Fri Jun 01, 2007 4:18 pm

18/36 is "temporarily" downgraded to GG. It will be decomissioned as soon as 10C/28C is put into service (2010 or the like).

SailorOrion