Pre-covid, several airlines made grandiose plans to expand A380 flights at airports I thought were not well-suited to handle that behemoth. For instance, the longest runway at BOS is a mere 10,006’ (and only 150’ wide) yet BA, EK and LH all had or planned to have A380 service there. I thought A380 demanded at least 10,500 (at 70 percent load). Are there restrictions on load factors at BOS for this aircraft? What airports are pushing the minimum limits for use of the A380? Thanks!

IIRC the A380 has extremely good field performance. It can use 7/25 at SYD going to California. The massive wing helps with really low takeoff speeds. 10000ft should be enough unless its extremely hot or high altitude.

Exactly, I was not aware A388 has any need for a long runway. It has 4 strong engines and a huge wing. BOS restriction is very unlikely.

But it's a perfectly good thread topic. The whole question of A388 field performance limits is a good one, perhaps JNB flights will shed light on it.

Sdmccray1984 wrote:

Pre-covid, several airlines made grandiose plans to expand A380 flights at airports I thought were not well-suited to handle that behemoth. For instance, the longest runway at BOS is a mere 10,006’ (and only 150’ wide) yet BA, EK and LH all had or planned to have A380 service there. I thought A380 demanded at least 10,500 (at 70 percent load). Are there restrictions on load factors at BOS for this aircraft? What airports are pushing the minimum limits for use of the A380? Thanks!

Runway length will pretty much never be a problem as long as it is 150" wide. At sea level 10k feet will essentially always be enough to depart with MTOW@highest weight variant even with the least powerful engine versions.
The problem comes with clearances between runways/taxiways, taxiway/taxiway, space in parking positions, ability to handle having so many passengers dumped into the terminal.

MAN, DUS and probably many other airports with 10k feet or shorter runways see, or saw, regular A380 service. Not sure if they used DUS´s 05L/23R runway, i would assume they did at some point, and that is not even 9k feet.
Any runway that sees a 77W depart for long haul is long enough for the A380, and them some. It may very well be that only the A359 offers better field performance. Keep in mind that enormous wing was designed or a 650t cargo aircraft/stretch version.

best regards
Thomas

tommy1808 wrote:

Sdmccray1984 wrote:

Pre-covid, several airlines made grandiose plans to expand A380 flights at airports I thought were not well-suited to handle that behemoth. For instance, the longest runway at BOS is a mere 10,006’ (and only 150’ wide) yet BA, EK and LH all had or planned to have A380 service there. I thought A380 demanded at least 10,500 (at 70 percent load). Are there restrictions on load factors at BOS for this aircraft? What airports are pushing the minimum limits for use of the A380? Thanks!

Runway length will pretty much never be a problem as long as it is 150" wide. At sea level 10k feet will essentially always be enough to depart with MTOW@highest weight variant even with the least powerful engine versions.
The problem comes with clearances between runways/taxiways, taxiway/taxiway, space in parking positions, ability to handle having so many passengers dumped into the terminal.

MAN, DUS and probably many other airports with 10k feet or shorter runways see, or saw, regular A380 service. Not sure if they used DUS´s 05L/23R runway, i would assume they did at some point, and that is not even 9k feet.
Any runway that sees a 77W depart for long haul is long enough for the A380, and them some. It may very well be that only the A359 offers better field performance. Keep in mind that enormous wing was designed or a 650t cargo aircraft/stretch version.

best regards
Thomas

I would agree with that. I would go as far as saying only the 359 and 35K(I’ve heard it’s sneaky good and only marginally “worse” off the field than the 359) have better field performance.
In terms of hot and high, well the quads will always Have the advantage, I actually haven’t heard much about the A380 at JNB or MEX, I do know EK and QR have minimal issues at DXB And DOH in the heat because it’s never tyre speed limited.

According to the Emirates press release (https://www.emirates.com/media-centre/e ... to-glasgow), EK operated GLA-DXB-GLA with an A380 daily from 4/16/2019 to 9/30/2019. The runway in GLA is only 8,743ft/2,665m and therefore quite significantly shorter than Boston's. An important consideration, though, is how much of that runway is used given it is (very rough estimate!) about half as far as BOS is from DXB. I have no idea if that's the shortest, but it's gotta be up there. Neither BOS nor GLA is hot/heavy and in fact are rather "cool" temperature-wise.

EK almost certainly has the distinction given the profile of airports it serves with the super jumbo, rather than just SYD, SIN, LAX, FRA, LHR, etc., stalwarts for many carriers. Since it's not BOS, I'd be surprised if another carrier operated this service.

Looking at the A380 technical data doc that I found here:

https://www.airbus.com/content/dam/corp ... C-A380.pdf

If I read it correctly, it looks like the max weight variant has an MTOW of 575000 kg (1,267,658 lbs).

Looking at the takeoff performance charts, at sea level and standard conditions, it looks like it can lift right around MTOW off of a 3000 meter (9840 ft) runway.

With that said:
1.) Obviously these are generic charts and do not refer to specific airline variants.
2.) I don't read these charts much, so I could be reading something incorrectly.

Also of note, it states that the max approach speed at max landing weight is 138 kts, which seems quite slow!

NCE has (or had) daily EK A380 service. Its longest runway, 04R/22L is 2 960 m (9 711 ft). Here's a video of one take-off.

Sometimes 04L/22R (2 570 m/8 432 ft) is used: Video.

Sdmccray1984 wrote:

Pre-covid, several airlines made grandiose plans to expand A380 flights at airports I thought were not well-suited to handle that behemoth. For instance, the longest runway at BOS is a mere 10,006’ (and only 150’ wide) yet BA, EK and LH all had or planned to have A380 service there. I thought A380 demanded at least 10,500 (at 70 percent load). Are there restrictions on load factors at BOS for this aircraft? What airports are pushing the minimum limits for use of the A380? Thanks!

Unfortunately, your premises are incorrect. "Only" 150' wide -- that is standard width for nearly all commercial runways throughout the world. There are a few that are 200' wide, but you can't say 150' and "only" in the same sentence. The issue you have is with taxiway clearance and maneuvering around terminals and such, not the runway width.

Likewise, a "mere" 10,006 ft is not short and as others have stated, can handle nearly any plane at MTOW and sea level (assuming not terribly hot) as long as there are no climb restrictions and such for an engine out.

Just a couple very rudimentary examples:

1. I flew IAH-NRT on the 777-200ER and we took off on runway 15R (10,000 ft). We were airborne within 7,000 ft -- We likely used a derated take off.
2. We flew LAX-ICN on a 747-400 and took off from runway 24L (10,885 ft). We were airborne again within 7,000 -- Again, very likely with a derated take off.

10,000 is quite long, especially from roughly sea level and temperatures that aren't extremely hot.

Cheers

1) The A380's takeoff performance has never been a particular issue. It has plenty of power and wing.

2) Have you taken a look at BOS? It is literally in Boston Harbor, so definitely sea level. Even when Boston feels miserable in the summer, thanks to humidity, it isn't particularly hot there. For an A380 to go a mere 6-9 hours, the runway length there is zero issue.

At what weight? At what density altitude?

vikkyvik wrote:

Looking at the A380 technical data doc that I found here:

https://www.airbus.com/content/dam/corp ... C-A380.pdf

If I read it correctly, it looks like the max weight variant has an MTOW of 575000 kg (1,267,658 lbs).

Looking at the takeoff performance charts, at sea level and standard conditions, it looks like it can lift right around MTOW off of a 3000 meter (9840 ft) runway.
(...)
Also of note, it states that the max approach speed at max landing weight is 138 kts, which seems quite slow!

Dear vikkyvik,

Your data seems very plausible to me. I have read and heard similar figures.

Hendric

GLA has had A380 service off 8,743/2,665. I'm guessing that LGW has gotten service with the A380 when using 08L/26R at 8,415/2,565. I'm pretty sure A380s have departed 24R at LAX, which is under 9000'.

N1120A wrote:

I'm pretty sure A380s have departed 24R at LAX . . .

N1120A, why do you think this?

The standard configuration for the north complex at LAX is Runway 24R for arrivals and Runway 24L for departures.

The standard for the south complex is Runway 25L for arrivals and Runway 25R for departures.

I operate in and out of LAX regularly and cannot remember a time when it was different.

Even during rare periods when runway 24L was closed, ground control directed us to Runway 25R for departure rather than use 24R.

The consistency is by design to enhance safety.

So, except for unusual circumstances, or unless you've seen it happen, it is not particularly likely A380s have departed 24R at LAX.

e38

I believe DUB's longest runway is only 8,652 ft and routinely has a DUB-LAX flight, albeit with an A330-200. EK flies a 77W from DUB-DXB. A 10,000 ft runway at sea level is quite long.

ElroyJetson wrote:

I believe DUB's longest runway is only 9,000 ft and routinely has a DUB-LAX flight, albeit with an A330-200. A 10,000 ft runway at sea level is quote long.

For values of long. We always seem to have to use Flaps 3 on that one.

Starlionblue wrote:

ElroyJetson wrote:

I believe DUB's longest runway is only 9,000 ft and routinely has a DUB-LAX flight, albeit with an A330-200. A 10,000 ft runway at sea level is quote long.

For values of long. We always seem to have to use Flaps 3 on that one.

I edited my post to be as precise as possible. The DUB runway per wiki is actually only 8652. I have always wondered about Aer Lingus flights to the west coast taking off on a runway of that length.

ElroyJetson wrote:

Starlionblue wrote:

ElroyJetson wrote:

I believe DUB's longest runway is only 9,000 ft and routinely has a DUB-LAX flight, albeit with an A330-200. A 10,000 ft runway at sea level is quote long.

For values of long. We always seem to have to use Flaps 3 on that one.

I edited my post to be as precise as possible. The DUB runway per wiki is actually only 8652. I have always wondered about Aer Lingus flights to the west coast taking off on a runway of that length.

It isn't really an issue payload-wise I would say. You might need more flap than usual, but there is no pointy stuff around, meaning climbout is not an issue. More flap means a shorter take-off run, but worse initial climb performance.

DUB also had regular service to HKG, which is about 800nm further than LAX.

Starlionblue wrote:

ElroyJetson wrote:

Starlionblue wrote:

For values of long. We always seem to have to use Flaps 3 on that one.

I edited my post to be as precise as possible. The DUB runway per wiki is actually only 8652. I have always wondered about Aer Lingus flights to the west coast taking off on a runway of that length.

It isn't really an issue payload-wise I would say. You might need more flap than usual, but there is no pointy stuff around, meaning climbout is not an issue. More flap means a shorter take-off run, but worse initial climb performance.

DUB also had regular service to HKG, which is about 800nm further than LAX.

I remember. I believe CX flew the route for a period of time pre-Covid. Might not see that one again for a long, long time.

ro1960 wrote:

NCE has (or had) daily EK A380 service. Its longest runway, 04R/22L is 2 960 m (9 711 ft). Here's a video of one take-off.

Sometimes 04L/22R (2 570 m/8 432 ft) is used: Video.

OT, but Concorde visited NCE and frequently used 4R.

ElroyJetson wrote:

Starlionblue wrote:

ElroyJetson wrote:

I believe DUB's longest runway is only 9,000 ft and routinely has a DUB-LAX flight, albeit with an A330-200. A 10,000 ft runway at sea level is quote long.

For values of long. We always seem to have to use Flaps 3 on that one.

I edited my post to be as precise as possible. The DUB runway per wiki is actually only 8652. I have always wondered about Aer Lingus flights to the west coast taking off on a runway of that length.

I think the performance of wide bodies is often underestimated. An A330 is even able to takeoff from DUB Runway 16 which is only 2070m and carry enough fuel to perform a transatlantic flight. At around 12:07 in this video you can see an A330 taking off from RWY16 for a flight to Boston: https://youtu.be/EJTjwW5ZYas?t=727
Regarding A380s, due to the massive wing the often use lower speeds than A320s and have a impressive performance.

e38 wrote:

N1120A wrote:

I'm pretty sure A380s have departed 24R at LAX . . .

N1120A, why do you think this?

The standard configuration for the north complex at LAX is Runway 24R for arrivals and Runway 24L for departures.

The standard for the south complex is Runway 25L for arrivals and Runway 25R for departures.

I operate in and out of LAX regularly and cannot remember a time when it was different.

Even during rare periods when runway 24L was closed, ground control directed us to Runway 25R for departure rather than use 24R.

The consistency is by design to enhance safety.

So, except for unusual circumstances, or unless you've seen it happen, it is not particularly likely A380s have departed 24R at LAX.

e38

I've departed off 25L twice in my own planes, let alone times on commercial planes. I'm well aware of how LAX flow works and they use all 4 runways for departures and arrivals at times. I've departed 24R on a Swissair MD11 and other aircraft.

DylanHarvey wrote:

IIRC the A380 has extremely good field performance. It can use 7/25 at SYD going to California. The massive wing helps with really low takeoff speeds. 10000ft should be enough unless its extremely hot or high altitude.

Takeoff: 3,000 m (9,800 ft) at MTOW, SL, ISA
src: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_A3 ... nt_engines)

Sdmccray1984 wrote:

I thought A380 demanded at least 10,500 (at 70 percent load).

We recently had 9V-SKQ leave ASP for SYD for a gear swing. She comfortably took off from the 7,999 ft runway and departed with 100 tonnes of fuel aboard due to flying gear down all the way to SYD. This would have put take off weight around 377 tonnes which is around 65% MTOW (34% load ?).

Regards, JetMech

While not usual, an AF A380 at JFK took-off of 4R, which is 8,400ft, a few years ago. From what I heard, the flight missed its departure slot and was sent out to Taxiway Z, at the end of the runway, for some reason. Rather than taxi all the way to 4L, which was the departure runway, ATC asked if they'd be able to pull off a 4R departure as there was going to be a break in arrivals. The pilot said they could and it departed from there. Very, very uncommon, but it's happened before.

Also, 22R's LDA is about 7,800ft and A380s do land on there fairly often.

OR Tambo International Airport is a medium sized airport in South Africa, serving the region of Johannesburg, Kempton Park, Ekurhuleni, Gauteng. The longest runway is 14.495 feet or 4.418 meters (guess its needed on hot days at 5000 feet )
see above:
Upington Airport (IATA: UTN, ICAO: FAUP) is an airport located in Upington, Northern Cape, South Africa. At 4900 metres, runway 17/35 is one of the longest runways in the world ( this airport is not high , but it gets very hot, like in desert hot)

There were plenty of daily A380 flights. ORTambo has has 8 a380 capable airbridges, although only 3 seemed to be in use at a time on the NW side

AirBoat wrote:

There were plenty of daily A380 flights. ORTambo has has 8 a380 capable airbridges, although only 3 seemed to be in use at a time on the NW side

JNB only has 4 A380 capable airbridges the rest are only B747 capable.