Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
bendewire
Topic Author
Posts: 125
Joined: Tue May 10, 2011 10:26 pm

Boeing 747-400 Runway lengths

Sun Dec 06, 2020 10:09 am

A second BA 747 arrived at Dunsfold aerodrome (EGTD) yesterday and I was wondering is this the shortest paved runway a 744 has ever landed on?
 
Toinou
Posts: 330
Joined: Sun Apr 14, 2019 8:21 am

Re: Boeing 747-400 Runway lengths

Sun Dec 06, 2020 11:13 am

There are some proposals here: viewtopic.php?t=248233
It seems it's around 5'500 ft.

I should add that an SR 747 -200 I guess) landed once in Sion, which is 6'500 ft long but with a very tricky approach between mountains, Probably not the shortest but for sure a spectacular one.
 
User avatar
flyingclrs727
Posts: 2749
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 7:44 am

Re: Boeing 747-400 Runway lengths

Sun Dec 06, 2020 11:29 am

Of course it landed with minimal fuel, no cargo, and no passengers. It also won't have to ever take off from there either.
 
bendewire
Topic Author
Posts: 125
Joined: Tue May 10, 2011 10:26 pm

Re: Boeing 747-400 Runway lengths

Sun Dec 06, 2020 11:38 am

You miss the point, configuration is unimportant just read the question
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 15864
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Boeing 747-400 Runway lengths

Sun Dec 06, 2020 12:07 pm

Some short runways 747s have landed on

VOTX - Tambaram Air Base 4,763 ft
KSHN - Sanderson Field 5005 ft
KRNT - Renton 5,280 ft
FAGM - Rand Airport: 5,400 ft
YLRE - Longreach 6,352 ft
“Don't be a show-off. Never be too proud to turn back. There are old pilots and bold pilots, but no old, bold pilots.” E. Hamilton Lee, 1949
 
User avatar
CPS001
Posts: 268
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2018 6:05 pm

Re: Boeing 747-400 Runway lengths

Sun Dec 06, 2020 12:37 pm

zeke wrote:
VOTX - Tambaram Air Base 4,763 ft


Not only did it land here with a full load of pax and cargo, it took off successfully too (albeit stripped of nonessentials).
 
fcogafa
Posts: 1311
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:37 pm

Re: Boeing 747-400 Runway lengths

Sun Dec 06, 2020 12:42 pm

Plus the Dreamlifter that landed at Jabara which is 6100ft
 
VMCA787
Posts: 191
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2020 9:31 pm

Re: Boeing 747-400 Runway lengths

Sun Dec 06, 2020 12:50 pm

I have taken a few 747s into KGWD, Greenwood MS, which is about 100NM south of Memphis. Not a problem getting in there. However, this is when GECAS Asset Management first opened up and the taxiways were extremely narrow. I would assume that has been resolved by now.
Fly fast, live slow!
 
citationjet
Posts: 2573
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2003 2:26 am

Re: Boeing 747-400 Runway lengths

Sun Dec 06, 2020 1:31 pm

In the early 1970s I was onboard Braniff's 747-127 N601BN that operated from a 7300 ft runway in Wichita, KS on a charter flight. The plane was ferried to ICT, landing with about 30 passengers, but departed with every seat full. It made a fuel stop in LAX on the way to HNL. This was the first 747 to land at ICT.
Boeing Flown: 701,702,703;717;720;721,722;731,732,733,734,735,73G,738,739;741,742,743,744,747SP;752,753;762,763;772,773,788.
 
User avatar
PatrickZ80
Posts: 4486
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:33 am

Re: Boeing 747-400 Runway lengths

Sun Dec 06, 2020 2:12 pm

bendewire wrote:
You miss the point, configuration is unimportant just read the question


It certainly is important as the configuration pretty much determines how much runway length is needed. They could only land on these airfields because they were empty with only a bare minimum of fuel on board. Had they been loaded heavier, they would have overshot the runway for sure.

Over the last few decades, from time to time KLM 747s diverted to Rotterdam airport when they couldn't land at Amsterdam. Now Rotterdam certainly won't qualify for the shortest runway a 747 has ever landed on, but it's not exactly long either (2200 meters / 7218 feet). Of course after their flight they didn't have much fuel left on board anymore, but other than that they did have a full load. They got completely unloaded at Rotterdam and, after making sure Amsterdam was open to receive them, they took off. Even while empty with a minimum of fuel on board, they needed the full runway length for that. If they would have been loaded heavier (more payload and/or fuel on board), the runway would have been too short.
 
btfarrwm
Posts: 122
Joined: Fri May 06, 2011 5:50 am

Re: Boeing 747-400 Runway lengths

Sun Dec 06, 2020 2:28 pm

Evergreen used McMinville Airport (KMMV) with a runway of 5420 ft to land the 747s that have on display at (or on top of) their museum. I’ve linked to a YouTube video of one of the landings below.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=tbYi8QnEU7I
 
cschleic
Posts: 1863
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2002 10:47 pm

Re: Boeing 747-400 Runway lengths

Sun Dec 06, 2020 3:07 pm

btfarrwm wrote:
Evergreen used McMinville Airport (KMMV) with a runway of 5420 ft to land the 747s that have on display at (or on top of) their museum. I’ve linked to a YouTube video of one of the landings below.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=tbYi8QnEU7I


And based on the video, looks like it touched down nearly 1/3rd of the way down the runway. Thanks for the link. Nice crowd watching it, too.

Wow, I was just thinking about this and then saw your post. I happened to be flying around near MMV when one of the two 747s landed there and watched it from the air. Quite a sight.
 
LTEN11
Posts: 145
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2020 10:09 am

Re: Boeing 747-400 Runway lengths

Mon Dec 07, 2020 1:35 am

zeke wrote:
Some short runways 747s have landed on

VOTX - Tambaram Air Base 4,763 ft
KSHN - Sanderson Field 5005 ft
KRNT - Renton 5,280 ft
FAGM - Rand Airport: 5,400 ft
YLRE - Longreach 6,352 ft


YSHL - Shellharbour/Woollongong 5968 ft
 
jetwet1
Posts: 3309
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2007 4:42 am

Re: Boeing 747-400 Runway lengths

Tue Dec 08, 2020 1:32 am

Not a 744 but a 74L, SAA put a 74L into Rand airport for it's museum, runway is 4898ft
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 7704
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: Boeing 747-400 Runway lengths

Tue Dec 08, 2020 9:06 am

jetwet1 wrote:
Not a 744 but a 74L, SAA put a 74L into Rand airport for it's museum, runway is 4898ft


They have a 742 as well don't they?

QF brought the 74L initially to serve WLG, rwy around 6350ft, served the 3-3.5hr flight to SYD/MEL/BNE for a few years 1981-85ish.

A few full size 747s have landed there for display, most famous was a UA 741 diversion from AKL when due fog, OHA wasn't avalible and CHC I believe had fog aswell or possibly low fuel meant they chose WLG, pretty sure they removed some freight and pax to depart back to AKL.
 
andz
Posts: 7772
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 7:49 pm

Re: Boeing 747-400 Runway lengths

Wed Dec 16, 2020 12:16 pm

jetwet1 wrote:
Not a 744 but a 74L, SAA put a 74L into Rand airport for it's museum, runway is 4898ft

According to the aerodrome chart, runway 11 is 1,579m (5,180ft) x 15m wide.

Notwithstanding, both the SP and the -200 landing on 11 stopped before the intersection with 35 then turned onto 35 to taxi to the terminal. According to my estimates from the chart that is a land and stop distance of less than 3,500ft.

There are a lot of pictures out there of the landings with the wing gear barely on the paved runway surface, it is so narrow.
After Monday and Tuesday even the calendar says WTF...
 
AndrewJM70
Posts: 59
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2016 1:08 pm

Re: Boeing 747-400 Runway lengths

Sat Jan 02, 2021 12:41 am

Empty 747s have landed at a variety of short runways over the years. Where it is the last flight considerations such as brake temperature are unimportant. An empty 747 can be stopped in around 3000ft if brakes are set to Max, although you would never do this with passengers on board.

Regular line flights onto short runways are more interesting in my opinion. 747s Often landed onto Runway 27 at Boston which, at 7000ft, was one of the shortest to host the type in normal ops. As the approach was obstruction-free being over water, the opposite end, 09, could also accommodate 747 take-offs to destinations such as London and Paris with a decent load.
 
Some1Somewhere
Posts: 61
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2015 2:22 pm

Re: Boeing 747-400 Runway lengths

Sat Jan 02, 2021 6:48 am

747SPs into Wellington were a regular occurrence, and there was a 747-200 that diverted there in 1991 when the runway was 5900ft: https://web.archive.org/web/20150608075 ... 02732.html
 
N47
Posts: 97
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2017 7:38 pm

Re: Boeing 747-400 Runway lengths

Sun Jan 03, 2021 7:38 pm

AndrewJM70 wrote:
Empty 747s have landed at a variety of short runways over the years. Where it is the last flight considerations such as brake temperature are unimportant. An empty 747 can be stopped in around 3000ft if brakes are set to Max, although you would never do this with passengers on board.

Regular line flights onto short runways are more interesting in my opinion. 747s Often landed onto Runway 27 at Boston which, at 7000ft, was one of the shortest to host the type in normal ops. As the approach was obstruction-free being over water, the opposite end, 09, could also accommodate 747 take-offs to destinations such as London and Paris with a decent load.


I once flew (April 2013) on a Lufthansa 747 that landed on Newark’s RWY 29 (6726 ft.) It was one of my most memorable approaches/landings as a passanger. It sure felt like brakes were max but it could have been some of the higher settings.
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 20601
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

Re: Boeing 747-400 Runway lengths

Sun Jan 03, 2021 11:42 pm

N47 wrote:
AndrewJM70 wrote:
Empty 747s have landed at a variety of short runways over the years. Where it is the last flight considerations such as brake temperature are unimportant. An empty 747 can be stopped in around 3000ft if brakes are set to Max, although you would never do this with passengers on board.

Regular line flights onto short runways are more interesting in my opinion. 747s Often landed onto Runway 27 at Boston which, at 7000ft, was one of the shortest to host the type in normal ops. As the approach was obstruction-free being over water, the opposite end, 09, could also accommodate 747 take-offs to destinations such as London and Paris with a decent load.


I once flew (April 2013) on a Lufthansa 747 that landed on Newark’s RWY 29 (6726 ft.) It was one of my most memorable approaches/landings as a passanger. It sure felt like brakes were max but it could have been some of the higher settings.


If the brake pedals were really pressed down to the floor, your face would have smashed into the seat in front of you. :) Maximum braking is violent.

Bear in mind there's a 1.67 safety factor even on a dry runway. So your aircraft could have stopped in about 60% of the runway distance with positive but still normal range braking.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
ACMIdriver
Posts: 13
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2019 4:19 pm

Re: Boeing 747-400 Runway lengths

Mon Jan 04, 2021 1:18 pm

Just for fun I ran the calculations on the Boeing EFB for a CF6 747-400 into London City at 240 tons (not far under max landing weight)

For a standard ISA day/nil wind with maximum manual braking on runway 09 gives a stop distance of 1279M with 1319M available.

Bear in mind this includes no credit for use of reverse thrust and additional safety factors should give you an idea of how powerful these brakes are when used in anger.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 15864
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Boeing 747-400 Runway lengths

Mon Jan 04, 2021 2:59 pm

ACMIdriver wrote:
Just for fun I ran the calculations on the Boeing EFB for a CF6 747-400 into London City at 240 tons (not far under max landing weight)

For a standard ISA day/nil wind with maximum manual braking on runway 09 gives a stop distance of 1279M with 1319M available.

Bear in mind this includes no credit for use of reverse thrust and additional safety factors should give you an idea of how powerful these brakes are when used in anger.


The only small issue with LCY is you would never be able to fly the 5.5 degree approach at that weight.
“Don't be a show-off. Never be too proud to turn back. There are old pilots and bold pilots, but no old, bold pilots.” E. Hamilton Lee, 1949
 
ACMIdriver
Posts: 13
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2019 4:19 pm

Re: Boeing 747-400 Runway lengths

Mon Jan 04, 2021 4:26 pm

zeke wrote:
ACMIdriver wrote:
Just for fun I ran the calculations on the Boeing EFB for a CF6 747-400 into London City at 240 tons (not far under max landing weight)

For a standard ISA day/nil wind with maximum manual braking on runway 09 gives a stop distance of 1279M with 1319M available.

Bear in mind this includes no credit for use of reverse thrust and additional safety factors should give you an idea of how powerful these brakes are when used in anger.


The only small issue with LCY is you would never be able to fly the 5.5 degree approach at that weight.


Sure but you can do a perfectly fine visual approach in good weather, makes for a fun little exercise if you have spare time left over at the end of your OPC.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 15864
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Boeing 747-400 Runway lengths

Mon Jan 04, 2021 4:59 pm

ACMIdriver wrote:
Sure but you can do a perfectly fine visual approach in good weather, makes for a fun little exercise if you have spare time left over at the end of your OPC.


The visual approach is also 5.5 degrees (Jepp chart 49-10), and to land there you need to have performance data for 5.5 degree approaches which the 747 does not have.
“Don't be a show-off. Never be too proud to turn back. There are old pilots and bold pilots, but no old, bold pilots.” E. Hamilton Lee, 1949
 
ACMIdriver
Posts: 13
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2019 4:19 pm

Re: Boeing 747-400 Runway lengths

Mon Jan 04, 2021 5:23 pm

zeke wrote:
ACMIdriver wrote:
Sure but you can do a perfectly fine visual approach in good weather, makes for a fun little exercise if you have spare time left over at the end of your OPC.


The visual approach is also 5.5 degrees (Jepp chart 49-10), and to land there you need to have performance data for 5.5 degree approaches which the 747 does not have.


I was referring to simply a raw handling exercise, i.e point the nose where you want to go and fly to the runway. Ok fair enough not a visual approach in the strict sense of a published procedure. I am just trying to point out you could land and stop there if you really, really needed to in extremis.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 15864
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Boeing 747-400 Runway lengths

Mon Jan 04, 2021 5:41 pm

ACMIdriver wrote:
I was referring to simply a raw handling exercise, i.e point the nose where you want to go and fly to the runway. Ok fair enough not a visual approach in the strict sense of a published procedure. I am just trying to point out you could land and stop there if you really, really needed to in extremis.


There are thousands of airports around the world one could choose to do that exercise where it would be permitted in the real world.
“Don't be a show-off. Never be too proud to turn back. There are old pilots and bold pilots, but no old, bold pilots.” E. Hamilton Lee, 1949
 
LTEN11
Posts: 145
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2020 10:09 am

Re: Boeing 747-400 Runway lengths

Mon Jan 04, 2021 9:21 pm

zeke wrote:
ACMIdriver wrote:
I was referring to simply a raw handling exercise, i.e point the nose where you want to go and fly to the runway. Ok fair enough not a visual approach in the strict sense of a published procedure. I am just trying to point out you could land and stop there if you really, really needed to in extremis.


There are thousands of airports around the world one could choose to do that exercise where it would be permitted in the real world.


Must you always be so pedantic ?

I'm pretty sure that everyone realises that you're not going to land a 747 at LCY, hell, you'd probably destroy the runway in the process. This was meant to be a "fun" example of what you could possibly do.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 15864
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Boeing 747-400 Runway lengths

Tue Jan 05, 2021 3:40 am

LTEN11 wrote:
Must you always be so pedantic ?

I'm pretty sure that everyone realises that you're not going to land a 747 at LCY, hell, you'd probably destroy the runway in the process. This was meant to be a "fun" example of what you could possibly do.


If the approach was flown as published, it would destroy the aircraft during the landing, the approach would require a rate of descent between 1500-2000 fpm in a 747, speed would not be stable, landing distance insufficient. What is being described is not flying the approach as published, it is illegal. OPT does not take into account the obstacles around LCY when performing visual circuits, the earlier claim regarding the LPA at LCY is not true.

We don’t land off an approach in a simulator when the required references at not there at the minima, we don’t continue a takeoff following an engine failure below V1, we do t go around deliberately crashing the simulator, and should not do be doing visual circuits where they are prohibited due to the proximity of the buildings and other obstacles. It is negative training.

Visual circuits with maximum baking effort could be practiced at thousands of different runways where such an approach is permitted in the real world. I would have no problem at all if visual circuits were practiced with maximum braking effort if they simply stated that landing was performed to achieve an exit of the same runway length as LCY. I agree that a landing could be performed with a short landing roll, my disagreement is the elements of the procedure prior to the landing which would make it illegal.
“Don't be a show-off. Never be too proud to turn back. There are old pilots and bold pilots, but no old, bold pilots.” E. Hamilton Lee, 1949
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 20601
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

Re: Boeing 747-400 Runway lengths

Tue Jan 05, 2021 4:01 am

LTEN11 wrote:
zeke wrote:
ACMIdriver wrote:
I was referring to simply a raw handling exercise, i.e point the nose where you want to go and fly to the runway. Ok fair enough not a visual approach in the strict sense of a published procedure. I am just trying to point out you could land and stop there if you really, really needed to in extremis.


There are thousands of airports around the world one could choose to do that exercise where it would be permitted in the real world.


Must you always be so pedantic ?

I'm pretty sure that everyone realises that you're not going to land a 747 at LCY, hell, you'd probably destroy the runway in the process. This was meant to be a "fun" example of what you could possibly do.


Being pedantic (I would call it "rather strictly beholden to reality") like that is in the nature of the profession. And this is tech_ops. ;)

"Negative training", e.g. planning or trying an approach which can't possibly have a good outcome, is very much discouraged. It opens up potential rabbitholes of bad decision possibilities in a crisis.

In context, we aren't allowed to put the (simulated) aircraft in an unusual attitude during upset recovery training anymore. This must be done by the sim instructor, who will then hand over for the recovery. Because if we were allowed to do it, it would be negative training; teaching us to do things we should never think about doing.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
AvgWhiteGuy
Posts: 28
Joined: Tue Jun 25, 2019 2:44 pm

Re: Boeing 747-400 Runway lengths

Tue Jan 05, 2021 4:47 am

So you can't step outside of that mindset for a quick, "what if" scenario? Negative training?? Maybe you are too close to the edge to entertain such scenarios before acting them out, but most of us airline pilots and tech ops members are sane enough that we can fantasize once in a while without there being any jeopardy of actually carrying through with it. How stodgy can you get?

The OP asked a very simple, one answer question that still, to my knowledge, hasn't been definitively answered yet.
 
LTEN11
Posts: 145
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2020 10:09 am

Re: Boeing 747-400 Runway lengths

Tue Jan 05, 2021 7:13 am

AvgWhiteGuy wrote:
So you can't step outside of that mindset for a quick, "what if" scenario? Negative training?? Maybe you are too close to the edge to entertain such scenarios before acting them out, but most of us airline pilots and tech ops members are sane enough that we can fantasize once in a while without there being any jeopardy of actually carrying through with it. How stodgy can you get?

The OP asked a very simple, one answer question that still, to my knowledge, hasn't been definitively answered yet.


Thank you.

God forbid anyone having a bit of fun with some numbers and propose a theoretical exercise to see which place they could dump a 747 into, in a fantasy situation. Haven't seen anyone suggest it be tried for real, or even dialed up in a simulator. Maybe those ties are a bit tight and are restricting oxygen intake.

AvgWhiteGuy, there were a few numbers tossed around in the early responses, whether anything shorter has been done ? Without someone going through three decades of records, I think the previous responses are going to be as close as you'll get.
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 20601
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

Re: Boeing 747-400 Runway lengths

Tue Jan 05, 2021 7:48 am

I take your point. And sure, we can do what-ifs. Happy to.

But in this case, we were talking a 747 into LCY specifically. That's not remotely realistic for a real-world scenario. As far as I understand the OP's intention, this thread is about real-world scenarios and short runways. How about taking our 747 into Bromma (ESSB)? 1668 metre runway.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 15864
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Boeing 747-400 Runway lengths

Tue Jan 05, 2021 10:19 am

AvgWhiteGuy wrote:
The OP asked a very simple, one answer question that still, to my knowledge, hasn't been definitively answered yet.


It has, just the answer is not obvious, EGTD is 1880 m. Reply 7 stated the dreamlifter (modified 744) landed by mistake at KAAO (1859m), and reply 13 stated YSHL. YSHL is 1819 m, QF landed a 744 there (video of it landing https://youtu.be/zvnjk0XUC-0 ), and reply 15 stated that UA diverted there from AKL when it was known as YWOL.

The short answer to the OP question, no it is not the shortest runway a 744 has landed on.
“Don't be a show-off. Never be too proud to turn back. There are old pilots and bold pilots, but no old, bold pilots.” E. Hamilton Lee, 1949
 
LTEN11
Posts: 145
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2020 10:09 am

Re: Boeing 747-400 Runway lengths

Tue Jan 05, 2021 8:35 pm

zeke wrote:
AvgWhiteGuy wrote:
The OP asked a very simple, one answer question that still, to my knowledge, hasn't been definitively answered yet.


It has, just the answer is not obvious, EGTD is 1880 m. Reply 7 stated the dreamlifter (modified 744) landed by mistake at KAAO (1859m), and reply 13 stated YSHL. YSHL is 1819 m, QF landed a 744 there (video of it landing https://youtu.be/zvnjk0XUC-0 ), and reply 15 stated that UA diverted there from AKL when it was known as YWOL.

The short answer to the OP question, no it is not the shortest runway a 744 has landed on.


Just to clarify, reply 15 stated that UA had a diversion into WLG, not YWOL.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 15864
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Boeing 747-400 Runway lengths

Tue Jan 05, 2021 9:35 pm

LTEN11 wrote:
Just to clarify, reply 15 stated that UA had a diversion into WLG, not YWOL.


Sorry Wellington, yes that makes more sense from Auckland.

6000 ft sort of length is not that usual for wide bodies to land in, before NRT 34R was extended the 747 was prohibited from landing on it, however since being extended it is commonly used by all widebodies including 744s, most aircraft do not use the full length. Ourselves and a QF 744 used to land around 6am on 34R. Runway 27 in MEL I have landed on many times and able to exit onto N, that is only a landing distance of 1630m (5348’).
“Don't be a show-off. Never be too proud to turn back. There are old pilots and bold pilots, but no old, bold pilots.” E. Hamilton Lee, 1949
 
BerenErchamion
Posts: 242
Joined: Thu May 28, 2015 12:44 am

Re: Boeing 747-400 Runway lengths

Sat Jan 09, 2021 11:31 pm

I imagine the VC-25 has flown into some unusual locations that should be considered?
 
User avatar
AirKevin
Posts: 694
Joined: Wed Apr 26, 2017 2:18 am

Re: Boeing 747-400 Runway lengths

Sun Jan 10, 2021 5:12 am

BerenErchamion wrote:
I imagine the VC-25 has flown into some unusual locations that should be considered?

Except that is a 747-200, not a 747-400, which is what the original question asked.
Captain Kevin
 
N1120A
Posts: 26655
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

Re: Boeing 747-400 Runway lengths

Mon Jan 11, 2021 9:47 pm

BerenErchamion wrote:
I imagine the VC-25 has flown into some unusual locations that should be considered?


It is not at all uncommon for C-32s to be used in place of VC-25As at such "unusual locations."
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 24 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos