Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
GalaxyFlyer wrote:Very simple, if they’re using the 28s and the 01s, the taxi route from the FBO on the opposite from the the terminal is far shorter, doesn’t involve crossing 28s or the long loop around the end of the 28s AND getting mixed up in the terminal. Short taxi, no crossings, no pushbacks, what’s not to love? Only a few bizjets use reduced thrust and none use derates
adipasqu wrote:I assume the pilot is requesting the departure runway and can request the 01's or the 28's under normal circumstances as they see fit operationally. Wouldn't the tower prefer usage of the 01's for most aircraft departures to avoid spacing issues for the landings on the 28's?
e38 wrote:
Your last comment, "I guess keeping them out of the terminal and the associated congestion must be a big factor."
That is correct. During peak departure periods, the area around the 01s--taxiways A, B, A1, A2, M1--can become quite congested.
The taxi distance may be comparable, but there is considerably more potential for conflict by using E / B to the 01s than a straight shot down C to the 28s.
e38
IAHFLYR wrote:
Not really as it takes almost as much spacing to depart from 1L/R to get the departure through the intersections of 28L/R before the 28 landers cross the threshold. Having a corporate jet "line up and wait" as the first arrival crosses the threshold and the next is on a 2.5 or 3 NM final then clearing them for takeoff is very simple. That corporate jet will be airborne in about 20 seconds leaving plenty of room for the second arrival and thinking back to my younger days of being a tower controller at a major airport cannot even remember any corporate jet using more than 5,000' of runway for departure and most much less.
adipasqu wrote:Are there any wake turbulence considerations, say when a 747 or 380 lands with a corporate jet lined up to wait to take off on the same runway, or as soon as the heavy has vacated the tower can/will clear the corporate jet for departure to fit into that 2.5-3 NM gap between landings?
acecrackshot wrote:I’ve always appreciated towers that seem to understand corporate/charter guys and gals are in there once or twice a year (or career!) vs. the airline (especially regional pilots) in a busy airport multiple times per week.
GalaxyFlyer wrote:acecrackshot wrote:I’ve always appreciated towers that seem to understand corporate/charter guys and gals are in there once or twice a year (or career!) vs. the airline (especially regional pilots) in a busy airport multiple times per week.
Yeah, it was always interesting to land at KEWR or KORD and be bombarded with taxi clearances like you were a local and, in truth, hadn’t been in years.
atcdan wrote:GalaxyFlyer wrote:acecrackshot wrote:I’ve always appreciated towers that seem to understand corporate/charter guys and gals are in there once or twice a year (or career!) vs. the airline (especially regional pilots) in a busy airport multiple times per week.
Yeah, it was always interesting to land at KEWR or KORD and be bombarded with taxi clearances like you were a local and, in truth, hadn’t been in years.
We always treat corporate, mil, and foreign crews with kid gloves lol. It’s much easier to spell it out once than try to get someone to look up taxi routes at a place they might fly to once in a year, or a decade.
adipasqu wrote:On my way home from work every day, I drive right under the departure path of the 28's at SFO. I see lots of business jets of all size using the 28's for departure, even though most NB departures will be using the 01's on a typical day and depart over the bay and only see the heavies using the 28's due to the need for the longer runway length. I realize sometimes NB's will use the 28's for various reasons (wind, destination considerations, etc.), but are there specific reasons why biz jets may elect to use longer runways at a major airport like SFO? Are they taking a large derate to save fuel, engine wear and tear, etc. and using more runway then necessary with full thrust? I assume the pilot is requesting the departure runway and can request the 01's or the 28's under normal circumstances as they see fit operationally. Wouldn't the tower prefer usage of the 01's for most aircraft departures to avoid spacing issues for the landings on the 28's?
phatfarmlines wrote:Funny that you should bring that up, I'm checking FR24 and two biz jets took off from the 1's, did exactly the opposite of what you described.
phatfarmlines wrote:
Funny that you should bring that up, I'm checking FR24 and two biz jets took off from the 1's, did exactly the opposite of what you described.
https://www.flightradar24.com/E55P/27bb3e82
https://www.flightradar24.com/N111QS/27ba2626
adipasqu wrote:N111QS is a Global 5000 headed to Kona, HI, so I would assume it needed more length than what is available from 28R at E.
IAHFLYR wrote:adipasqu wrote:N111QS is a Global 5000 headed to Kona, HI, so I would assume it needed more length than what is available from 28R at E.
See post above your last, 10L/28R is closed so they cannot use it.
adipasqu wrote:So, under this scenario where 28R is unavailable, I assume they would want to keep 28L for landings only except for those that absolutely need the length of 28L for departure and send biz jets through the terminal to use the 01's?
IAHFLYR wrote:adipasqu wrote:So, under this scenario where 28R is unavailable, I assume they would want to keep 28L for landings only except for those that absolutely need the length of 28L for departure and send biz jets through the terminal to use the 01's?
Doubt ground control would take route them "through the terminal" and have to coordinate with ramp control unless everything else was all screwed up (which can happen ). They would most likely use Taxiway A or B to get them in the conga line for the 1's.
26point2 wrote:And we haven’t even discussed trying to get back INTO SFO yet.