Why does Newark International Airport (EWR) have so much displaced threshold on the 04/22 runways? There does not seem to be significant obstacles on either end and the amount of displaced threshold reduces available landing distance significantly.

Considering the location of the airport in a densely populated area, it is most likely for noise abatement and possibly even for obstacle clearance as there are plenty of tall buildings on either approach path. Remember that obstacles to either side of the approach path still count. Even with the displaced threshold, it’s more than enough runway for anyone to land.

orlandocfi wrote:

Even with the displaced threshold, it’s more than enough runway for anyone to land.

Yep, lots of runway to use. Here's the numbers:

4L / 22R: 11,000'
4L: 2,540' displaced threshold- 8,460' remaining
22R: 1,440' displaced threshold- 9,560' remaining

4R / 22L: 10,000'
4R: 1,190' displaced threshold- 8,810' remaining
22L: 1,793' displaced threshold- 8,207' remaining

I don’t have the trapezoids for approach obstacle clearance, but having driven by it any number of times, there’s lots in the 34:1 planes. Here’s a link, to one discussion. Fun fact, and interstate Highway is an obstacle

https://wsdot.wa.gov/sites/default/file ... basics.pdf

tjwgrr wrote:

orlandocfi wrote:

Even with the displaced threshold, it’s more than enough runway for anyone to land.

Yep, lots of runway to use. Here's the numbers:

4L / 22R: 11,000'
4L: 2,540' displaced threshold- 8,460' remaining
22R: 1,440' displaced threshold- 9,560' remaining

4R / 22L: 10,000'
4R: 1,190' displaced threshold- 8,810' remaining
22L: 1,793' displaced threshold- 8,207' remaining

Thank you for that data. I’ll also add that 4R LAHSO distance is even shorter when 11 is in use.

Take a look at the diagrams. First one is from 1990, second from 1995 and the third is the most recent.

http://www.flightsimbooks.com/flightsim ... art507.php (1990)

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... rt_map.png (1995)

https://flightaware.com/resources/airpo ... IAGRAM/pdf (most recent)

The runways were shorter back then. 4L/22R was built in 1970 and was only 7,000 feet when it was first constructed and 22R only started where Taxiway W is today. It only increased to its current length - 11,000 feet - in 2000 (the 4L end was lengthened in the early 90s). So the displaced threshold was a way of increasing the runway length for takeoffs as later planes required a longer takeoff distance.

The displaced thresholds on 4R/22L aren't all that long compared to 4L/22R and this was originally the longest runway at EWR.

Also, in the older diagrams, you still had the North Terminal Building, which prevented 22R from being extended further north. Once that was torn down, 22R was extended.

And most 22R takeoffs start at Taxiway W, not at the beginning of the runway. Only flights to Asia, which require a longer takeoff roll, or some parked north of Runway 11/29 and want a shorter taxi, will begin their takeoffs at the beginning of the runway.

leader1 wrote:

Take a look at the diagrams. First one is from 1990, second from 1995 and the third is the most recent.

http://www.flightsimbooks.com/flightsim ... art507.php (1990)

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... rt_map.png (1995)

https://flightaware.com/resources/airpo ... IAGRAM/pdf (most recent)

The runways were shorter back then. 4L/22R was built in 1970 and was only 7,000 feet when it was first constructed and 22R only started where Taxiway W is today. It only increased to its current length - 11,000 feet - in 2000 (the 4L end was lengthened in the early 90s). So the displaced threshold was a way of increasing the runway length for takeoffs as later planes required a longer takeoff distance.

The displaced thresholds on 4R/22L aren't all that long compared to 4L/22R and this was originally the longest runway at EWR.

Also, in the older diagrams, you still had the North Terminal Building, which prevented 22R from being extended further north. Once that was torn down, 22R was extended.

And most 22R takeoffs start at Taxiway W, not at the beginning of the runway. Only flights to Asia, which require a longer takeoff roll, or some parked north of Runway 11/29 and want a shorter taxi, will begin their takeoffs at the beginning of the runway.

That is always true (at least in my experience) about starting the takeoff roll at Taxiway W except there was one time flying back to DFW (i think on an AA MD80) we went all the way to the start of 22R to begin the roll. That was different - wish i knew the reason why (unless W, Y, and M taxiways onto 22R were shutdown for maintenance or something but I don't think they were). Again was a pleasant surprise. Must have been extra heavy and the extra 1000' or so was needed for the extra margin but that's just a guess.

tmu101 wrote:

leader1 wrote:

Take a look at the diagrams. First one is from 1990, second from 1995 and the third is the most recent.

http://www.flightsimbooks.com/flightsim ... art507.php (1990)

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... rt_map.png (1995)

https://flightaware.com/resources/airpo ... IAGRAM/pdf (most recent)

The runways were shorter back then. 4L/22R was built in 1970 and was only 7,000 feet when it was first constructed and 22R only started where Taxiway W is today. It only increased to its current length - 11,000 feet - in 2000 (the 4L end was lengthened in the early 90s). So the displaced threshold was a way of increasing the runway length for takeoffs as later planes required a longer takeoff distance.

The displaced thresholds on 4R/22L aren't all that long compared to 4L/22R and this was originally the longest runway at EWR.

Also, in the older diagrams, you still had the North Terminal Building, which prevented 22R from being extended further north. Once that was torn down, 22R was extended.

And most 22R takeoffs start at Taxiway W, not at the beginning of the runway. Only flights to Asia, which require a longer takeoff roll, or some parked north of Runway 11/29 and want a shorter taxi, will begin their takeoffs at the beginning of the runway.

That is always true (at least in my experience) about starting the takeoff roll at Taxiway W except there was one time flying back to DFW (i think on an AA MD80) we went all the way to the start of 22R to begin the roll. That was different - wish i knew the reason why (unless W, Y, and M taxiways onto 22R were shutdown for maintenance or something but I don't think they were). Again was a pleasant surprise. Must have been extra heavy and the extra 1000' or so was needed for the extra margin but that's just a guess.

I don't know much about MD80 takeoff performance, but they seem to have a longer takeoff roll compared to other aircraft from what I've seen. I'm guessing that's why they requested the full runway length.

The only time my flight has took off from the start of 22R was when flying on a 77W to NRT. We definitely needed to use the entire runway on that occasion. Funny enough, the aircraft right in front of us was an EK 77W going to DXB, and they also took off at the start of the runway. Everyone else took off at the Taxiway W intersection.

Can an aircraft line up on the runway at Taxiway W and at the north end of 22R at the same time? Or is that not enough distance as the engine exhaust from aircraft at W at full power can blow FOD that far back and hit the aircraft waiting its turn at the end? I'm thinking that's not allowed (lining up two airplanes on runway simultaneously separated by 1000' or so). I would think that could shave a few seconds off at least and help make things a little more efficient for a constrained airfield like EWR if it were allowed. Thanks for the responses.

tmu101 wrote:

Can an aircraft line up on the runway at Taxiway W and at the north end of 22R at the same time? Or is that not enough distance as the engine exhaust from aircraft at W at full power can blow FOD that far back and hit the aircraft waiting its turn at the end? I'm thinking that's not allowed (lining up two airplanes on runway simultaneously separated by 1000' or so). I would think that could shave a few seconds off at least and help make things a little more efficient for a constrained airfield like EWR if it were allowed. Thanks for the responses.

According to this, no.

An aircraft may be authorized to line up and wait at an intersection between sunset and sunrise under the following conditions:
The procedure must be approved by the appropriate Service Area Director of Air Traffic Operations.
The procedure must be contained in a facility directive.
The runway must be used as a departure-only runway.
Only one aircraft at a time is permitted to line up and wait on the same runway.
Document on FAA Form 7230-4, Daily Record of Facility Operation, the following: “LUAW at INT of RWY (number) and TWY (name) IN EFFECT” when using runway as a departure-only runway. “LUAW at INT of RWY (number) and TWY (name) SUSPENDED” when runway is not used as a departure-only runway.

https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publica ... ion_9.html

For instance, if a plane is going to use 22R at full-length and there is another plane cleared to takeoff at Taxiway W, that plane using the full-length of the runway must wait on the taxiway until the Taxiway W departure has started its takeoff roll and Tower gives the OK to enter the runway and line-up.

In my example above, the EK flight and my flight waited for Taxiway W departures to roll until we got the OK from Tower enter the runway. I've seen examples of this at other airports with even more extreme intersection departures further down the runway - CPH, CDG, ATH.

orlandocfi wrote:

tjwgrr wrote:

orlandocfi wrote:

Even with the displaced threshold, it’s more than enough runway for anyone to land.

Yep, lots of runway to use. Here's the numbers:

4L / 22R: 11,000'
4L: 2,540' displaced threshold- 8,460' remaining
22R: 1,440' displaced threshold- 9,560' remaining

4R / 22L: 10,000'
4R: 1,190' displaced threshold- 8,810' remaining
22L: 1,793' displaced threshold- 8,207' remaining

Thank you for that data. I’ll also add that 4R LAHSO distance is even shorter when 11 is in use.

No pilot is required to accept a LAHSO clearance and some airlines may prohibit LAHSO acceptance.

leader1 wrote:

For instance, if a plane is going to use 22R at full-length and there is another plane cleared to takeoff at Taxiway W, that plane using the full-length of the runway must wait on the taxiway until the Taxiway W departure has started its takeoff roll and Tower gives the OK to enter the runway and line-up.

If you take your link of the .65 and read paragraph H, there is authorization to have two aircraft using LUAW under certain situations:

h. Do not authorize aircraft to simultaneously line up and wait on the same runway, between sunrise and sunset, unless the local assist/local monitor position is staffed.

We normally would use the entire length of 22R in the 767-400 when departing non stop for HNL, full power and packs off as well


We always got our money’s worth out of that runway !

leader1 wrote:

The runways were shorter back then. 4L/22R was built in 1970 and was only 7,000 feet when it was first constructed and 22R only started where Taxiway W is today. It only increased to its current length - 11,000 feet - in 2000 (the 4L end was lengthened in the early 90s).

And quite interesting that UA was able to operate the 747 out of EWR in the 70s and 80s prior to the extension of the runways.

N62NA wrote:

leader1 wrote:

The runways were shorter back then. 4L/22R was built in 1970 and was only 7,000 feet when it was first constructed and 22R only started where Taxiway W is today. It only increased to its current length - 11,000 feet - in 2000 (the 4L end was lengthened in the early 90s).

And quite interesting that UA was able to operate the 747 out of EWR in the 70s and 80s prior to the extension of the runways.

Where were they flying them? It probably wasn't at the edge of the envelope for the aircraft, and besides the 747 was the range king at the time.

I flew Whales out of KEWR to KLAX on some airline way back in the day. In the ‘70s , UA had virtually no intl 747 flying, HI was it.

The likely reason for the displaces thresholds.. the original runways were shorter, the ILS, etc were build and installed and tested per the smaller runways. Aircraft typically need more runway length to depart than to land, so extending the length for departing aircraft but not arriving aircraft is an easy way to increase the size of jets that can operate in/out.

Besides being expensive, moving the ILS etc would require there to be no obstacles in the way of the new glide slope, which would probably not be the case at EWR.

tmu101 wrote:

Can an aircraft line up on the runway at Taxiway W and at the north end of 22R at the same time? Or is that not enough distance as the engine exhaust from aircraft at W at full power can blow FOD that far back and hit the aircraft waiting its turn at the end? I'm thinking that's not allowed (lining up two airplanes on runway simultaneously separated by 1000' or so). I would think that could shave a few seconds off at least and help make things a little more efficient for a constrained airfield like EWR if it were allowed. Thanks for the responses.

I don't know if ATC has some kind of procedural reason why this wouldn't be permitted, but I have been cleared to cross 22R on Z (full length) while aircraft were simultaneously taking off from W and no one seemed to have any concerns about jet blast.

Starlionblue wrote:

N62NA wrote:

leader1 wrote:

The runways were shorter back then. 4L/22R was built in 1970 and was only 7,000 feet when it was first constructed and 22R only started where Taxiway W is today. It only increased to its current length - 11,000 feet - in 2000 (the 4L end was lengthened in the early 90s).

And quite interesting that UA was able to operate the 747 out of EWR in the 70s and 80s prior to the extension of the runways.

Where were they flying them? It probably wasn't at the edge of the envelope for the aircraft, and besides the 747 was the range king at the time.

EWR-SFO and for a while, EWR-NRT.