Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
AirKevin wrote:The runway at Teterboro is equally as long as the runways at LaGuardia at 7,000 feet. The problem with an A350 trying to land there is part of the runways sit on piers, so I don't know if they were designed to support that kind of weight.
GalaxyFlyer wrote:The KLGA runways have a PCN of 63 FBWT, I doubt a landing 350 has a higher ACN than 63.
ArcticFlyer wrote:For comparison's sake, 22L at EWR only has 8,200 feet of available landing distance (due to displaced threshold) and 4R at JFK is only 8,400 feet long. Both of these runways regularly see widebody arrivals. Not having flown either the 777 or the A350 I'm not sure if there is a weight penalty on those runways but, when you consider the fact that (at least for FAA rules) airliners need to be able to land within 60% of the available distance, 7,000 feet should be plenty in an emergency.
zeke wrote:During recent runway works in MEL closing the main 16/34, our A350s were routinly landed on shorter cross strip 27 exiting at N, which is only 4740'. The A350 has lower approach speeds to the A330.
ArcticFlyer wrote:For comparison's sake, 22L at EWR only has 8,200 feet of available landing distance (due to displaced threshold) and 4R at JFK is only 8,400 feet long. Both of these runways regularly see widebody arrivals.
Sdmccray1984 wrote:When USAirways Flight 1549 was airborne but losing power, it was interesting that Teterboro was recommended by TRACON. Obviously, they couldn’t make it there, but it has me thinking: Can a fully loaded A350 or B777 land at LaGuardia if absolutely necessary? And could an empty one take off from there to shuttle back over to JFK or Newark? What are the specs? Thanks guys.
zeke wrote:During recent runway works in MEL closing the main 16/34, our A350s were routinly landed on shorter cross strip 27 exiting at N, which is only 4740'. The A350 has lower approach speeds to the A330.
Kno wrote:Originally they had planned to make the 777 with folding wingtips to be able to taxi and park at LGA - now we see the folding wingtips on the 777X
rt23456p wrote:But the takeoff will suffer enough...
rt23456p wrote:But the takeoff will suffer enough...
airportgeek wrote:Definitely possible for takeoff and landing. The LGA runways are around 2134m. According to the ACAP, with 2000m runways and sea level(0 ft), the A350-900 could take off at 235 metric tons. Operational empty is around ~142 tons, and MTOW is 283 tons. So the A350-900 could definitely take off with a solid payload and fuel. Obviously the conditions are idealized, but still lots of margin.
https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/2022-05/Airbus-Commercial-Aircraft-AC-A350-900-1000.pdf
hitower3 wrote:zeke wrote:During recent runway works in MEL closing the main 16/34, our A350s were routinly landed on shorter cross strip 27 exiting at N, which is only 4740'. The A350 has lower approach speeds to the A330.
Hey Zeke,
Did you scrape the first class passengers off the flight deck door after the landing?
Cheers,
Hendric
Starlionblue wrote:airportgeek wrote:Definitely possible for takeoff and landing. The LGA runways are around 2134m. According to the ACAP, with 2000m runways and sea level(0 ft), the A350-900 could take off at 235 metric tons. Operational empty is around ~142 tons, and MTOW is 283 tons. So the A350-900 could definitely take off with a solid payload and fuel. Obviously the conditions are idealized, but still lots of margin.
https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/2022-05/Airbus-Commercial-Aircraft-AC-A350-900-1000.pdf
The operational empty weight is WAY below 142 tonnes. And MTOW 283 tonnes is only on some of the newer tails. More typically under 280 tonnes.
That notwithstanding, you are right. 235 tonnes will get you a long way.
zeke wrote:
Not sure what you are trying to say, the approach speed of the A350 would typically be lower than a 737 or 767, the deceleration rate rate required to make the first exit would be lower.
hitower3 wrote:zeke wrote:
Not sure what you are trying to say, the approach speed of the A350 would typically be lower than a 737 or 767, the deceleration rate rate required to make the first exit would be lower.
Dear Zeke,
I know this...
I was trying to be funny but I am a German.
Cheers!