Fly Away Simulation
SearchSearch 

Should Heathrow Get the 3rd Runway

Pro Member Captain
Chris Morris (morris91) Captain

Hi a lil bored so i thought i'd do this:

I was watching the news the other day and saw about the two planes hit each other's wings.

it was a British Airways Boeing 747 to Singapore and a Sri Lankan Airlines Airbus A340.

Do you fink that Heathrow Airport should be able to make a 3rd runway.

Thay already have 2 main runways wih ILS and also have a small runway on the east side of the airport witch it not used for landing's or takeoff's it only gets used for taxing now and also does not have ILS.

Here are some pics of the airport:

Also i was looking around the airport and i saw this plane i dunno if it is or not but is this plane the Air Force One i just saw it there so i thought i better ask???

Also put to mind heathrow are already making another terminal for the A380 you think when heathrows gets all them taxing around the airport hitting each other.

Thanks for reading ummm.. just to clear i don't care if heathrow do make a 3rd runway i was just bored so...

Anyway comments all welcome thanks.

Pro Member Chief Captain
Drew B (belgeode) Chief Captain

No it's not air force one, it is a shadow.

And where are they going to put a third runway? it's all built up around the airport.

Pro Member Captain
Chris Morris (morris91) Captain

I know this is why the resedents are haveing protests against it so...

What ever happends happends.

Pro Member First Officer
antone First Officer

Yeah - a third runway (about 6000ft as opposed to the 12,000ft of the other two, ILS-equipped runways) would need extensive demolition and use of green belt.

I can see why residents wouldn't be happy. If they all volunteer to stop taking flights I might start taking their objections more seriously.

Here's the proposed plan for the new runway:

Pro Member Trainee
Bartfs Trainee

antone wrote:

Yeah - a third runway (about 6000ft as opposed to the 12,000ft of the other two, ILS-equipped runways) would need extensive demolition and use of green belt.

I can see why residents wouldn't be happy. If they all volunteer to stop taking flights I might start taking their objections more seriously.

Here's the proposed plan for the new runway:

Isn't the runway a bit short then? I mean.. 7000 feet isn't much to accomodate 747's etc.. They can get 737 or A320 or smaller..
And it is going to like Schiphol much 😛 Schiphol runway Polderbaan is far away from the airport too
😛

Pro Member Chief Captain
Drew B (belgeode) Chief Captain

Jeez... you'd waste half your gas taxiing out to there!!!

Heathrow's problem is it is just too cramped for the volume and size of aircraft that come through there... they'd need to do soome major overhauling I think, and I highly doubt that will happen... they just don't have the space at or around the airport.

Pro Member First Officer
antone First Officer

Bartfs wrote:

Isn't the runway a bit short then? I mean.. 7000 feet isn't much to accomodate 747's etc.. They can get 737 or A320 or smaller..
And it is going to like Schiphol much 😛 Schiphol runway Polderbaan is far away from the airport too
😛

Well, when you think about it, a Cessna requires as much runway space and a departure slot, just like a 747. So overall, the size of the aircraft isn't Heathrow's main problem.

That is, if the smaller aircraft could use the short runway, there'd be more space on the other runways for the bigger planes.

Pro Member First Officer
antone First Officer

belgeode wrote:

Jeez... you'd waste half your gas taxiing out to there!!!

Heathrow's problem is it is just too cramped for the volume and size of aircraft that come through there... they'd need to do soome major overhauling I think, and I highly doubt that will happen... they just don't have the space at or around the airport.

Yeah. They were talking about a sixth terminal to go with the new runway, which might save some taxiing I guess. If they moved all of the flights to places like Manchester, Birmingham, Inverness, Aberdeen and so on to this new terminal and runway, it may help things.

The alternative seems to be to build new facilities (including a runway?) at Gatwick instead. That's less built up. They even thought about Stansted, but seem to have decided against it. It seems the costs of work there would raise the operating charges airlines pay to the airport by a fair amount. Stansted relies heavily on budget operators like Ryanair and EasyJet, who have small profit margins and would not pay higher costs.

Pro Member First Officer
mossy First Officer

I flew into Schiphol about 6 months ago. I am not sure but judging by the length of the taxi (1/2 hour,) it was probably that runway. What is quite funny it that to get to the runway one has to go on a bridge over a road. When you drive down the road crossed there is a sign that says 'slow, aircraft crossing.' I guess this will raise some foriegner eyebrows from time to time.

All times are GMT Page 1 of 1

Related Questions