Runway Centre-line lengths

[theahdg]

Hi, I am wondering if someone can tell me what the length of the centreline and the piano keys are at an airport? And if they are the same at an international port (eg. Perth) as opposed to a GA airport(eg. Jandakot). I have been going through the AIP but it only states that the gap between the centrelines are 30 meters, but no info on how long the actual centreline is. Thanks.

[Worrals in the wilds]

The CASA Manual of Standards part 139 is your friend. It's available on the CASA website and sets out all aerodrome standards.

[sleeve of wizard]

You may also want to look in Jepp Intro section page 166 onwards, ICAO recommended runway markings.

[aileron_69]

Ok I got to ask.....why on earth would you want to know that???? You could always go out and measure them when noone is around I guess :E

[nig&nog]

Try 30 metre long for the centreline, and gap approx 20m so gap plus line should be 50m. For the piano keys, they start normally 6 m in from the runway edge and are usually 30m long so from start of runway to end of piano keys should be approx 36m. Thats all reference from my brain, so could be a little out but bloody close. Nig

[aditya104]

From AIP AD

Centreline 30m long then 30m gap. For any runway whose width is 18m or greater, irrespective of international/domestic.


Checked Manual of Standards Part 139, didn't find the physical characteristics of the piano keys.

btw if anybody needs a CPL pilot, let me knw. i jst finished CPL on BE-76. 180hrs total time. want to build more time.
cheers :ok:

[The Green Goblin]

will look up the other one and get back to u. sry not enough time. gotta catch a train. btw if anybody wants a CPL pilot, let me knw. i jst finished CPL on BE-76.

One of your reports would make interesting (read entertaining) reading.

I would not mention the fact you completed your CPL in a Duchess, in fact when going for a single job I would just mention your total time and ratings.


:)

[Mr.Buzzy]

Must have a Rex line check!

So are the centreline lights on the left or right of the centreline?

bbbbbbbbbbbzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

[Fratemate]

Must have a Rex line check!

Or an oral check with the JCAB in Japan :rolleyes: Seriously, I was asked the number of white stripes on the piano keys of a 45m rwy and a 60m rwy, the dimensions of the white stripes (not just the length) and the varying standards between the old and new touchdown markings. I had to pinch my leg to prevent myself from laughing out loud at such ridiculous and irrelevant questions. :ugh:

[aditya104]

Must have a Rex line check!

So are the centreline lights on the left or right of the centreline?

That is an irrelevant question. Because if the lights are to the left of the centreline from one end, the same lights would be to the right from the other.

[Mr.Buzzy]

That is an irrelevant question. Because if the lights are to the left of the centreline from one end, the same lights would be to the right from the other.
27th Apr 2011 21:34

Good to see someone gets the joke:ok:

bbbbbbbbbbbbzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

[ChinaBeached]

And they can only be painted on with a left-handed paint brush....:ok:

Sorry to have to add to the fun but it's always odd to see questions on this forum that are asked in place of minimal CAR / Jepps / ICAO reading & research.

Chatted to a JAA certified TRE (Austrian) not too long ago about such questions asked in interviews or even line checks. He says that pilots flying into & out of international & often unfamiliar airports should appreciate the rwy standards, by way of markings, etc, it's certifications..... That was his argument anyway. (And yes, a "professional" pilot would've done the reading on the unfamiliar strip prior to the flight anyway).

Not knowing what certification standards & limits you're operating under can get you in trouble real quick, real bad. Eg: TERPS vs PANS OPS.

[Pontius]

He says that pilots flying into & out of international & often unfamiliar airports should appreciate the rwy standards, by way of markings, etc, it's certifications..... That was his argument anyway.

What bolleaux. Who cares about the width of the centreline marking? How is it relevant at all? I'm not going to vary any aspect of operation because I thought the line was 2cm too short. The only relevance could be whether it is a Cat I or Cat II/III bunch of markings and, even then, it really does not affect the price of fish. As you say, you're going to have a look at an unfamiliar airport and brief any differences that might exist in Stinkarseystan but you're not going to check their certification standards and make sure their marking dimensions are correct.

Not knowing what certification standards & limits you're operating under can get you in trouble real quick, real bad. Eg: TERPS vs PANS OPS.

I don't agree with that either. What are we supposed to do, check every aspect of every airfield chart to ensure they conform or trust Jeppesen et al and use the information they provide. If you change the way you operate because one minute you're using TERPS and the next Pans Ops, then you'd be the first pilot I've ever met who did. Everyone I've ever met just uses the plates they've been provided. We're pilots, not chart makers.

[ChinaBeached]

Your opinion and you're welcome to it. I did not state whether or not I agreed with the comment made by the (said) JAA certified TRE, only mentioning his beliefs regarding such knowledge & the questioning of it. I agree, knowledge to the cm is stupid and irrelevant. Overall aprreciation of runway markings cannot be dismissed as "What bolleaux"If you change the way you operate because one minute you're using TERPS and the next Pans Ops, then you'd be the first pilot I've ever met who did.Wow. What a statement to admit to. Hate to be a pax on board if you ever have to divert at night to an airfield using TERPS circling minima and terrain clearance in the greatly reduced airport vicinity: which is exactly why TERPS procedures are maintained at such fields and not [updated] replaced with PANS OPS.

Pontius: as a 767 pilot (??) I would assume you would know of the 767 accident at Busan due to incorrect circling approach flown by the crew? They did not know (it seems) or appreciate the differences and as a result are dead, along with the other 127 souls they took with them. I wonder if the families and friends of those perished view such knowledge as "bolleaux"?

One of the major conclusions as the cause of the accident? "Crew not aware of TERPS vs PANS OPS"

We're pilots, not chart makers.True. We are chart INTERPRETERS and chart USERS. But too bad if you haven't the professionalism, knowledge or training to know WHAT the charts are telling you the pilot. Bet those 129 dead people on board Air China flight 129 wished the crew had a better knowledge of such irrelevant (to some) details.

Sorry, thread divergence. But the point is that knowledge should not be labelled as "bolleax". Knowledge to the cm of rwy markings is extreme of course but an appreciation of such markings is not. Appreciation of TERPS vs PANS OPS will save you and your passengers lives so this is not trivial. I cannot fathom how any pilot could believe it not necessary to change procedures when operating under PANS OPS or TERPS. Scary. Very, very scary indeed.

[The Green Goblin]

Look folks,

As Pilots we could spend all day analyzing every detail of the intended operation. We can make it so complex for ourselves that we lose sight of what we are actually trying to achieve and we will never get off the ground.

At the end of the day, in the time you have available to you before a flight (which is not much), you need to keep things simple and to the point. if you concentrate on the detail and forget the big picture, you can paint yourself into a corner.

I think of it as must haves, and nice to haves.

Concentrate on the must haves (safety of the flight) and use the resources at your disposal to organize the nice to haves.

Runway marking sounds like something a jaded ATO would ask you on a CPL flight text, or maybe a REX interview.

Fortunately the rest of the aviation world try to keep things in perspective.

[Pontius]

Okay, I promise this will be my last post on the matter. It's not that I don't want to discuss this in more depth but (a)we're definitely straying from the original point of the thread (b)I don't want to bore everybody to death with my ponderings and (c)Green Goblin has said, better, what I was alluding to.

Anyway, ChinaBeached, just to clarify; the 'bolleaux' was associated with the niff naff and trivia that the Austrian TRE was talking about. I, too, have my JAA ATPL, operate internationally and, sometimes, to unfamiliar airports. I do this very safely and conscientiously but stand by my comment that it is not necessary to know the minutae of airport markings and such like in order to conduct the operation safely and professionally.

On the practical side, the differences between TERPS and Pans Ops are not necessary to KNOW if you conduct your flight correctly. It doesn't matter that TERPS uses such-and-such angle of bank, whereas Pans Ops uses something else IF you stay within your circling area. Likewise, obstacle clearance etc. IF I keep the runway in sight, stay within my circling area and don't descend below MDA then it matters not a jot who drew the chart. I agree that Pans Ops will give you greater margins but there's no need to get silly about being a passenger on one of my flights because I haven't distinguished between the TERPS design and Pans Ops designs of the charts during my approach briefing. I won't bust the minimums and I'll stay in the right place. That way I won't smash into the ground under either system (although I might come closer with TERPS......by about 100').

The Busan incident would not have been avoided if the crew had realised they were working to differing chart design standards. There's no allowance made in either design for flying as far out of the circling area as they did (both TERPS and Pans Ops areas). There's no allowance for the stupidity of losing sight with the runway and pressing on with the approach. There's no allowance for not immediately carrying out a GPWS manoeuvre, rather than waiting until you're lined up on the rwy centreline. This crew screwed the pooch by unsafely operating the aircraft and no amount of knowing the differences between chart designs would have stopped them doing that. I DON'T and WON'T exceed the limits and, therefore, you'll be perfectly safe on one of my flights, when I divert at night and carry out a circling approach, even if I don't vary my operation because of the chart designers.

[ChinaBeached]

Pontious & Goblin, I believe we're on the same page. Apologies for perhaps over-zealous reply.... Flown with too many minimalist guys recently where near enough seems to be good enough, so again, apologies.

Here's a former post on these differences:
Circling Man' Area [Archive] - PPRuNe Forums (http://www.pprune.org/archive/index.php/t-252228.html)

And this as well where the Air China crash is mentioned with respect to these procedures: SKYbrary - Circling Approach - difference between ICAO PANS-OPS and US TERPS (http://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/Circling_Approach_-_difference_between_ICAO_PANS-OPS_and_US_TERPS)

Jeep charts simply state at the bottom left of the chart TERPS or PANS OPS. So you need to know these differences & limits, I believe. Applying PANS OPS circling radius to a TERPS circling approach is going to hurt you.

Last comment on rwy markings: knowing the distance between rwy edge lights & counting them from a lined up position enabled me many more take offs than simply relying on METARS. In those hour building days knowing & applying it kept me in a job.

Cheers guys... :ok: