SOUTHEND - 3 The new beginning

[Tagron]

The runway width, per se, does not make any direct difference to the performance limitations of any of the aforementioned aircraft. SEN is a Code 3C airport but the 757 is a Code 4D aircraft, by virtue of its wingspan which is approx 5m above the Code 3 limit. My understanding from a previous reading (and I think it must be in ICAO Annex 14 though I haven't the time to research it now) is that it is a general principle that an aircraft can operate commercially "one below" its code, but that specific CAA approval may be required and there may be a limitation to the number of operations.

The irony is that the runway performance of the 757 is far better than either the A321 or the 738 (which are Code 3), and it would be a very capable aircraft from SEN's runway. But in talking of (e.g.) the 738 we have to bear in mind that different operators use different take off thrust ratings. So with the 738 the 24000lb thrust aircraft is not much use commercially at SEN but the 27000lb thrust version as used by some UK operators would have a rather better payload/range profile.

Then there are different configurations and seating densities, or Weight Variants to use the Airbus term. It does not help operations from SEN that the versions most likely to be potential users of SEN are the heavyweight high density seating variants. The issue is not so much whether commercial operations are possible but whether they are commercially attractive to the operator in the light of restrictions on range or payload.

In comparing runways at different airports some caution is necessary. Rather than simple length of paved surface, declared distances TODA TORA and ASDA are a better comparison. Then there are factors which is not possible to evaluate by casual inspection such as slope and second segment climb. The only really reliable picture emerges when an individual operator evaluates performance of its own aircraft against all the parameters of the individual runway.

And a final point is that regardless of the above considerations none of these aircraft (A321, 738 and 757) can operate commercially from SEN at present because they require RFF7 whereas SEN operates to RFF6. But that could be addressed readily by SEN spending the money on the upgrade if it could see the expenditure was justified.