Was it not 06R-24L back in the day? I was in Inverness last week and discovered they now have a runway 05-23 now as well!

The one over Sipson please.....

I'm with you on this one Jabird.

Wee 'Eck and his teuchters have not yet achieved Scottish independence, so how about the 2556 metres of Edinburgh 06/24, opened as 07/25 in 1977?

East Midlands, Newcastle and Luton also had new runways built in the 1960s.

Excuse me but CVT was developed from a grass airfield circa late 70's as I recall and, likewise, PLH was developed from a grass airfield circa early 80's, ESH was also developed from a grass airfield circa 1980's.

Whilst PLH was, then, tiny, with ESH being modestly sized, I'd suggest that CVT's main runway was/is of reasonable length.

And LGW is a 1950's developed airport with it's secondary runway coming along around the late 80's if I recall.

If we're talking 'full length' then compared with the likes of MAD, LUX etc. then UK doesn't have a full length runway!

PF - the residents of Bubbenhall and Baginton would strongly disagree with that statement, having previously claimed that the runway at CVT would not be long enough for 737 ops - as if somehow Thomsonfly had got their figures wrong!

Where they were of course correct is that CVT would have some restrictions with Ryanair's 738s, hence we've never seen them here, even though our portakabin terminal is the most appropriate Ryanairport facility in the land!

If we take full size as meaning "capable of handling the type of aircraft which would usually serve a city / destination of that stature", then BHX certainly doesn't have a full size runway either, although that is changing.

Westray's 09/32 at 467m on the other hand is perfectly long enough for a two minute twotter hop to Papa Westray :D

And Northampton Airport's full length runway was built in the year?

MAN runway restrictions
 

Someone asked earlier about restrictions on R2 at MAN. The planning conditions don't allow use between 2200 and 0600 hours unless R1 is unavailable. The airport doesn't need dual runway at night and so this isn't really restrictive commercially. There are no limits on aircraft type using R2. There are size limits on the LISTO SIDs off both runways, which do cause departure flow constraints at peak times.

I see that the geographically-challenged Daily Torygraph, which normally conflates "UK" with "London/SE England", managed to hedge its bets yesterday, declaring that:

while simultaneously reporting the CBI as saying:

scr1:Not any more it's not. Reduced to 1750m last month.
NS

PeterP wrote: A better proposition than Southend or Manston, probably.

Oh dear; do you know where Southend is? Over a million people within 40 minutes travel time and only 53 minutes rail journey to central London. easyJet services operating to ten destinations, with more to come.

I like Swansea - my brother lived there. I've spent happy hours at Fairwood Common watching him fly around, and Air Wales Dorniers chugging about. With some major investment Swansea probably could support a low key lo-co operation, whether at the current site (but strong local opposition to any runway extension) or at Pembrey, but a better proposition than Southend? Surely some mistake......

Wales could have a nice shiny airport with Llanbedr's 2,286m 'full length' runway ..... were the people of Wales not so anti aviation. :)

Problem is, Phileas, not many of them live near Llanbedr! ( I do see your smiley) Lovely place to visit for a holiday, ie "Shell Island" next to Llanbedr, but a commercial airport? Nooo!

If a third runway at Heathrow is fought off again, and Gatwick I believe has a long term planning restriction that blocks a second runway there for many years, then maybe, just maybe, Manston might be the place to develop?

Probably near enough to an upgradable rail link? Enough land to add three or four hundred metres to the runway?

Maybe "Steady Eddie" could sort it for us....

As an aside, why is a second runway at Stansted not in the equation?

EGCA

'New' Runway at MAN
 

The second runway at MAN (23L/05R) does not have a parallel taxiway and therefore 23L is primarily used for take-off's with landing traffic using 23R. When winds are easterly, 05R is used for landings whilst 23L is used for take-off's. This eliminates the need for backtracking due to lack of parallel taxiway with the new runway, although all traffic to or from the new runway has to cross the old 23R/05L runway.

The new runway is (was) also closed between 12.00 and 15.00.

Not in the UK but
 

Reminds me of the ‘new’ Dusseldorf runway, opened in the 1990s. Under extreme environmental pressure, its construction had been approved only on condition that the new 2-runway airport should be subject to a strict movement cap. The trouble was that by the time it was completed, movements were already well above the cap.

In other words, the moment that the runway came into use, the cap would come into effect. So it was never used. But there was a permanent environmentalists’ camp outside the perimeter fence keeping watch over it and the airport was paranoid that someone would land on it by mistake.

I think at some stage a compromise solution was reached, but it lay idle for years.

EGCA:Built up area of Ramsgate at less than one mile final, planning restrictions on movements especially at night and a very vocal opposition. But it is up for sale...
NS

Well actually CVT's runway was opened by Lord Brabazon of Tara on 15th October 1960.

To add to the list Leeds/Bradford's main runway was built in or around 1966

The Government's last White Paper on Airports (c 2005) referred to 'full length' as 3000m plus.
The politicians want to put the next such runway at Stansted, but that's not where Joe Public wants to fly from. IMHO no decision will be made before 2015, and the next Govenment won't progress it. So we're looking at 2030 before anything is researched, planned, approved and built.
I'll be dead by then....

That's consistent with this take on what constitutes a "full-length" runway:

FAQs - We Listen - Hong Kong International Airport Master Plan 2030

So, allowing for the fact that HK has a larger proportion of wide body movements, and is a few degrees warmer, that would suggest that a runway at a major international airport of 3000-3500m or longer can reasonably described as "full-length", and anything less than that as "short" (relatively speaking). Of the two "short" runways referred to, FRA's is 2800m, and that proposed for LHR would be 2000-2200m.

Quote:
"The new runway is (was) also closed between 12.00 and 15.00."
The new runway is (was) also closed between 12.00 and 15.00. 19th Apr 2012 10:41

Thanks, TSR2, that explains it, my observations were on lunchtime/early afternoon departures, but do you know why? It seems an odd time for a restriction, and very inconvenient!



Quote: "Was it not 06R-24L back in the day? I was in Inverness last week and discovered they now have a runway 05-23 now as well!"

Skipness One Echo, am old enough to remember when LHR's were 10L/28R and 10R/28L! Apparently some runways were reassigned a while back because of some movement in the magnetic north pole.



Quote: "Slightly off-topic. What will be the NEXT full-length runway in the UK?"

Heathrow and Heathrow. The next two new additional runways have to be at LHR and soon! The evidence is there, if carriers cannot access the UK hub, they go elsewhere: not to other UK airports but to other European countries' hubs: AMS, CDG, FRA, and increasingly MAD.

So forget about LGW or STN instead of LHR, forget about BHX or MAN, and definitely forget about any estuary airport! Where are you Silver?

Call-me-Dave, don't delay, do your U-turn today!

More pigs flying.



Quote: "PeterP wrote: A better proposition than Southend or Manston, probably."

Is he referring to Swansea? If so, not a chance!

As it happens, SEN and MSE are too hemmed in for expansion. However, MSE has a long runway (although shorter than LHR's) and can take B747s. Both serve their existing purposes well, but neither can never be seriously considered as sites for major expansion.