PDA

View Full Version : Perth Int. runway designation confusion


Leon Tsao
27th Feb 2015, 03:14
Hey all. new here and i have a question on my mind about perth airport.
The actual orientation of the main runway at Perth Int. is 016/196 degrees Magnetic. On this basis, the runways should have a designation of 02/20.
Why is runway 03/21 not a 02/20 which is more accurate for its heading?
To avoid transposing 20 for 02? If this is the case why has Singapore kept 02/20?
Thanks for help.

1Charlie
27th Feb 2015, 09:44
Brisbane is the same 016/196 but the Aussies tend to avoid 02/20

tipsy2
27th Feb 2015, 11:17
13/31 for the same reason

Tipsy

VH-MLE
27th Feb 2015, 11:57
Perth's 21/03 was formerly 20/02 until around 15 years or so ago.

I believe the change was made to avoid the possibility of confusion but I've never seen that documented anywhere.

airdualbleedfault
27th Feb 2015, 13:45
None of it makes sense, it's a lot closer to 01/19 but hey, it's WA after all.
Anyway Perth only has 1.5 runways, 24 rarely used for departures and 06 rarely used for arrivals. Is the 3rd runway going to be a half or full runway :}

training wheels
27th Feb 2015, 15:32
13/31 for the same reason

Moorabbin still has 13/31? It's been a while since I last few in there ...

tipsy2
27th Feb 2015, 20:10
A re-numbering of 13/31 at MB was under discussion in the mid 70's as a consequence of ab initio or low time and visiting pilots not familiar with MB arrivals lining up for landing at the wrong end.

I wrote a blurb about the potential for error to BASI at the time. After much head scratching and hand wringing the response was "my suggestion didn't comply with ICAO"

It was especially interesting when there was a runway change enacted.

Tipsy:ugh:

fujii
27th Feb 2015, 21:31
Melbourne went for 09/27 (083/263) due to Essendon having 08/26.

Leon Tsao
28th Feb 2015, 02:07
from ICAO AN14 V1
5.2.2.4 A runway designation marking shall consist of a two-digit number and on parallel runways shall be supplemented with a letter. On a single runway, dual parallel runways and triple parallel runways the two-digit number shall be the whole number nearest the one-tenth of the magnetic North when viewed from the direction of approach. On four or more parallel runways, one set of adjacent runways shall be numbered to the nearest one-tenth magnetic azimuth and the other set of adjacent runways numbered to the next nearest one-tenth of the magnetic azimuth. When the above rule would give a single digit number, it shall be preceded by a zero.

I still have a confusion with the designation.
If Perth don't obey the AN14, ICAO should send a ICAO_StateLetter.
BUT NO...

morno
1st Mar 2015, 01:44
Honestly, who gives a rats ass?

It could be runway 40/04 for all I care, what benefit is renaming it 20/02?

NZScion
1st Mar 2015, 02:53
When the above rule would give a single digit number, it shall be preceded by a zero.

You'll have to get the FAA to comply with this as well... :rolleyes:

Oktas8
1st Mar 2015, 09:32
I understand why 02/20 isn't used. Don't agree, but understand.

But why not use 01/19 for runway bearings between 011 & 020?

Romeopapa
1st Mar 2015, 10:09
Perth is easy.

Fly in from Kalgoorlie over Kalamunda and Perth is the big airfield in the middle with Jandakot on the left and Pearce on the extreme right.

If you have passed the beach and see a small strip on an island with a 49 dollar landing fee that is Rotto:ok:

Miss that and South Africa will be your next landfall.

greybeard
1st Mar 2015, 22:14
It is all because of a lissdexic amongst us

DCA to long at morning tea, had to do something reportable??

:ugh: