A380 on 34R/16L - am I dreaming?

[Bull at a Gate]

There has been some discussion in our local newspaper about whether an A380 can land on the third runway at Sydney. I seem to recall that it has happened, but can’t find any confirmation of this. Has it happened or have I been dreaming?

[sandsthrudahrglass]

Landing one thing, taxiing to the other side of the airport another :)

[maggot]

Yep, she has low approach speeds and good brakes. No problem. You wouldn't choose 16L though
but check the wing span restrictions on the 10-9

[hiltonbaby]

Can and has.

[The Bullwinkle]

I think there has to be a runway inspection after each A380 landing if my memory serves me correctly.

[bobsyauncle]

There has been some discussion in our local newspaper about whether an A380 can land on the third runway at Sydney. I seem to recall that it has happened, but can’t find any confirmation of this. Has it happened or have I been dreaming?

It's happened once only that i recall. On the 25th February 2017, Runway 16R had a pavement failure during bad weather causing QF A380 VH-OQE as QF12 to go around. International aircraft diversions commenced but crew on OQE called a "pan" emergency? Followed by the aircraft landing on 16L... QF 747 OEF & an American 77W also landed 16L that morning.

[Bull at a Gate]

Thanks Bob. Turns out my memory is not as bad as my children say it is! Now, where did I put my glasses...

[ruprecht]

Now, where did I put my glasses...

They’re on your head. :)

[C441]

It’s considered a ‘contingency’ landing runway for Qantas A380s with relevant procedures noted in the manual. 16L from the displaced threshold is roughly the same length as 27 in Melbourne and that can be used largely without restriction from an operational perspective. As mentioned earlier, the restrictions relate more to taxiing than landing or taking off.
Off 34R via Twy L or Twy B10 only.
Off 16L via Twy T6 only.

Somewhere out there is a bloody awesome photo of a Qantas 744 departing off 34R too. Found it! (https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/192)

[atakacs]

It is (was) my understanding that the a380 was designed not to have special runway requirements, at lest within « normal » operations. is there something special to 34R/16L ?

[Capt Fathom]

It is (was) my understanding that the a380 was designed not to have special runway requirements, at lest within « normal » operations. is there something special to 34R/16L ?

Did you read the previous post in relation to taxiways??

[wondrousbitofrough]

Somewhere out there is a bloody awesome photo of a Qantas 744 departing off 34R too. Found it! (https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/192)

Is that whats called 'using all the runway'?

[macbe327]

https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/720x479/33b44020_84e1_47f4_897b_cd6f9ac420f1_53da9f13c604fd81da3ba0c 2c2ad01f796d65ce0.jpeg
I remember the 380 crew had some concern about wingtip clearance with the 747 northbound on Tango but were committed to the landing.

[WingNut60]

It’s considered a ‘contingency’ landing runway for Qantas A380s with relevant procedures noted in the manual. 16L from the displaced threshold is roughly the same length as 27 in Melbourne and that can be used largely without restriction from an operational perspective. As mentioned earlier, the restrictions relate more to taxiing than landing or taking off.
Off 34R via Twy L or Twy B10 only.
Off 16L via Twy T6 only.

Somewhere out there is a bloody awesome photo of a Qantas 744 departing off 34R too. Found it! (https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/192)

Great photo but somehow it just looks wrong to me.
When was displaced threshold put in on 16L? It's not in that photo (2002).
And somehow Kurnell landscape in the background looks different?

[GA Driver]

It’s departing 34R, so is over the 16L threshold in the shot. You can see the arrows leading to the threshold in the pic. Been there since Noah departed there with the ark way back when.

[LeadSled]

[ QUOTE=wondrousbitofrough;10419019]Is that whats called 'using all the runway'?[/QUOTE]

"All the runway" ---- look again, it is airborne with at least 1000' remaining of the pavement, not to mention clearway.
Tootle pip!!

[WingNut60]

It is (was) my understanding that the a380 was designed not to have special runway requirements, at lest within « normal » operations. is there something special to 34R/16L ?

OK, thanks for that.
Yes, I can see now that it's just a depth perception thing.

Looking at it now on Google Earth and it seems that the aircraft was still, at least, 800 metres from the photographer. Probably more like 1 km
Very deceiving.

[LostProperty]

According to the EXIF data in the photo it was taken with a 300mm lens on a camera with a small chip (most digital cameras had small chips in 2002) giving an effective focal length of around 450mm. More than enough to create the illusion of 1000m condensed into a few tens of meters. A superb aircraft photo.

[mrdeux]

It's happened once only that i recall. On the 25th February 2017, Runway 16R had a pavement failure during bad weather causing QF A380 VH-OQE as QF12 to go around. International aircraft diversions commenced but crew on OQE called a "pan" emergency? Followed by the aircraft landing on 16L... QF 747 OEF & an American 77W also landed 16L that morning.

One of the minimum fuel heroes if memory serves correctly.

[Capt Fathom]

I guess if your destination is Sydney, you wouldn’t have fuel to go anywhere else?

[donpizmeov]

All foreign carriers do .

[haughtney1]

I guess if your destination is Sydney, you wouldn’t have fuel to go anywhere else?


Darn it...all that extra gas I carried for MEL as an alternate the other day was just a waste...I think we should be told :-)
Apart from txy restrictions on 16L/34R have they had any other pavement probs? I only ask as I splatted a 77F (crazy high ACN) into SYD the other week on 34R after being offered it by ATC...behind an Air NZ 77W.