Runway use program - mostly for US controllers
Thread Starter
Joined: Apr 2001
Aviation Qualifications: ATP+Mil
Posts: 4,924
Likes: 613
From: surfing, watching for sharks
Runway use program - mostly for US controllers
Who develops the runway use programs as far which configuration will be used? The 7110.65 says to use the runway most aligned with the wind when the wind is five knots or more unless there is a runway use program. Going into ABQ a few nights ago, the winds were out of the north at 20 plus gusting to almost 30. Instead of landing on 35, we had to land 26. I asked if 35 was available and was told no, then told later there would be a long wait for it. The wait time would have had us low on fuel. My basic question is what criteria is used when adopting a use program, simply to run the most traffic, noise abatement, when does safety of flight drive the issue? Is it a product of ATC, does airport ops have a say, what about the airlines? Any reference to a FAA pub would be great. Thanks.
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
From: Bucks. UK
Hi West Coast. Excuse a Brit for interfering but I thought this might go some way to answering your query.
www.cabq.gov/airport/noise.html
www.cabq.gov/airport/noise.html
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 234
Likes: 0
From: Silicon Hills
WC,
I can't give you any references, but at the two airports I've worked with a program, the city (airport owner) had a great deal of (majority?) influence on the decisions. Mostly for noise reasons. At the busier airports, capacity has to always be factored in.
Any time the PIC determines that a runway other than the preferred runway is operationally necessary, we are allowed to deviate from the program, though delays are certainly possible.
Just curious, was Rwy 3 not available for some reason? 17/35 is always a problem I suppose, because it crosses all the other runways.
RUNWAY USE PROGRAM- A noise abatement runway selection plan designed to enhance noise abatement efforts with regard to airport communities for arriving and departing aircraft. These plans are developed into runway use programs and apply to all turbojet aircraft 12,500 pounds or heavier; turbojet aircraft less than 12,500 pounds are included only if the airport proprietor determines that the aircraft creates a noise problem. Runway use programs are coordinated with FAA offices, and safety criteria used in these programs are developed by the Office of Flight Operations. Runway use programs are administered by the Air Traffic Service as "Formal" or "Informal" programs.
a. Formal Runway Use Program- An approved noise abatement program which is defined and acknowledged in a Letter of Understanding between Flight Operations, Air Traffic Service, the airport proprietor, and the users. Once established, participation in the program is mandatory for aircraft operators and pilots as provided for in 14 CFR Section 91.129.
b. Informal Runway Use Program- An approved noise abatement program which does not require a Letter of Understanding, and participation in the program is voluntary for aircraft operators/pilots.
I can't give you any references, but at the two airports I've worked with a program, the city (airport owner) had a great deal of (majority?) influence on the decisions. Mostly for noise reasons. At the busier airports, capacity has to always be factored in.
Any time the PIC determines that a runway other than the preferred runway is operationally necessary, we are allowed to deviate from the program, though delays are certainly possible.
Just curious, was Rwy 3 not available for some reason? 17/35 is always a problem I suppose, because it crosses all the other runways.
RUNWAY USE PROGRAM- A noise abatement runway selection plan designed to enhance noise abatement efforts with regard to airport communities for arriving and departing aircraft. These plans are developed into runway use programs and apply to all turbojet aircraft 12,500 pounds or heavier; turbojet aircraft less than 12,500 pounds are included only if the airport proprietor determines that the aircraft creates a noise problem. Runway use programs are coordinated with FAA offices, and safety criteria used in these programs are developed by the Office of Flight Operations. Runway use programs are administered by the Air Traffic Service as "Formal" or "Informal" programs.
a. Formal Runway Use Program- An approved noise abatement program which is defined and acknowledged in a Letter of Understanding between Flight Operations, Air Traffic Service, the airport proprietor, and the users. Once established, participation in the program is mandatory for aircraft operators and pilots as provided for in 14 CFR Section 91.129.
b. Informal Runway Use Program- An approved noise abatement program which does not require a Letter of Understanding, and participation in the program is voluntary for aircraft operators/pilots.
Thread Starter
Joined: Apr 2001
Aviation Qualifications: ATP+Mil
Posts: 4,924
Likes: 613
From: surfing, watching for sharks
V4F
I can't remember if 3/21 was/wasn't available. We didn't have the data for one of the runways, can't remember which one. The controllers indeed would have honered our request for 35, however the time frame given would have been unacceptable from a fuel standpoint. Which given operational restrictions means that the runway most aligned into the wind was not available.
I don't blame the controlllers, they were simply following the rules they had to work within. I do fault whom ever decided to allow noise abatement to seemingly hold a higher wrung on the ladder than safety of flight.
I can't remember if 3/21 was/wasn't available. We didn't have the data for one of the runways, can't remember which one. The controllers indeed would have honered our request for 35, however the time frame given would have been unacceptable from a fuel standpoint. Which given operational restrictions means that the runway most aligned into the wind was not available.
I don't blame the controlllers, they were simply following the rules they had to work within. I do fault whom ever decided to allow noise abatement to seemingly hold a higher wrung on the ladder than safety of flight.
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,155
Likes: 0
From: Fort Worth ARTCC ZFW
Hi West Coast;
I see that the folks with an earlier get home time got to you first <G>. What you have already been told. The majority of how any airfield in the US is run is designated by the airport management. From opening and closing times ( not the tower or approach ) to patterns and other such wonderful things. We just have to try to comply with the restrictions. SNA is a GREAT example of trying to make stuff work due to airport management restrictions.
regards
Scott
I see that the folks with an earlier get home time got to you first <G>. What you have already been told. The majority of how any airfield in the US is run is designated by the airport management. From opening and closing times ( not the tower or approach ) to patterns and other such wonderful things. We just have to try to comply with the restrictions. SNA is a GREAT example of trying to make stuff work due to airport management restrictions.
regards
Scott
