Perth Int. runway designation question
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: China
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perth Int. runway designation question
Hey all. new here and i have a question on my mind about perth airport.
Why is runway 03/21 not a 01/19 which is more accurate for its heading?
Thanks heaps.
Why is runway 03/21 not a 01/19 which is more accurate for its heading?
Thanks heaps.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: China
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank u for reply, but the new runway is 03R/21L, so should be another reason for the runway "wrong" designation.
The actual orientation of the main runway at Perth Int. SI 016/196 degrees Magnetic. On this basis, the runways should have a designation of 02/20.
The actual orientation of the main runway at Perth Int. SI 016/196 degrees Magnetic. On this basis, the runways should have a designation of 02/20.
Years ago the present 03/21 at YPPH was known as 02/20. The name was changed, in the mid 1980s I think, to try and avoid the confusion of having too many to's/2's/02's/20's and the resultant cockups due to misunderstanding or mishearing ATC instructions. This despite the fact that there are many other R/W 02/20 combinations elsewhere that seem to function well.
Cheers,
BH.
Cheers,
BH.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Surrounding the localizer
Posts: 2,200
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
1 Post
Well,
I'd never heard of this practice before !
I'd never heard of this practice before !
Not so uncommon really. There are four parallel runways at KLAX all aligned 069/249 magnetic but the north complex is designated 06/24 L&R and the south complex 07/25 L&R. Strictly all the runways should be 07/25 something but it's convenient and it works.
Cheers,
BH.
Cheers,
BH.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Surrounding the localizer
Posts: 2,200
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
1 Post
Bullet, are you honestly comparing KLAX to YPPH? particularly in relation to runway designation? the 24/25 designation is to differentiate between the north and south complex.
Strictly all the runways should be 07/25 something
07L/25R
07-second-from-the-left/25-second-from-the-right
07-second-from-the-right/25-second-from-the-left
07R/25L
I guess the runways weren't wide enough to paint on those designators.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Runway#Naming
WSSS has 02 / 20 L C R!
YSSY should be 16L&R, 34L&R and 06/24 however 16/34 and 06/24 would be a good combination.
Sometimes common sense comes into play. Perhaps YPPH runway designations will be reviewed when the concrete is being laid on the parallel.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: China
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi, Bullet
ICAO AN14 V1 5.2.2.4
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.
So, the runway designation in KLAX is reasonable.
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.
So, the runway designation in KLAX is reasonable.
I was just pointing out that sometimes runways are given convenient names rather than strictly correct designators.
In fact, the "convenient naming" is simply conformance with ICAO SARPS (Annex 14 - Aerodrome Design & Operations):
"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".
