Narita crosswinds
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Haneda
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Narita crosswinds
Any foreign pilots forced to stay on main NRT runway during severe crosswinds?
Japanese pilots talk about this often, but only foreign pilots have mens to pressure Japanese government. Opinions?
Japanese pilots talk about this often, but only foreign pilots have mens to pressure Japanese government. Opinions?
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
>>Any foreign pilots forced to stay on main NRT runway during severe crosswinds?
Konnichiwa!
Huh? Would you rather be on the 'B' runway during a severe crosswind? I'd love to stay on the 'main' runway rather than take B to the E2 gateway...
Konnichiwa!
Huh? Would you rather be on the 'B' runway during a severe crosswind? I'd love to stay on the 'main' runway rather than take B to the E2 gateway...
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: EGKK
Posts: 204
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Errrr, I had to check google earth just in case I'd misread my approach plate the last time I was there, but which runway did you plan on using if there was a cross wind?
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=l&hl...8,0.087633&t=k
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=l&hl...8,0.087633&t=k
Last edited by QAR ASR; 16th Mar 2006 at 05:57.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Flagrant Harbour
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What I think 'nh877roger' is referring to is that the main runway 16R/34L is effected by turbulence from the airport buildings when the wind is from the East. Using the shorter 16L/34R more Easterly runway may then help. Providing you are in a mini-jet and allowed to use it. 
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Haneda
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 7FF
What I think 'nh877roger' is referring to is that the main runway 16R/34L is effected by turbulence from the airport buildings when the wind is from the East. Using the shorter 16L/34R more Easterly runway may then help. Providing you are in a mini-jet and allowed to use it.
For the Japanese the situation at Narita is a neverending headache. I wonder if foreign pilots through their governments cannot push to get the cross runway complete. It is up to you to initiate complaints, otherwise we might wait another half century to solve the dangerous situation. And maybe a planeload of passengers will be the sacrifice to resolve the problem?
Junior trash
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,025
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thats fair comment, the cross runway would be very useful, if they could just fill in the gap! Narita has some fairly odd winds even when its fairly light on the ground.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: EGKK
Posts: 204
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Out of interest how many hulls/lives have been lost in the last 50 yrs due to this rota in the lee of the buildings.
Having operated into Narita but not experienced this turbulence, how bad is it? and how does it compare to other airfields and in world that suffer with this? eg Funchal or even Gatwicks own 'Freddies Revenge'. At Heathrow unless the wind is straight down the strip you are likely to suffer rota, with severity dependant on wind speed.
Whilst a 3-4000m runway straight into wind always gets my vote, life is not like that. A cross wind with the associated considerations should maybe focus the mind, demand some handling skill and take ones attention away from the Su Doku it should not result in loss of hull or lives. The decision to avoid such a senario should have already been made e.g Go-Around, Hold off, divert or stay at home.
Having operated into Narita but not experienced this turbulence, how bad is it? and how does it compare to other airfields and in world that suffer with this? eg Funchal or even Gatwicks own 'Freddies Revenge'. At Heathrow unless the wind is straight down the strip you are likely to suffer rota, with severity dependant on wind speed.
Whilst a 3-4000m runway straight into wind always gets my vote, life is not like that. A cross wind with the associated considerations should maybe focus the mind, demand some handling skill and take ones attention away from the Su Doku it should not result in loss of hull or lives. The decision to avoid such a senario should have already been made e.g Go-Around, Hold off, divert or stay at home.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Flagrant Harbour
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The low level turbulence at Narita can be quite severe. In my experience 34L with the displaced threshold just downwind from the maintenance sheds is the worst.
Even then it is no worse than other known airports. I do not think that complaining to our companies via incident reports or such like would have even the slightest effect.
Start the rumour that a cross runway is being planned and watch the land/property prices soar. Not to mention more riots and 'revolting' farmers. Perhaps you do not remember the riots before the other runway was built?
Cross runway...not a hope.
Even then it is no worse than other known airports. I do not think that complaining to our companies via incident reports or such like would have even the slightest effect.
Start the rumour that a cross runway is being planned and watch the land/property prices soar. Not to mention more riots and 'revolting' farmers. Perhaps you do not remember the riots before the other runway was built?
Cross runway...not a hope.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Kernow, home of the pasty
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://bbs.keyhole.com/ubb/showthreaded.php/Cat/0/Number/218899/page//vc/1[/URL]
Check out the link above. If you have Google Earth look at the airport, it certainly looks like the airport was designed for a cross R/w, whether they ever finish it is another question. Looking at GE though it does look like the work to complete it is well in hand.
Check out the link above. If you have Google Earth look at the airport, it certainly looks like the airport was designed for a cross R/w, whether they ever finish it is another question. Looking at GE though it does look like the work to complete it is well in hand.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
QAR ASR, the date escapes me but cx came very close with a tristar quite some time back on a landing on 16R with a strong westerly component. End result was a hard landing with the R main ldg gear puncturing the fuel tank and the smelly stuff everywhere. Haneda has seen fit to put in a cross strip due the prevelence of the westerly/easterly flows which can be very strong (50 kts down to 200 ft then tapering off) but the appricot farmer seems to have some pull in NRT - must make for some toxic fruit though, or weavel free (not sure as to which)
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Haneda
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 7FF
... Providing you are in a mini-jet and allowed to use it.
For those not familiar a photo can be found at:
http://nichinichi.********.com/2005/...ts-narita.html
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Between land masses
Posts: 159
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aircraft have x-wind limits.
Pilots are expected to be able to fly their aircraft up to those limits.
If the x-wind exceeds the aircraft limit, you don't land, and divert to the nominated (suitable) alternate.
Basic PPL stuff - hardly the sort of topic professional pilots need debate.
Pilots are expected to be able to fly their aircraft up to those limits.
If the x-wind exceeds the aircraft limit, you don't land, and divert to the nominated (suitable) alternate.
Basic PPL stuff - hardly the sort of topic professional pilots need debate.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Haneda
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Foreign Worker
Basic PPL stuff - hardly the sort of topic professional pilots need debate.
Is this issue for pilots to debate, or do we wait for terrible tragedy at Narita?
Cool as a moosp
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Mostly Hong Kong
Posts: 802
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quite, FW, the issue is not one of competence, but of putting pressure on airport operators to provide a safe environment in which to fly.
With a south westerly surface wind at NRT, say 230/15 and upwards there will be an upper wind at 1000 feet of around 240/30. As this wind blows over the small valleys to the west of rw 16R they stir into a windshear of a level far in excess of that expected for the wind speed. I have experienced (and have the DFDR printout to prove it...) of losing 18 knots headwind component in 1 second at 30 foot wheel height in the flare. The ensuing landing was not one of my best. Watching the windsock on next takeoff an hour or so later it was doing the same thing - flicking round 180 degrees and still streaming horizontally. It's a vicious approach on a bad day, so be careful out there.
It would not be so vicious if there was a south westerly runway as originally planned.
As an aside the scuttlebut on the farmer in the middle of 34R/16R is that he works for the government and has been told to stay there. When the WTO sorts out aviation access and the unequal treaties between the US and Japan, then he will move. You will get your two trans-pacific runways, and the American carriers will not be allowed to flood NRT to the detriment of JAL.
Oh, and there is access for Japan to buy Alaskan oil in that agreement somewhere too.
Well this is a rumour forum...
With a south westerly surface wind at NRT, say 230/15 and upwards there will be an upper wind at 1000 feet of around 240/30. As this wind blows over the small valleys to the west of rw 16R they stir into a windshear of a level far in excess of that expected for the wind speed. I have experienced (and have the DFDR printout to prove it...) of losing 18 knots headwind component in 1 second at 30 foot wheel height in the flare. The ensuing landing was not one of my best. Watching the windsock on next takeoff an hour or so later it was doing the same thing - flicking round 180 degrees and still streaming horizontally. It's a vicious approach on a bad day, so be careful out there.
It would not be so vicious if there was a south westerly runway as originally planned.
As an aside the scuttlebut on the farmer in the middle of 34R/16R is that he works for the government and has been told to stay there. When the WTO sorts out aviation access and the unequal treaties between the US and Japan, then he will move. You will get your two trans-pacific runways, and the American carriers will not be allowed to flood NRT to the detriment of JAL.
Oh, and there is access for Japan to buy Alaskan oil in that agreement somewhere too.
Well this is a rumour forum...
