Birmingham (UK) airport: runway length
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: London
Posts: 516
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Birmingham (UK) airport: runway length
Afternoon all,
I wonder if someone can help answer a question that arose from an article in this weekend's FT. It says: "Birmingham airport has capacity for 18m passengers a year and is investing £65m to extend its one runway, which will allow aircraft to carry enough fuel to reach the US west coast and Asia. Work is due to be completed by 2014." [my emphasis].
Is the part in bold in this statement correct? If Birmingham airport currently handles flights to Dubai and Florida, is the extra fuel needed to get to Los Angeles / San Francisco genuinely the 'restricting factor' (if I can call it that) in using the airport for those routes?
In other words, I am asking whether the runway length really imposes a restriction on the amount of fuel carried, thus affecting possible flight distances? The runway is already long enough to handle long-distance aircraft such as the 747 and A330/340....
Thank you for any clarification you can provide.
Nick
I wonder if someone can help answer a question that arose from an article in this weekend's FT. It says: "Birmingham airport has capacity for 18m passengers a year and is investing £65m to extend its one runway, which will allow aircraft to carry enough fuel to reach the US west coast and Asia. Work is due to be completed by 2014." [my emphasis].
Is the part in bold in this statement correct? If Birmingham airport currently handles flights to Dubai and Florida, is the extra fuel needed to get to Los Angeles / San Francisco genuinely the 'restricting factor' (if I can call it that) in using the airport for those routes?
In other words, I am asking whether the runway length really imposes a restriction on the amount of fuel carried, thus affecting possible flight distances? The runway is already long enough to handle long-distance aircraft such as the 747 and A330/340....
Thank you for any clarification you can provide.
Nick
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Wor Yerm
Age: 68
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Being able to accommodate large aircraft doesn't mean that they can depart profitably, otherwise they would already do so. As a runway length increases, so does the maximum weight an aircraft can lift. The long haul aircraft you were referring to burn between six and 12 tonnes per hour, so extending a runway allowing an additional 60-70 tonnes to be lifted might be a good thing for the airport.
PM
PM
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: world
Posts: 3,424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In a nutshell, a fully loaded B744, with the required legal fuel reserves, flying to say LAX could not plan to use the present runway. It could take less fuel and make a stop en route which would increase the fare or wipe out any profits. The statement in bold is correct.
