Runway ID

No, Bill has this right. If rounded correctly, 045 becomes 'runway 4' and
055 becomes 'runway 6'.
"Morgans" wrote in message
...

"Lakeview Bill" wrote No...

The magnetic heading of Runway 5 can be any heading between 046 and 054.

Actually, it could be 045 to 055. There is a choice of rounding up or
down,
with a heading ending in "5".
--
Jim in NC

"Mike W." wrote

No, Bill has this right. If rounded correctly, 045 becomes 'runway 4' and
055 becomes 'runway 6'.

I'm sure I read a reg quoted earlier in this thread, that you got to choose
going up or down, when it was --5.

Who posted that?
--
Jim in NC

"Morgans" wrote

I'm sure I read a reg quoted earlier in this thread, that you got to
choose
going up or down, when it was --5.

I found it. Quoted in earlier post by Bob Moo
____________________________________

4-3-6. Use of Runways/Declared Distances

a. Runways are identified by numbers which indicate the nearest 10-degree
increment of the azimuth of the runway centerline. For example, where the
magnetic azimuth is 183 degrees, the runway designation would be 18; for a
magnetic azimuth of
87 degrees, the runway designation would be 9. For a magnetic azimuth
ending in the number 5, such as 185, the runway designation could be either
18 or 19. Wind direction issued by the tower is also magnetic and wind
velocity is in knots.
____________________________________

So if this was a valid quote that Bob pulled up, it would seem to put *that*
to rest.

As far as the zero in the runway, I know it is not "correct" in the US, but
I think it is a shame that we do not follow more of the IACO conventions.
Just my opinion, of course.
--
Jim in NC

"Morgans" wrote in message
...

I found it. Quoted in earlier post by Bob Moo
____________________________________

4-3-6. Use of Runways/Declared Distances

a. Runways are identified by numbers which indicate the nearest 10-degree
increment of the azimuth of the runway centerline. For example, where the
magnetic azimuth is 183 degrees, the runway designation would be 18; for a
magnetic azimuth of
87 degrees, the runway designation would be 9. For a magnetic azimuth
ending in the number 5, such as 185, the runway designation could be
either
18 or 19. Wind direction issued by the tower is also magnetic and wind
velocity is in knots.
____________________________________

So if this was a valid quote that Bob pulled up, it would seem to put
*that*
to rest.

As far as the zero in the runway, I know it is not "correct" in the US,
but
I think it is a shame that we do not follow more of the IACO conventions.
Just my opinion, of course.


Advisory Circular 150/5340-1J STANDARDS FOR AIRPORT MARKINGS

MARKINGS FOR PAVED RUNWAYS AND TAXIWAYS.

Section 2. Runway Markings.

7. RUNWAY DESIGNATION MARKING.

a. Purpose. A runway designation marking identifies a runway by its
magnetic
azimuth.

b. Location. Runway designation markings, as shown in Figures 1 and 2,
are
located on each end of a runway.

c. Color. Runway designation markings are white. It is particularly
helpful
to pilots if these markings are outlined in black on light colored pavements
(see paragraph 4(a)(1)).

d. Characteristics. A runway designation marking consists of a number
and,
on parallel runways, is supplemented with a letter. A single-digit runway
designation number is not preceded by a zero. On a single runway, dual
parallel runways and triple parallel runways, the designation number is the
whole number nearest one-tenth of the magnetic azimuth when viewed from the
direction of approach. For example, where the magnetic azimuth is 183
degrees, the runway designation marking would be 18; and for a magnetic
azimuth of 87 degrees, the runway designation marking would be 9. For a
magnetic
azimuth ending in the number "5," such as 185 degrees, the runway
designation marking can be either 18 or 19. On four or more parallel
runways, one set of adjacent runways is numbered to the nearest one-tenth of
the magnetic azimuth and the other set of adjacent runways is numbered to
the next nearest one-tenth of the magnetic azimuth.

(1) Parallel Runways. In the case of parallel runways, each runway
designation number is supplemented by a letter, in the order shown from left
to right when viewed from the direction of approach, as shown in the
following examples:

(i) For two parallel runways having a magnetic azimuth of 182
degrees, the
runways would be designated "18L," "18R."

(ii) For three parallel runways having a magnetic azimuth of 87
degrees, the
runways would be designated "9L," "9C," "9R."

(iii) For four parallel runways having a magnetic azimuth of 324
degrees,
the runways would be designated "32L," "32R," "33L," "33R."

(iv) For five parallel runways having a magnetic azimuth of 138
degrees, the
runways would be designated "13L," "13R," "14L," "14C," "14R."

(v) For six parallel runways having a magnetic azimuth of 83
degrees, the
runways would be designated "8L," "8C," "8R," "9L," "9C," "9R."

(vi) For seven parallel runways having a magnetic azimuth of 85
degrees, the
runways would be designated "8L," "8C," "8R," "9L," "9C," "9R," "10."

(2) There are some cases where parallel runway designation may not be
appropriate because of possible pilot confusion with the runway surface or
the distance between landing thresholds. For example a turf runway or a
visual runway, which is parallel to a higher precedence runway and has a
distance between the landing thresholds may have a different runway
designation, especially if the paved runway has a paved parallel taxiway.
Another example where a parallel runway designation may not be appropriate
is a situation where the parallel runways are separated by a large distance
with a terminal between them.

(3) The size and spacing of the numbers and letters are reduced only
when
necessary due to space limitations on narrow runways, and should be no
closer than 2 feet from the runway edge or side strips if present. The
numbers and letters are in the form and proportion shown in Figure 4.

Morgans wrote:

"Mike W." wrote


No, Bill has this right. If rounded correctly, 045 becomes 'runway 4' and
055 becomes 'runway 6'.


I'm sure I read a reg quoted earlier in this thread, that you got to choose
going up or down, when it was --5.

You would choose the number to which the magnetic variation is taking
the runway. For example around the western US you would choose the
higher number as if you don't you'll have to renumber the runway that
much sooner.

"Newps" wrote

You would choose the number to which the magnetic variation is taking
the runway. For example around the western US you would choose the
higher number as if you don't you'll have to renumber the runway that
much sooner.

What??? You don't rename a runway after it has been named.

The reg has been quoted. Show me where it says you have to take the
movement of magnetic variation into account.
--
Jim in NC

I have seen many runways get renumbered after enough years of slow
change in the mag heading. Daytona Beach is an example that I can
quickly remember. Runway 7 used to be runway 6 about 20 years ago.



On Sun, 16 Oct 2005 17:11:12 -0400, "Morgans"
wrote:


"Newps" wrote

You would choose the number to which the magnetic variation is taking
the runway. For example around the western US you would choose the
higher number as if you don't you'll have to renumber the runway that
much sooner.

What??? You don't rename a runway after it has been named.

The reg has been quoted. Show me where it says you have to take the
movement of magnetic variation into account.

"Morgans" wrote in message
...

What??? You don't rename a runway after it has been named.

The reg has been quoted. Show me where it says you have to take the
movement of magnetic variation into account.


"On a single runway, dual parallel runways and triple parallel runways, the
designation number is the whole number nearest one-tenth of the magnetic
azimuth when viewed from the direction of approach."

Crystal airport (MIC) in Minneapolis area went from runways 4/22 to
6/24 a few years ago. I don't know why so much change though.......

"nrp" wrote in message
oups.com...

Crystal airport (MIC) in Minneapolis area went from runways 4/22 to
6/24 a few years ago. I don't know why so much change though.......


I have a MIC airport diagram dated 97310. The present runway 6L/24R was
then 5L/23R. The present runway 6R/24L was then 5R/23L. There has been no
change in the magnetic azimuth of these runways. The magnetic azimuth of
runway 6L/24R is 050.6/230.6, as it was eight years ago. The magnetic
azimuth of runway 6R/24L is 050.7/230.7, as it was eight years ago. The
local variation on these charts is 2.6E, a January 1995 value. Why were
these runways redesignated?