If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
|
#22
|
|||
|
|||
I've often thought that a good way to deal with runway congestion
at places like Heathrow where expansion is just about impossible would be double-decker runways. You could use the bottom one for landings, and the top one (starting a bit further along) for takeoffs. Not much different from a LAHSO when you think about it. John ( :-), for the (sadly numerous) irony challenged) "Larry Dighera" wrote in message ... On 02 Apr 2004 14:48:42 GMT, (Hjk40) wrote in Message-Id: : I actually remember reading about the circular runway in the early 1960's For security reasons, subterranean runways/airports were proposed during WW-II. Perhaps the time has come to consider that proposal again. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Larry Dighera writes:
For security reasons, subterranean runways/airports were proposed during WW-II. Perhaps the time has come to consider that proposal again. Hmmm...no more snow removal. --kyler |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
John Harper wrote: I've often thought that a good way to deal with runway congestion at places like Heathrow where expansion is just about impossible would be double-decker runways. That would be a *very* interesting engineering exercise. The ramps at Hartsfield are 6' thick concrete slabs. I don't know how much thicker the runways are. I'm also certain that they would have to be significantly thicker if they weren't supported by the ground underneath them. Concrete weighs over 3,500 pounds per cubic yard. The upper runway will be an unsupported clear span several hundred feet wide and about a mile long. I'm not sure there is any material on Earth that could handle that job. I think it safe to say that the upper runway wouldn't be concrete, though. George Patterson This marriage is off to a shaky start. The groom just asked the band to play "Your cheatin' heart", and the bride just requested "Don't come home a'drinkin' with lovin' on your mind". |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
My suggestion wasn't serious. But since we're pretending to take
it seriously... there are several airports where runways go over bridges (e.g. CDG). In the case of CDG it's a six-lane highway underneath. I'd guess you could just replicate that bridge as required. It may be expensive, but given land prices in urban areas it might still be economical. John "G.R. Patterson III" wrote in message ... John Harper wrote: I've often thought that a good way to deal with runway congestion at places like Heathrow where expansion is just about impossible would be double-decker runways. That would be a *very* interesting engineering exercise. The ramps at Hartsfield are 6' thick concrete slabs. I don't know how much thicker the runways are. I'm also certain that they would have to be significantly thicker if they weren't supported by the ground underneath them. Concrete weighs over 3,500 pounds per cubic yard. The upper runway will be an unsupported clear span several hundred feet wide and about a mile long. I'm not sure there is any material on Earth that could handle that job. I think it safe to say that the upper runway wouldn't be concrete, though. George Patterson This marriage is off to a shaky start. The groom just asked the band to play "Your cheatin' heart", and the bride just requested "Don't come home a'drinkin' with lovin' on your mind". |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
double-decker runways. Not a bad idea. For similar reasons, Colorado double-decked portions of I-70 west of the Continental Divide. all the best -- Dan Ford email: (put Cubdriver in subject line) The Warbird's Forum www.warbirdforum.com The Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com Viva Bush! www.vivabush.org |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
I don't know how much thicker the runways are. I'm also certain that they would have to be significantly thicker if they weren't supported by the ground underneath them. I have a vague recollection that when the USAF resurfaced Pease Air Force Base in Newington NH (just a few years before it was closed down the surface mentioned was 36 inches of concrete. all the best -- Dan Ford email: (put Cubdriver in subject line) The Warbird's Forum www.warbirdforum.com The Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com Viva Bush! www.vivabush.org |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Cub Driver wrote: I have a vague recollection that when the USAF resurfaced Pease Air Force Base in Newington NH (just a few years before it was closed down the surface mentioned was 36 inches of concrete. That's the thickness of the resurface layer? I worked as a tunnel rat on the expansion of Hartsfield in the 70's. The ramps were three layers of concrete, each two feet thick. George Patterson This marriage is off to a shaky start. The groom just asked the band to play "Your cheatin' heart", and the bride just requested "Don't come home a'drinkin' with lovin' on your mind". |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
I have a vague recollection that when the USAF resurfaced Pease Air Force Base in Newington NH (just a few years before it was closed down the surface mentioned was 36 inches of concrete. That's the thickness of the resurface layer? I worked as a tunnel rat on the expansion of Hartsfield in the 70's. The ramps were three layers of concrete, each two feet thick. As I say, the memory is ten or twelve years old. What a peaceful summer it was! The KC-135s all flew off to New York state. all the best -- Dan Ford email: (put Cubdriver in subject line) The Warbird's Forum www.warbirdforum.com The Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com Viva Bush! www.vivabush.org |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Funny how aviation ideas just keep recycling. The circular runway was
reported on in an article in Popular Science in the early 1960s as the airport of the future, banked turn and all. Never amounted to much. Thank goodness, if you have ever taken off or landed on a runway with a curve in it, the idea of using one regularly is not terribly attractive...plus, given the difference in aircraft speeds the banking cannot eliminate sideloads on the landing gear which could make for some interesting gear collapses. All the best, Rick jsmith wrote in message ... Good article in the recent issue of AIR & SPACE. A USN pilot got the idea for a circular runway after experiencing an engine failure and landing on a country road. He proposed the Navy test the idea. He was killed in an accident, but someone carried the ball got the testing approved. The tests were satisfactorily completed with Navy jet fighters at Goodyear's test track. A 10,000 foot banked oval works at low and high speeds. Taladega? Daytona? (What are the other Super Speedways?) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Diamond DA-40 with G-1000 pirep | C J Campbell | Instrument Flight Rules | 117 | July 22nd 04 05:40 PM |
Diamond DA-40 with G-1000 pirep | C J Campbell | Owning | 114 | July 22nd 04 05:40 PM |
F15E's trounced by Eurofighters | John Cook | Military Aviation | 193 | April 11th 04 03:33 AM |
Rwy incursions | Hankal | Piloting | 10 | November 16th 03 02:33 AM |
Moving violation..NASA form? | Nasir | Piloting | 47 | November 5th 03 07:56 PM |