02-28-2017, 07:17 AM | #1 |
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: UK
|
runway lengths
Does anyone know where I can find comprehensive data on required runway lengths for aircraft? Specifically I am most interested in 50s/60s prop liners.
|
02-28-2017, 09:02 AM | #2 |
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: traveller
|
Re: runway lengths
Runway Length Requirements for Airport Design
The actual figures and charts won't have changed substantially since the 60's, except for some minor increases for safety. If you input your aircrafts' performances, this should be close enough. |
02-28-2017, 02:42 PM | #3 |
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: UK
|
Re: runway lengths
I had a look at that, and couldn't really make sense of it. I don't really have performance stats for aircraft (except for what's on wikipedia). A lot of what that page said was essentially "look on these links to the manufacturer's site", but manufacturers being what they are, won't reliably be expected to have data for obsolete aircraft up front. In some cases, the companies have ceased trading or their websites are not in English, making it even harder to look it up in the suggested manner.
The aircraft I consider as representative of the performance I am interested in are: Douglas DC-6 (1946, 58 passengers, 97k lb max wt., 311 mph cruise speed) Vickers Viking (1945, 36 passengers, 34k lb, 210 mph) Vickers Vanguard (1959, 139 passengers, 141k lb, ? mph) Bristol Britannia (1952, 139 passengers, 185k lb, 357 mph) Illyushin Il-18 (1957, 93 passengers, 141k lb, 388 mph) Antonov An-10 (1959, 100 passengers, 121k lb, 392 mph) Tupolev Tu-114 (1958, 170 passengers, 289k lb, 478 mph) |
02-28-2017, 03:12 PM | #4 |
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: traveller
|
Re: runway lengths
Ah, sorry. On a cursory look I thought the charts you need were included.
Try this thread on the Bristol Britannia: http://www.pprune.org/aviation-histo...e-off-run.html Only the Tu-114 is heavier: maybe take the Britannia figure (8,000 ft at sea level and moderate temperatures) and add 25% (i.e., sqrt(289/185))? |
02-28-2017, 04:49 PM | #5 | ||||||
Join Date: Sep 2007
|
Re: runway lengths
Google gives me some hits.
Takeoff distances*: 6360 ft Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
-- * Usually over a 50' obstacle (standard metric at least for the US FAA) ** based on Vickers Viscount data. The Vanguard is a Viscount with a heavier "double bubble" fuselage, albeit more powerful engines, so I'm guessing it needs a bit more runway. |
||||||
02-28-2017, 06:11 PM | #6 |
☣
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Southeast NC
|
Re: runway lengths
Idlewild (later JFK, in New York) opened in 1948 with its longest runway at 9500 feet. Heathrow' longest runway was 9200 feet, and Orly 7874 feet.
As noted by Anaraxes, "takeoff distance" can be a bit longer than the paved runway length, as it includes "off the ground by too low and slow to usefully maneuver" and part of that distance need only be clear of tall obstacles.
__________________
RyanW - Actually one normal sized guy in three tiny trenchcoats. |
03-01-2017, 04:00 AM | #7 |
GURPS FAQ Keeper
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Kyïv, Ukraine
|
Re: runway lengths
Off-the-cuff recall of an amateur light craft flier (so take with a grain of salt):
An-10: 700-800m of acceleration, 600-650m of running. Il-18: 1000m of acceleration, 800m of running. Tu: 1600m of acceleration, 1550m of running. |
03-01-2017, 09:15 AM | #8 |
Join Date: Dec 2012
|
Re: runway lengths
Also remember that the takeoff distance will vary considerably based on the aircraft weight, the direction and speed of the wind, the altitude of the airport, and the ambient air temperature. Lighter weight of course means a shorter takeoff distance and both higher altitude and higher temperatures mean a longer takeoff distance. Wind direction and speed can mean either a longer or shorter takeoff. I would assume Anaraxes' numbers are for sea level, a fairly moderate temperature, and calm winds. Commercial pilots have to do calculations before every takeoff to make sure the conditions and runway length (among other things) are within tolerances (with a safety margin added in). However, adventuring situations allow for some shortcuts and ignoring things like safety margins in case of engine failure.
|
03-01-2017, 12:03 PM | #9 |
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: UK
|
Re: runway lengths
The specific reason I am asking is that I am trying to create a game world in which jet aircraft never (or have not yet at least) became a thing, and I am trying to figure out, for London at least, what the realistic alternatives were for Heathrow Airport. This requires a combination of determining what the required runway length would have been for aircraft of that age, and looking at likely candidate airfields to see how much room there was to expand. Thanks to this thread so far, I have firmly ruled out an expanded Croydon (the Webb Estate to the south-west would have firmly vetoed it).
Morden looks like a possible, as it was relatively undeveloped in the 30s. Kenton is another possibility. However, neither has an existing airfield, and both are on uneven ground, at least relative to Heathrow. Denham has some potential, as well as an existing airfield and rail links. Going farther afield, I could make Hatfield the main London airport for this purpose, thanks to its historic aviation links, but that feels too far given that ground transport would also be slower at this tech level. The other likely site is the Woolwich/Plumstead marshes area, except that is SE London, and therefore low on prestige, and along the lower Thames area, so suffers again. Northolt could be another option (and in fact one of the 521st century proposals for Heathrow's current capacity woes involves making Northolt a full-scale commercial airport). Does anyone have any alternate suggestions? I'm probably looking for a space that was reasonably greenfield during the 30s-50s, lacks serious hills, avoids "anti-prestige" sites, and has potential for good transport link to central London. Useful map reference: https://wtp2.appspot.com/wheresthepath.htm Map key: OS (and most others): modern maps Old 25K: 1950s? Shows Heathrow with six runways. 1930s OS: 1930s? No Heathrow. Cassiobury Estate in Watford present. Historical OS: 1920s? No Heathrow. Cassiobury Estate in Watford unbuilt. |
03-01-2017, 12:30 PM | #10 |
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
|
Re: runway lengths
Is there some reason you need an alternative? Aircraft are to a significant degree designed with runways in mind, and there is no particular obstacle to prop planes that can use the same runways as jets.
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|