Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 25, 2018, 07:37:24 PM
Home Help Login Register
News:

CAP Talk  |  Operations  |  Aviation & Flying Activities  |  Topic: Dutch scientist proposes circular runways for airport efficiency
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: Dutch scientist proposes circular runways for airport efficiency  (Read 1323 times)
OldGuy
Seasoned Member

Posts: 314
Unit: TBKS

« on: January 29, 2018, 04:56:12 PM »

https://www.curbed.com/2017/3/24/15043986/endless-runway-airport-design

Logged
etodd
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,045

« Reply #1 on: January 29, 2018, 07:01:14 PM »

This one has been circulation on aviation FB pages and other forums for months. Craziest thing anyone has ever seen. Would be fun to watch planes trying to land with 40kt crosswinds.  ;D
Logged
MS - MO - AP - MP - FRO
Nick
Seasoned Member

Posts: 494
Unit: SWR-TX-001

« Reply #2 on: January 29, 2018, 10:59:09 PM »

Yeah Iíve seen this floating around too. I just donít get it. They say take off and land from any direction. Sure, but what happened to taking off and landing into the wind? And three simultaneous operations. Same thing, wouldnít all three planes need to take off and land into the same direction which would mean the same spot on the circle? It just seems that you get more action out of two parallel primary runways and two parallel crosswind runways than you would get with this design.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Logged
Nicholas McLarty, Lt Col, CAP
Texas Wing Staff Guy
National Cadet Team Guy
coudano
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,122

« Reply #3 on: January 29, 2018, 11:13:42 PM »

I think the point is that you can always fly directly into a wind...  regardless of where the wind is coming from
except for variable i guess

I think the high speed exit is even pretty sweet.

What I don't really get is how you get 387 tonnes going 175kts to turn around a nascar track without tipping over.  I imagine they've done that math, but oish.  ;)
Logged
Nick
Seasoned Member

Posts: 494
Unit: SWR-TX-001

« Reply #4 on: January 29, 2018, 11:19:32 PM »

Yeah that makes sense... but in how many places is the wind so variable? I thought thereís a fairly consistent predominant wind, and thatís how primary runways are established.

As for the NASCAR thing... that thought crossed my mind too. Talk about rudder input on takeoff...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Logged
Nicholas McLarty, Lt Col, CAP
Texas Wing Staff Guy
National Cadet Team Guy
SarDragon
Global Moderator

Posts: 10,264
Unit: NAVAIRPAC

« Reply #5 on: January 30, 2018, 12:44:29 AM »

Yeah that makes sense... but in how many places is the wind so variable? I thought thereís a fairly consistent predominant wind, and thatís how primary runways are established.

As for the NASCAR thing... that thought crossed my mind too. Talk about rudder input on takeoff...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

FWIW, them NASCAR fellas are going in excess of 175 kts at Daytona and Talladega and don't usually tip over.
Logged
Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret
coudano
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,122

« Reply #6 on: January 30, 2018, 12:47:06 AM »

They also have more than one point of contact up front, wider relative wheel base, lower CG, and aren't hauling quite as much inertia :)
Logged
Mitchell 1969
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 733
Unit: PCR-CA-051

« Reply #7 on: January 30, 2018, 04:31:45 AM »

This one has been circulation on aviation FB pages and other forums for months. Craziest thing anyone has ever seen. Would be fun to watch planes trying to land with 40kt crosswinds.  ;D

Iíve been seeing variations of this crackpot idea for nearly 50 years. Every few years some new guy comes along who thinks he invented it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Logged
_________________
Bernard J. Wilson, Major, CAP

Mitchell 1969; Earhart 1971; Eaker 1973. Cadet Flying Encampment, License, 1970. IACE New Zealand 1971; IACE Korea 1973.

CAP has been bery, bery good to me.
Nick
Seasoned Member

Posts: 494
Unit: SWR-TX-001

« Reply #8 on: January 30, 2018, 08:21:52 AM »

Yeah that makes sense... but in how many places is the wind so variable? I thought thereís a fairly consistent predominant wind, and thatís how primary runways are established.

As for the NASCAR thing... that thought crossed my mind too. Talk about rudder input on takeoff...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

FWIW, them NASCAR fellas are going in excess of 175 kts at Daytona and Talladega and don't usually tip over.
They also donít have 100 foot-wide lift producing devices requiring constantly changing wind correction as they went around and around. In fact, the NASCAR cars have things intentionally designed to keep them on the ground.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Logged
Nicholas McLarty, Lt Col, CAP
Texas Wing Staff Guy
National Cadet Team Guy
TheSkyHornet
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,086

« Reply #9 on: January 30, 2018, 09:43:10 AM »

Those poor landing gear assemblies...
Logged
Live2Learn
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 570

« Reply #10 on: January 30, 2018, 12:16:34 PM »

https://www.curbed.com/2017/3/24/15043986/endless-runway-airport-design

Perhaps the intent is to provide (a) a much larger and acreage consuming foot print; and (b) more practice retrieving aircraft after a runway excursion.  It's a form of job creation, plus a safety net for the hull insurance providers (much more business).
Logged
Robborsari
Forum Regular

Posts: 173
Unit: SER-TN-128

Tennessee Wing
« Reply #11 on: February 19, 2018, 12:06:11 AM »

Here is an article about FSX scenery so you can give it a try at home:

http://www.simgazine.com/freeware-endless-runway/

I like his idea better than most of these:

https://io9.gizmodo.com/these-are-the-floating-airports-of-our-dreams-986436836

Oops, missed the taxiway....
Logged
Maj Rob Borsari
Group 1 CC / Wing DO
SER-TN-128
I_Am_Twigs
Recruit

Posts: 48
Unit: RMR-ID-069

« Reply #12 on: February 19, 2018, 04:53:39 PM »

I see many flaws with this design.

Quote
And three planes would be able to take off or land at the same time.

Cool! Now if that would work in non-ideal weather, it'd only happen on a good day when there's very little or no wind.

Also, what happens when a plane crashes? I believe that on standard airports they shut down the runway that the debris is on and redirect planes to another, how are you going to do that here?! Shut down the whole runway? Even then you can land on the other side of the runway, but what if there's a cross wind or a tailwind? What then?

Then in limited spaces how are you going to get to your terminal? You can construct tunnels under the runway, but then what if you're in a tight space and can't build any tunnels? You obviously can't drive across the runway. how about helicopters? Well then that's just inefficient, that's just wasting more fuel. Bridges? That would restrict the planes' landing zones even more. So the tunnels seem like the best option but there's still that problem with having room for them.

Also, where would you park? Most airports these days have stacked parking lots, where are you going to put that here? Outside the circle? No, because for most people that'd be too long of a walk to get to the terminal. Transport shuttles? Well if you're going to do that you'd still need those tunnels and room for it, not to mention the parking lot too.

Lastly, how are planes going to take off/land on a curved runway? A small plane (Cessna 182) lands at about 60ish knots and a large plane (Boeing 777) lands at about 150ish knots. Going that speed it'd be quite hard to land on a curved runway especially with a machine that's meant to fly.
Logged
1st Encampment 2016 
2nd Encampment 2017
C/CMSgt, First Sergeant, CAP
 
TheSkyHornet
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,086

« Reply #13 on: February 20, 2018, 09:57:27 AM »

I see many flaws with this design.

Quote
And three planes would be able to take off or land at the same time.

Cool! Now if that would work in non-ideal weather, it'd only happen on a good day when there's very little or no wind.

No, it wouldn't work even in ideal weather. I'll explain more below.

Quote
Also, what happens when a plane crashes? I believe that on standard airports they shut down the runway that the debris is on and redirect planes to another, how are you going to do that here?! Shut down the whole runway?

Many airports only have a single runway, or intersection runways. If the runway is shut down, so be it. You'd never have an aircraft land on the same runway (straight or not). Just as you said---debris, possible collision with the accident scene; a number of potential problems.

Quote
Even then you can land on the other side of the runway, but what if there's a cross wind or a tailwind? What then?

You won't have just a crosswind, tailwind, or headwind. Because you're on a circular path, your relative wind will always be shifting. That's extremely dangerous because it will constantly require additional control inputs, not to mention those that you're adding in already because of the fact that you're traveling round in an ellipse.

Quote
Then in limited spaces how are you going to get to your terminal? You can construct tunnels under the runway, but then what if you're in a tight space and can't build any tunnels? You obviously can't drive across the runway. how about helicopters? Well then that's just inefficient, that's just wasting more fuel. Bridges? That would restrict the planes' landing zones even more. So the tunnels seem like the best option but there's still that problem with having room for them.

I tunnel is not so much as issue. That can be handled in engineering. I'd be more concerned about a high-speed taxi out due to the bank of the runway. It needs to be constructed kind of like a NASCAR tack, on an angle. There are points at which you'll have dips and hills to travel over to enter and egress from the runway.

Quote
Also, where would you park? Most airports these days have stacked parking lots, where are you going to put that here? Outside the circle? No, because for most people that'd be too long of a walk to get to the terminal. Transport shuttles? Well if you're going to do that you'd still need those tunnels and room for it, not to mention the parking lot too.

You can build a terminal in the center or on the exterior, anywhere really. That's just road-mapping the design plan.

Quote
Lastly, how are planes going to take off/land on a curved runway? A small plane (Cessna 182) lands at about 60ish knots and a large plane (Boeing 777) lands at about 150ish knots. Going that speed it'd be quite hard to land on a curved runway especially with a machine that's meant to fly.

The speed isn't so much the issue. You can travel around the circle as long as it takes to build up the speed.

The problem is that you have the factor of centripetal force, and it's exerting a great deal of acceleration on the aircraft, including the people on board. But I'm more concerned about the fact that you have landing gear in a constant turn, considering on almost all aircraft, the main gear don't pivot in turning. That's a lot of side exertion.

Additionally, you have to consider that this aircraft is taking off on an angle into an ever-changing wind direction, as mentioned previously above. As it lift off, it needs to return to wings level. Someone is going to scrape a wing tip at some point. This just seems inherently dangerous.


The whole premise of this is to be innovative and come up with optional solutions. I admire that people sit around and think about these sort of things. Now let's scratch this option off the list of selection choices.
Logged
Pages: [1] Print 
CAP Talk  |  Operations  |  Aviation & Flying Activities  |  Topic: Dutch scientist proposes circular runways for airport efficiency
 


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP SMF 2.0.14 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.47 seconds with 20 queries.