View Full Version : YSSY this morning.
NathanJ
25th February 2017, 08:43 AM
Hey All, Any ideas what's happening at the airfield today? 16R appears to be partially closed. Qf26 & Qf12 a380 landing on 16L??? Wowzers! China Southern a380 diverting to BNE?
Rob Fluke
25th February 2017, 09:04 AM
Pavement failure..All departures will go from Golf while looks like quite a number of acft are diverting to YBBN
NathanJ
25th February 2017, 09:22 AM
Thanks Rob... American just landed 16L. Should be an interesting morning!
16R has reopened with Korean departing...
Grahame Hutchison
25th February 2017, 11:37 AM
Qantas A380 VH-OQE did a go around on Runway 16R because of the pavement failure, then landed on Runway 16L and had 6 Fire Tenders following it on Taxiway Tango. Apparently they called PAN earlier.
A Tiger aircraft departing from Bravo 4 reported debris on the edge of the runway and a whole in the pavement.
http://www.16right.com/MessageBoard/ADS-B 20170225-A.JPG
NathanJ
25th February 2017, 12:22 PM
I don't recall an a380 ever landing on 16L / 34R ?
MarkR
25th February 2017, 09:28 PM
For Qantas it's not an approved option unless it's the only option.
lloyd fox
26th February 2017, 07:41 AM
We in BNE got 4 international diversions including CZ 380 and DL 777.
Mick F
26th February 2017, 01:50 PM
I'm guessing probably some pretty hot brakes after landing on 16L. And shorter than 34R!
David C
26th February 2017, 09:38 PM
16L landing distance available (LDA) is a published 2207M , 34R LDA is a published 2400M .
Dave C
Mick F
27th February 2017, 06:06 AM
Does anyone know why when they built 16L/34R, they didn't make it just a few hundred metres longer? Often those few hundred metres would make a world of difference with arrival and departure, in particular our friendly Asian cousins who insist on 16R/34L, because of I'm assuming marginal performance on 16L/34R?
Or is it just another case of being typically Australian and not looking forward beyond the next 5 years because it's fine for the current situation?
Mick
David C
27th February 2017, 08:12 AM
That question has always intrigued me too . From my non expert position , I couldn't see the logic of building a parallel runway 1500M shorter than the main parallel when building space was not an issue . It would have provided an opportunity for true noise sharing with landings and take offs before swapped at time intervals between the two runways without any performance issues . Look at LHR , ICN , JFK just to name a few , and there are many airports around the World who have equal or near equal length parallel runways , and observe the advantages .
Dave C
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.