john penta

Thanks for the info.

I wasn't looking for exact stuff, more what the lengths are that
planners use when planning for basing, emergency fields...things like
that.

The numbers that would (all other things being equal) allow one to
intelligently say "X can go here, here, here, and here, but not here,
here, here, and here. Meanwhile, Y can go here, here, here, and
here..."

Um. I really hope I'm making sense.

John

ed rasimus

You are making sense and considering the sort of stuff that a lot of
folks tend to overlook. There are even more issues than mentioned.
Things like load bearing capacity of the pavement. Aircraft not only
need to be supported by the runway, but also by the taxiways and
ramps. Large aircraft especially can sink through the pavement at high
gross weights. "Footprint" weight is important, considering max gross
weights as well as size and number of tires on the landing gear.

There are also some shortcuts to make runways that might not otherwise
be suitable OK. Things like jet barriers and arresting gear. A runway
too short for safe takeoff at high gross weight because it is
inadequate for a high speed abort, might become useable with a
departure end barrier installed. Or, a too short recovery field might
become an option with an approach end barrier capability deployed and
a suitably tail-hook equipped aircraft.

And, when considering suitability, don't forget compatible instrument
approaches.

waltbj01

Things like load bearing capacity of the pavement. Aircraft not only


SNIP:
Back in late 1957 I delivered their first F86D to the Kelly TX ANG to
replace their F80s. Upon deplaning we discovered the Dog's main gear
had sunk not into but through the asphalt of their parking ramp. . . .
Walt BJ