Posted on 04/25/2017 2:09:26 PM PDT by DoughtyOne
Last month we published a video arguing the case for circular runways at airports, as part of a series called World Hacks. It took off and went viral.
The video has had more than 36 million views on Facebook and generated heated debate on social media - including within the aviation community. Many people are sceptical about the concept.
So we decided to hand-pick some of the top concerns and put them straight to the man proposing the idea: Dutch engineer Henk Hesselink.
This is what he had to say.
(Excerpt) Read more at bbc.com ...
Dumb as dog doo doo
Maybe yes. Maybe no.
If I can’t drive to my destination, I’m not going.
I’ll take the window seat away from the centrifugal force.
Just encase going around in circles causes someone to puke.
I don’t think there’s any maybe there. It makes runways WAY more expensive to build, makes multiple runways largely impossible and gains... nothing.
As a former AF pilot, this idea horrifies me. The last thing I want to do is engage nose-wheel steering immediately after touchdown.
It solves the angry runway problem.....
Doesn't matter what he has to say. This was looked at seriously 50 years ago, when I was in flight school. The Physics alone make it unsafe.
Traffic circles for airplanes? What could possibly go wrong?
He’s Dutch, he’s probably consuming edibles in hash bars.
So nothing will change for you. “:^)
They actually tried this at Wright-Patterson AFB (then Wright Field) during WWII.
There’s a reason the idea didn’t catch on then.
The runway is three miles around. There won’t be much centrifugal force.
Diminishing returns says too large of a radius makes the airport an impractical giant. On the plus side, urban encroachment will not diminish runway length.
Remember, it was initially difficult to land airplanes on a ship. It was thought to be very dangerous to land the shuttle in the glide mode with no go-around capability. Some people are stuck on the concept that future airplanes with be still configured as they are today.
From the video.
The runway can handle three to four times the traffic of a normal runway.
You can alter the approach on extremely windy days.
You can also alter the approach to avoid only one approach area having to bear the brunt of the noise all the time.
I’m not sold on it, but some of the benefits seem reasoned.
Push button Airbus pilots- Good luck!
Been there, done that.
Bunker Hill Outlying Field #8 / Naval Outlying Field 11713 /
Converse Airport (1I8), Converse, IN
http://www.airfields-freeman.com/IN/Airfields_IN_N.htm
About 2/3rds of the way down.
Thank you for your input. Perhaps that’s a deal killer.
I’m not convinced the curvature will require you to engage the nose-wheel immediately, but perhaps I’m not understanding your point clearly.
The runway is 3km long, not 3 miles. This is not much longer than your average runway at a major airport, which is why they’ve made the runway banked. The forces would be noticeable.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.