Laughs in Oshkosh EAA Fly-In. I think they land 3 at the same time on the same runway and take off 2 at a time on the busy days.
CO Mid-Air Collision
- Thread starter pilottravis
- Start date
Same at Sun n Fun. "Cleared landing xyz runway blue spot, next aircraft purple spot".. They don't even want you checking in on the radio. "Red and white high wing, rock wings to acknowledge, proceed next checkpoint"..
Doable every day every year...
I worked at Oshkosh in 2000 and 2001 with Civil Air Patrol. It was a super fun experience. Everyone ripped on me hard for being from California too.
Sure. But I understand that the runways closer to the terminals are preferred for takeoff while the ones further away are preferred to landings. I don't believe they typically have simultaneous landings one runways next to each other.
I was leaving Maui that day, had inter-hops changed... confidence building!
Having flown on civilian and military fixed and rotary wing aircraft I don't know how many hundreds of times, across the globe, 5 continents, crossing several oceans and seas many many times, I can affirm I'm very thankful to have never had an incident and that my flying days are pretty much over. WHEW... I don't see any flights in my future again really, no need or desire.
Crazy - A primary school classmate and friend, same town, same basic upbringing, has NEVER FLOWN. How radical is that?
Crazy - A primary school classmate and friend, same town, same basic upbringing, has NEVER FLOWN. How radical is that?
I'm talking commercial jets with 200 or 300 passengers each. If two singles crash together, not much carnage.
How is that much different than crosswinds causing two parallel planes to crash into each other?
San Francisco has two sets of parallel runways that intersect. I used to watch the traffic from the mezzanine of the A concourse on the International side. The timing of the operations is fascinating to watch. Two aircraft will take off from the one set while two others are on short final.
I think that depends on the runway spacing and weather. I know at SFO they go to single runway landings when the weather turns bad, but that's usually because of fog.
I thought at some airports where they're about the same length (like SJC), they use one for takeoffs and the other for landings. But that airport isn't busy enough to require simultaneous takeoffs and landings. Some of the busiest airports in the world use two parallel runways and have to do simultaneous landings.
However, this was a crash miles away from the airport.
Quite familiar with it. For years they've been talking about trying to rebuild with greater separation so that they can do simultaneous instrument landings in fog. Something like this:
It been some time since I flew out of there. It looks like a new concourse is blocking that view I described.
Most of the operations I saw were not exactly parallel. They stagger the planes somewhat. I would see it from ours as we would be on a wide body and the other plane was smaller.
I’m sure the greenies don’t like that plan
I've watched takeoffs before. Most of the time I saw that takeoffs were simultaneous. I guess it's not as dangerous because each pair is supposed to turn to a different direction. I've even watched as we "raced" the plane on the other parallel runway.
I suppose landings are a little bit harder to time to be simultaneous, but there are some that are pretty close.
I don't know about LAX, but many airports do this all day long, and it's not a problem. ATC coordinates size, speed, wake turbulence, etc. to avoid conflicts. It's not dangerous, but standard procedure.
It may happen in some special circumstances, like OshKosh, but it's not standard procedure. I've never seen ATC authorize this. ATC may instruct the next airplane to "position and hold" while the previous airplane is a mile down the runway taking off. But "hold" means don't move. ATC won't clear you for takeoff on the same runway until the previous airplane is up and away. Because that previous airplane may abort their takeoff.
I get that other airports (especially SFO) do simultaneous landings on parallel runways. However, I was reading about LAX, and they seem to use each closely spaced pair for separate takeoffs and landings.
But I'm pretty sure it's better to have them well spaced. I found the FAA's required centerline spacing for visual flight rules is 700 ft. SFO's notorious runways have a 750 ft centerline spacing. SFO would love to get it up to the 4300 ft minimum for instrument flight rules. SFO gets tons of delays whenever the fog rolls in.
In regards to SFO (in visual conditions), the planes landing 28L usually will be established on the runway centerline further out than the planes landing 28R. Then the planes landing 28R will be following a course with a very shallow intercept angle. This gives more time to see the plane you’re converging with, plus a lower chance of “overshooting final” if you’re the plane landing on 28R.
Overshooting final is one of my bigger concerns flying into bigger airports. Depending on the airplane, once ATC clears you to “intercept the final approach course” for your runway, you’ll usually arm the Localizer (LOC) mode on the Autopilot/Flight Director (AP/FD) immediately. This makes the plane join the runway centerline and track it inbound towards the runway. If you forget it and you’re distracted, you could easily overshoot the final. *This is all assuming ATC has been giving you assigned headings towards the localizer/runway centerline up to this point*
I usually brief the other pilot to hit the “LOC” button if they don’t see me do it immediately. Way too easy to miss it if you’re distracted.
I haven’t flown a Cirrus in years, but their AP/FD commands are probably very similar.
It’s still not foolproof though. You could have a strong trail wind on the “base leg” (90° angle from the runway) that either the pilot will misjudge or not notice, or the AP/FD isn’t capable of figuring out. Or, if you’re approaching the localizer too fast and at too steep of an intercept angle, the AP/FD often can’t figure it out either. Just depends on the plane…. Ironically, the best AP/FD I’ve ever flown was in the Saab 340. You could fly at 250 knots and 90° intercept angle and it would join the localizer perfectly. I’ve never seen another plane do that (737, MD80s, CRJ, etc.)
Overshooting final is one of my bigger concerns flying into bigger airports. Depending on the airplane, once ATC clears you to “intercept the final approach course” for your runway, you’ll usually arm the Localizer (LOC) mode on the Autopilot/Flight Director (AP/FD) immediately. This makes the plane join the runway centerline and track it inbound towards the runway. If you forget it and you’re distracted, you could easily overshoot the final. *This is all assuming ATC has been giving you assigned headings towards the localizer/runway centerline up to this point*
I usually brief the other pilot to hit the “LOC” button if they don’t see me do it immediately. Way too easy to miss it if you’re distracted.
I haven’t flown a Cirrus in years, but their AP/FD commands are probably very similar.
It’s still not foolproof though. You could have a strong trail wind on the “base leg” (90° angle from the runway) that either the pilot will misjudge or not notice, or the AP/FD isn’t capable of figuring out. Or, if you’re approaching the localizer too fast and at too steep of an intercept angle, the AP/FD often can’t figure it out either. Just depends on the plane…. Ironically, the best AP/FD I’ve ever flown was in the Saab 340. You could fly at 250 knots and 90° intercept angle and it would join the localizer perfectly. I’ve never seen another plane do that (737, MD80s, CRJ, etc.)
Last edited:
Brings to memory the pictures of B-17's that flew back.
Similar threads
