- Joined
- Jun 7, 2008
- Messages
- 24,222
- Display Name
Display name:
Bob Noel
Do you think the airlines need runways less than 5k feet?
Do you think small GA needs runways longer than, say, 3000'? (at sea level, adjust the length for high DAs).
Do you think the airlines need runways less than 5k feet?
Why do we need paved 3,000' runways? Russia has 16,000 grass strips. Not that I want to compare the US to Russia, but why exactly do we need short paved runways? Europe uses grass too. While I have no experience operating a runway or airport, my gut tells me that it would be cheaper to use grass.
What do other people think?
How this ties into User fees, is why should we maintain runways with user fees?
Why do we need paved 3,000' runways? Russia has 16,000 grass strips. Not that I want to compare the US to Russia, but why exactly do we need short paved runways? Europe uses grass too. While I have no experience operating a runway or airport, my gut tells me that it would be cheaper to use grass.
The reason they don't have much GA is because it's too bloody expensive. One of the reasons it's too bloody expensive is user fees.
Steingar,
Wow, you totally missed the point of my post and zeroed in on the political aspects of it, at which point, you overlooked my question. Please reread it. BLUF: Why do we need short paved runways? I understand commercial airports would still need paved runways, but why do small towns? In my opinion it is a waste of money and looks awful, which is why I believe communities are trying to close them down. For the sake of this argument, look at pictures of Meigs airport in Chicago that got closed down. Imagine that you could still land aircraft there, but on a grass vs. paved run way that was aesthetically pleasing to look at and user friendly. Also, imagine that it wasn’t fenced off and was open to the public for trailing running / walking/ biking, etc. One is a paved eye sore, while the other has charm and character and is part of the community and not blocked off.
I don't get this idea at all. If I were landing on a grass strip (or anywhere else), I would certainly not want it open for anyone to just wander out and picnic on. Or walk, ride, bike or whatever. Certainly not in anything even close to an urban area. You want joggers with ear buds stuffed in their ears using the runway when you're on final? Or wandering around the hangars of all the aircraft based at the field? Not I... maybe I'm not getting what you had in mind.Also, imagine that it wasn’t fenced off and was open to the public for trailing running / walking/ biking, etc.
User fees make sense to me. I don't use ATC services but pay for them. Any user fee is going to be in addition to what we have now, so I don't support them. But I would gladly switch from fuel to fee for service. Stop all those IFR guys from freeloading off my fuel purchases.
Steingar,
Wow, you totally missed the point of my post and zeroed in on the political aspects of it, at which point, you overlooked my question. Please reread it. BLUF: Why do we need short paved runways? I understand commercial airports would still need paved runways, but why do small towns? In my opinion it is a waste of money and looks awful, which is why I believe communities are trying to close them down. For the sake of this argument, look at pictures of Meigs airport in Chicago that got closed down. Imagine that you could still land aircraft there, but on a grass vs. paved run way that was aesthetically pleasing to look at and user friendly. Also, imagine that it wasn’t fenced off and was open to the public for trailing running / walking/ biking, etc. One is a paved eye sore, while the other has charm and character and is part of the community and not blocked off.