Re: Fracturing the Pacific

From:         Graeme Cant <graemec@ibm.net>
Date:         28 Aug 1997 15:39:08 -0400
Organization: Kapor Enterprises, Inc.
References:   1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

Karl Swartz wrote:
 
> >Considering the benefits of twins, would investing in a bit of concrete
> >not be advantagious by the airlines with large Asia-America traffic?
> 
> That or other upgrades such as ILS at an airport which already has a
> long runway but perhaps doesn't have very good weather.

The ILS would be more important than the concrete.  I think in your
earlier posts you over-emphasised the importance of the runway and other
facilities compared with the weather.

The airlines - and Boeing - do not expect to ever actually use any of
these airports.  The logistics of recovering a load of passengers and a
large aeroplane from places like Majuro and Tarawa are not really
relevant.  What is needed is adequate length of concrete/asphalt and
predictably good weather.  Remote islands in the Pacific have good
weather and that's made them valuable.  Equally remote strips in the
Arctic will almost certainly lack the good weather.

An ETOPS airport MUST be available from a met viewpoint or the flight
cannot plan to use it and must fly a longer route.  From others'
comments, Barrow would be unavailable on many occasions because of fog
alone.

As I said, the ILS would be useful in lowering the minima but Arctic fog
has the reputation (I don't know it from experience luckily, I've stuck
to Pacific islands) of being hard to beat.

Graeme Cant