Engineer defends concept circular runway idea
1–10 of 44 posts
Re: Engineer defends concept circular runway idea
#2> If someone one hundred years ago would have said that we would be transporting as many passengers in aircraft as we would in trains, people may have thought , "a steam engine would never fit in an aircraft made of wood and ropes".
That's such an eloquent way of highlighting the need for conceptualisation in engineering but also the struggle to convince others (investors perhaps) that you're not a complete nutcase when you think outside the box.
Re: Engineer defends concept circular runway idea
#3> If someone one hundred years ago would have said that we would be transporting as many passengers in aircraft as we would in trains, people may have thought , "a steam engine would never fit in an aircraft made of wood and ropes". That's such an eloquent way of highlighting the need for conceptualisation in engineering but also the struggle to convince others (investors perhaps) that you're not a complete nutcase w…
If you're struggling to convince others it's best to leave the Galileo fallacy out of your arguments.
Just because something was thought to be ridiculous in the past and now we know better, that doesn't mean that your seemingly ridiculous idea is just as misunderstood and underestimated as that other idea was at the time.
Re: Engineer defends concept circular runway idea
#4As an airline pilot flying Boeing 757 and 767 I think this concept is really cool but it does overlook some fundamental principles of the unreliability of weather in order to be practical.
This week I have landed in variable winds gusting up to 45 knots and then every inch of wingtip clerance counts, a drawback of this design.
What if the aircraft makes a long landing (floats) and suddely faces a different wind component that subjects it to a tailwind.
Also, the full circle would only be useable on zero wind days which makes me wonder about the economical reality of having a large part of the pavement be unusable most days.
Re: Engineer defends concept circular runway idea
#5> If someone one hundred years ago would have said that we would be transporting as many passengers in aircraft as we would in trains, people may have thought , "a steam engine would never fit in an aircraft made of wood and ropes". That's such an eloquent way of highlighting the need for conceptualisation in engineering but also the struggle to convince others (investors perhaps) that you're not a complete nutcase w…
The thing with thinking outside the box is that you never really know if you're doing it right unless you hit the "jackpot". I.e. an idea seems obvious to you, but not to your co-workers/friends/bosses/whatever and is usually met with serious resistance from them. Especially in a work setting where you have to convince "non-technical" people. Sometimes it takes more than nice words to get your message across.
Re: Engineer defends concept circular runway idea
#6As an airline pilot flying Boeing 757 and 767 I think this concept is really cool but it does overlook some fundamental principles of the unreliability of weather in order to be practical. This week I have landed in variable winds gusting up to 45 knots and then every inch of wingtip clerance counts, a drawback of this design. What if the aircraft makes a long landing (floats) and suddely faces a different wind compo…
and conventional runways are ok with all wind? because the angle stays constant?
Re: Engineer defends concept circular runway idea
#7As an airline pilot flying Boeing 757 and 767 I think this concept is really cool but it does overlook some fundamental principles of the unreliability of weather in order to be practical. This week I have landed in variable winds gusting up to 45 knots and then every inch of wingtip clerance counts, a drawback of this design. What if the aircraft makes a long landing (floats) and suddely faces a different wind compo…
and conventional runways are ok with all wind? because the angle stays constant?
You never land with a tailwind and if the wind shifts the airport simply change the runway to the opposite one. If you use a circular runway and landing with a cross wind you would during your landing roll be subjected to a tailwind.
Sure, you could stop using that part of the runway but then we're back at the practical economical argument for this design.
Re: Engineer defends concept circular runway idea
#8Under one of the original articles, in the comments section some military pilot pointed that lateral forces on big airliner on this runway would break the fuselage and gear of the plane.
I'm disappointed that this argument wasn't addressed in todays article.
Re: Engineer defends concept circular runway idea
#9Under one of the original articles, in the comments section some military pilot pointed that lateral forces on big airliner on this runway would break the fuselage and gear of the plane. I'm disappointed that this argument wasn't addressed in todays article.
Given a radius of a curve and bank angle it is simple to calculate what the minimum required speed is to have 0 lateral force
Re: Engineer defends concept circular runway idea
#10Opposite Opinion:
REALITY CHECK: CIRCULAR RUNWAYS
http://theavion.com/reality-check-circular-runways/