Hartsfield Jackson Atlanta International Airport

[ATLonthebrain]

Looks like the new 398' tower @ ATL is due to become operational next week. It'll be staffed just a couple of weeks ahead of the commissioning of the 5th runway. Wish they had made it 2' taller..just to see the number 400ft. for a control tower. Wow! 2nd tallest tower in the world after Bangkok, which is about 434ft.

DFW is the airport I have traveled through more than any other on the planet, aside from Palm Springs International, where I lived for over 9yrs. I've been flying through the airport for about 5yrs now, and I can attest that the airport has made huge strides in improving the terminal facilities occupied by AA - A, B, & C, along with the brand-new massive Terminal D. The concessions are very good, ever-expanding in concepts and new outlets. And the new Skylink train system is awesome, offering excellent views of the ramp operations and airfield from above. There are about 8-10 new Starbuck's there, created along with the construction of the train system's stations. So for anybody who can't live without their Starbuck's, they've got you covered @ DFW!

But DFW is far less busy than ATL, by about 30M passengers and 300K operations in 2005, especially after the closing of DL's hub there. I have heard that Terminal E, where DL's hub was located, needs a lot of attention in modernization. Perhaps it will get it now, with the airport being so interested in attracting another airline to establish a large presence to replace DL.

[Chachi]

I'll be one of the 1500 people on the new 5th runway (10-28) on Saturday, May 20th at 7:30am for the incredibly long 5K run. I'm bringing my little Canon SD200 camera to take some pics of the runway where it traverses I-285. If they're interesting I'll post them.

[ThrashATL]

The new 398' tower is in use as of last Saturday.... tallest in the U.S.

[Chachi]

Very nice photo!

I'm happy to say that runway 10-28 had its first commercial landing today around 6am. An inbound Delta flight from Tel Aviv, Israel.

[theelectricsm]

Originally Posted by Chachi

Very nice photo!

I'm happy to say that runway 10-28 had its first commercial landing today around 6am. An inbound Delta flight from Tel Aviv, Israel.

I was waiting for my flight this morning, and I had time to kill, so I headed to Concourse E. I went to the south end and immediately saw the South African Airways flight from Johannesburg/Cape Verde landing on the new runway. I saw a Song plane and at least half a dozen Delta MD-88s and AirTran 717s land one right after the other. After that flurry of activity, I saw nothing land on 10-28 for the remaining time that I stood there. It was getting close to the time I needed to head to my flight, but I kept saying to myself, "I'll leave after I see one more plane land," but I had to give up on that plan after 10-15 minutes.

[zodiac]

D@mn the new runway in ATL ...planes will have to taxi a great distant to get to the main part of the airport for passengars..

[theelectricsm]

Originally Posted by zodiac

D@mn the new runway in ATL ...planes will have to taxi a great distant to get to the main part of the airport for passengars..

It's really not that far. The FAA is saying it will take 15 minutes, but it hasn't been taking that long thus far. Besides, if it eliminates holding patterns and other delays in the air, then it will be doing its job. Furthermore, many airports have very long taxiing distances because they don't have the luxury of the compact, efficient layout that ATL has.

[ATLssMania]

Originally Posted by theelectricsm

It's really not that far. The FAA is saying it will take 15 minutes, but it hasn't been taking that long thus far. Besides, if it eliminates holding patterns and other delays in the air, then it will be doing its job. Furthermore, many airports have very long taxiing distances because they don't have the luxury of the compact, efficient layout that ATL has.

Yes, 15 minutes of taxiing is not bad at all. I once flew into Amerstdam's Schipol airport and we taxied for about a half hour...seemed longer than the flight from London!

[Chachi]

Originally Posted by zodiac

D@mn the new runway in ATL ...planes will have to taxi a great distant to get to the main part of the airport for passengars..

I read that the proper authorities are tossing around the idea of having flights that land on 9R/27L perform Land and Hold Short Operations (LAHSO) where a pilot not use the full length of the runway but, rather, that (s)he stop and hold short before reaching an intersecting runway, taxiway, or other specified point on the landing runway. This would allow recently landed plane on 10-28 to not have to taxi all the way to the end of 9R/27L, but rather cut across the runway and then cut across 9L/27R (take off runway) when it's cleared.

This would save taxi time to the terminal. LAHSO are never required, as far as I understand, and are at the discretion of the landing pilot. Many pilots are not big fans of LAHSO due to safety concerns.

[zodiac]

Thanks for the information everyone, I must say its still very impressive.

[theelectricsm]

Originally Posted by Chachi

I read that the proper authorities are tossing around the idea of having flights that land on 9R/27L perform Land and Hold Short Operations (LAHSO) where a pilot not use the full length of the runway but, rather, that (s)he stop and hold short before reaching an intersecting runway, taxiway, or other specified point on the landing runway. This would allow recently landed plane on 10-28 to not have to taxi all the way to the end of 9R/27L, but rather cut across the runway and then cut across 9L/27R (take off runway) when it's cleared.

This would save taxi time to the terminal. LAHSO are never required, as far as I understand, and are at the discretion of the landing pilot. Many pilots are not big fans of LAHSO due to safety concerns.

My observation on Saturday is that planes were crossing 9R/27L and then 9L/27R at their midpoints because that's where the taxiway from 10/28 is. The planes just wait for the runway to clear like all landing planes at Hartsfield have to do, which doesn't take very long. They just have to cross both a landing and takeoff runway. I don't understand why land and hold short has even been discussed. I'm mainly curious as to whether takeoffs are going to get to benefit from the new runway. Perhaps there will be times when 10/28 has relieved so much of the landing backlog that 8L/26R or 9R/27L can accommodate some takeoffs at peak times. I was recently 18th in line to takeoff on a Saturday morning, so it would be nice not to have those kinds of waits to takeoff.

[Fiorenza]

According to AJC

Air traffic controllers say the runway, which will increase the airport's capacity by 40 percent, will be used mostly for landings at first.

I take that to mean it will eventually be handling takeoffs as well, especially during times when there are more takeoffs than landings.

[Chachi]

Originally Posted by Fiorenza

According to AJC



I take that to mean it will eventually be handling takeoffs as well, especially during times when there are more takeoffs than landings.

I don't see why 10-28 can't handle take-offs. It's 9000' feet long, which is plenty of runway for 95% of what ATL sees. A fully loaded 747 with a full load of fuel for a 10+ hour flight would need more runway than 9000' especially in ATL in the summer in the middle of the day, with Atlanta's 1000' altitude. Since I haven't seen one of those babies since South African Airways stopped using their 747 for nonstop flights to Johannesburg/Cape Town.

[theelectricsm]

Originally Posted by Chachi

I don't see why 10-28 can't handle take-offs. It's 9000' feet long, which is plenty of runway for 95% of what ATL sees. A fully loaded 747 with a full load of fuel for a 10+ hour flight would need more runway than 9000' especially in ATL in the summer in the middle of the day, with Atlanta's 1000' altitude. Since I haven't seen one of those babies since South African Airways stopped using their 747 for nonstop flights to Johannesburg/Cape Town.

I don't think it's a question of being able to handle takeoffs -- it certainly can. Logistically, it's easier (or better) to use 10-28 for landings. Waiting in line on the ground isn't like having to wait in line in the air.

Are you saying that you haven't seen a 747 since South African switched to the A340-600? There aren't many at ATL, but Korean has a daily 747 flight to Seoul. Several 747 cargo freighters use ATL regularly. Occasionally you'll see an equipment change from another airline, like Lufthansa.

[Rail Claimore]

^Those 747s as well as 777s use 9L/27R for a reason, and it's conveniently located next to terminal E and the east air cargo complex. An extention of that runway from 11,889 ft to 13,300 ft is planned.

[ThrashATL]

There is a constant barrage of Polar Air 747 cargo flights using ATL.

[Chachi]

Originally Posted by theelectricsm

Are you saying that you haven't seen a 747 since South African switched to the A340-600? There aren't many at ATL, but Korean has a daily 747 flight to Seoul. Several 747 cargo freighters use ATL regularly. Occasionally you'll see an equipment change from another airline, like Lufthansa.

There is a huge difference between a 747 that is full with passengers and belly cargo and is fully loaded with fuel that will take it to its maximum nautical mile range, like the SAA Johannesburg and CapeTown flights did, and Korean Air's 747 with a 70% passenger load and very little belly cargo, because Korean Air Cargo has a daily 747 flight into ATL.

Most of the cargo flights into ATL are also making stops in other nearby US cities. I know that Lufthansa will usually continue on to Dallas-Ft Worth after it drops off and picks up ATL cargo. Polar Air's 747s hardly ever use Atlanta as a final stop before they begin their intercontinental journey, so they are rarely packed to Maximum take-off weight.

@Rail Claimore: I have heard that many people in the Atlanta aviation community would like 9L/27R to be extended from 11,889 to 13,300 feet, but I haven't heard of any definite plans. Are you getting that info from the ATL Master Plan, because that has projects on it that we aren't going to see for a very long time (South Terminal).

[Rail Claimore]

Originally Posted by Chachi

There is a huge difference between a 747 that is full with passengers and belly cargo and is fully loaded with fuel that will take it to its maximum nautical mile range, like the SAA Johannesburg and CapeTown flights did, and Korean Air's 747 with a 70% passenger load and very little belly cargo, because Korean Air Cargo has a daily 747 flight into ATL.

Most of the cargo flights into ATL are also making stops in other nearby US cities. I know that Lufthansa will usually continue on to Dallas-Ft Worth after it drops off and picks up ATL cargo. Polar Air's 747s hardly ever use Atlanta as a final stop before they begin their intercontinental journey, so they are rarely packed to Maximum take-off weight.

@Rail Claimore: I have heard that many people in the Atlanta aviation community would like 9L/27R to be extended from 11,889 to 13,300 feet, but I haven't heard of any definite plans. Are you getting that info from the ATL Master Plan, because that has projects on it that we aren't going to see for a very long time (South Terminal).

It's in the ATL master plan and is even specifically mentioned somewhere on the airport's website. I don't expect everything in the master plan to get built, but extending a runway 1411 ft isn't exactly the expensive and complex project two new terminals are.

[Snickers52]

Hartsfield earns top global efficiency award

By CHRISTOPHER QUINN
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

Published on: 06/08/06

A study released this week rated Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport as the most productive in the world when operating costs were balanced against flights and cargo handled, passengers moved and revenue generated.

"Atlanta is our global top efficiency award winner of 2006. Has been doing excellently," said Tae Oum, by e-mail from South Korea Wednesday.

Oum is president of the Air Transport Research Society and is a professor at the Sauder School of Business at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver. He is in Seoul for the Asian release of the annual report on 134 airports worldwide.

Ben DeCosta, general manager of Hartsfield-Jackson, could not be reached for comment.

The lineup of North America's five most efficient airports after Atlanta include: Tampa, Raleigh-Durham, Fort Lauderdale and Reno-Tahoe, Nev.

This was the fifth year the report was released. Researchers gather and analyze information from sources such as airport financial statements and the Federal Aviation Administration.

Chunyan Yu, one of Oum's collaborators, said they also measure revenue streams from non-airline services, such as restaurants and stores in an airport and costs for landing jets or planes. Researchers remove factors beyond airport managers' control, such as the size of the jets landing. Larger jets usually pay larger landing fees.

"Atlanta has consistently finished near the top," Yu said.

[Newnan]

great news