daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Continental Forums > OZScrapers > Local Projects & Discussions > KiwiScrapers > Local Forums > Wellington



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old January 11th, 2018, 06:43 PM   #781
cle
Registered User
 
cle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,096
Likes (Received): 524

On Airliners, people were speculating about the upcoming announcement of a WLG - ADL - AUH route on Etihad. Any thoughts?

Is there much Wellington - Adelaide demand? There isn't a flight to ADL from the South Island either, so that could be another source of demand (as per Canberra).

I think it's interesting, but Perth would be more useful. Not sure of the runway/payload implications though.
cle no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old January 11th, 2018, 11:16 PM   #782
JeffRef
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 390
Likes (Received): 67

Quote:
Originally Posted by cle View Post
On Airliners, people were speculating about the upcoming announcement of a WLG - ADL - AUH route on Etihad. Any thoughts?

Is there much Wellington - Adelaide demand? There isn't a flight to ADL from the South Island either, so that could be another source of demand (as per Canberra).

I think it's interesting, but Perth would be more useful. Not sure of the runway/payload implications though.
It always gets back to runway length. Etihad operate the A330 and 777LR which are both better suited to Wellington than the 777 200ER operated by Singapore to Canberra but Adelaide is 500 miles or another 7 tonnes of fuel further and another 7 tonnes of payload less.

I will just add what the new runway could bring to Wellington for an "average" aircraft.
In tonnes of payload or fuel
+ 355 M 25 tonnes (90 M RESA)
+ 655 M 33 tonnes (240 M RESA)
The 655 M option provides only provision for 150 M to be used on takeoff with no additional available for landing
If you had another 50 M on top of either of the above there would be an extra 2.5 tonnes give or take
As a runway lengthens beyond a certain point aircraft acceleration drops and runways need to be longer
As an example only
Increasing by 300 M from 2300 metre benefit 15 Tonne
From 2600 metres Benefit 13 tonne
From 2900 metres Benefit 10 tonnes
Note this is an indication only
You can visit the Airbus and Boeing websites to get "actual" figures for generic aircraft but these will differ from actual weights of a specific aircraft supplied to an airline.

Last edited by JeffRef; January 11th, 2018 at 11:59 PM. Reason: Adding "average" airfield performance
JeffRef no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 02:24 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

tech management by Sysprosium