If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Runway ID
"Hilton" wrote in message nk.net... SJC's runway 29 is 303.3 degrees. ATW's runway 29 is 297.9 degrees. |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Runway ID
On Sun, 16 Oct 2005 04:27:48 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote: "Mike W." wrote in message ... No, Bill has this right. If rounded correctly, 045 becomes 'runway 4' and 055 becomes 'runway 6'. So why is it correct to round 045 down to 'runway 4' and 055 up to 'runway 6'? Ah, because the REAL rounding rule, designed so that averages will not become distorted high from rounding 1/2 up, is to round 1/2 to the EVEN number. I know of almost no teacher nor textbook that remembers this, much less why it is so. |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Runway ID
Morgans wrote: "Mike W." wrote No, Bill has this right. If rounded correctly, 045 becomes 'runway 4' and 055 becomes 'runway 6'. I'm sure I read a reg quoted earlier in this thread, that you got to choose going up or down, when it was --5. You would choose the number to which the magnetic variation is taking the runway. For example around the western US you would choose the higher number as if you don't you'll have to renumber the runway that much sooner. |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Runway ID
Ah, because the REAL rounding rule, designed so that averages will not
become distorted high from rounding 1/2 up, is to round 1/2 to the EVEN number. I know of almost no teacher nor textbook that remembers this, much less why it is so. That's because it's not so. The standard rounding rule is 5 goes up. The catch is that you ONLY round from the digit after the one you're rounding to. For example, .2447 rounds to .245 or to .24 or to .2 although a common error is to round (to the hundredths) as .25, because the "rounded to the thousanths" version would end in a five. When rounding, always round from the source, not an already adulterated version. Jose -- Money: what you need when you run out of brains. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Runway ID
"GeorgeB" wrote in message ... Ah, because the REAL rounding rule, designed so that averages will not become distorted high from rounding 1/2 up, is to round 1/2 to the EVEN number. If these runways were at the same field, your method would have runway designators that differ by twenty degrees for runways that have a difference in azimuth of only ten degrees. I think I'd round both in the direction that local magnetic variation was moving. |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Runway ID
I have seen many runways get renumbered after enough years of slow
change in the mag heading. Daytona Beach is an example that I can quickly remember. Runway 7 used to be runway 6 about 20 years ago. On Sun, 16 Oct 2005 17:11:12 -0400, "Morgans" wrote: "Newps" wrote You would choose the number to which the magnetic variation is taking the runway. For example around the western US you would choose the higher number as if you don't you'll have to renumber the runway that much sooner. What??? You don't rename a runway after it has been named. The reg has been quoted. Show me where it says you have to take the movement of magnetic variation into account. |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Runway ID
"Newps" wrote You would choose the number to which the magnetic variation is taking the runway. For example around the western US you would choose the higher number as if you don't you'll have to renumber the runway that much sooner. What??? You don't rename a runway after it has been named. The reg has been quoted. Show me where it says you have to take the movement of magnetic variation into account. -- Jim in NC |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Runway ID
"Morgans" wrote in message ... What??? You don't rename a runway after it has been named. The reg has been quoted. Show me where it says you have to take the movement of magnetic variation into account. "On a single runway, dual parallel runways and triple parallel runways, the designation number is the whole number nearest one-tenth of the magnetic azimuth when viewed from the direction of approach." |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Runway ID
Morgans wrote: "Newps" wrote You would choose the number to which the magnetic variation is taking the runway. For example around the western US you would choose the higher number as if you don't you'll have to renumber the runway that much sooner. What??? You don't rename a runway after it has been named. You most certainly do. Our parallel runways here at BIL were renumbered from 27 R+L to 28 R+L several years ago. They did this at the same time they rotated the VOR for the same reason. Another example is MSP. The parallel runways there were 11/29 until a few years ago when they were renumbered to 12/30 |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
Runway ID
Crystal airport (MIC) in Minneapolis area went from runways 4/22 to
6/24 a few years ago. I don't know why so much change though....... |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Pilots | Slick | Piloting | 4 | November 20th 04 11:21 AM |
Diamond DA-40 with G-1000 pirep | C J Campbell | Instrument Flight Rules | 117 | July 22nd 04 05:40 PM |
Diamond DA-40 with G-1000 pirep | C J Campbell | Owning | 114 | July 22nd 04 05:40 PM |
Diamond DA-40 with G-1000 pirep | C J Campbell | Piloting | 114 | July 22nd 04 05:40 PM |
Rwy incursions | Hankal | Piloting | 10 | November 16th 03 02:33 AM |