KSBS runway portion not useable for landing....

P

pstan

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
May 17, 2009
Messages
168
Display Name
Display name:
Stan
KSBS Steamboat Springs in Colorada, has 14/32 with 4452 feet. Runway 32 has a displaced threshold of about 600 feet. Runway 14 has no displaced threshhold. The AF/D here

http://aeronav.faa.gov/afd/02MAR2017/sw_278_02MAR2017.pdf

says LDA of 3852 feet for either 14 or 32. Why landing rwy 14 can you not use the full length of the runway?
Similarly, the ASDA is 3852 feet, the runway after the displaced thresshold cannot be used for take off or rejected take off?

thanks in advance for responses

**Notice the baffled PAPI...

Stan
 
pstan said:
KSBS Steamboat Springs in Colorada, has 14/32 with 4452 feet. Runway 32 has a displaced threshold of about 600 feet. Runway 14 has no displaced threshhold. The AF/D here

http://aeronav.faa.gov/afd/02MAR2017/sw_278_02MAR2017.pdf

says LDA of 3852 feet for either 14 or 32. Why landing rwy 14 can you not use the full length of the runway?
Similarly, the ASDA is 3852 feet, the runway after the displaced thresshold cannot be used for take off or rejected take off?

thanks in advance for responses

**Notice the baffled PAPI...

Stan
Click to expand...
Call 'em and ask.
 
Usually it has to do to terrain or obstructions, I can't tell if the terrain rises or drops off at the end of the runway, but the either could be the reason or possibly just the buildings off the end of the runway. ASDA for 12 may be the Same reason, just to keep airplanes higher off the approach end of 32.

I am mostly just guess, I don't recall ever landing there.

Brian
CFIIG/ASEL
 
I just got off the phone with SBS....the original design was for air taxis (e.g. Dash, commuters that used to fly in there and now go to Yampa) and if you try to land on the 1000 ft from the end of 32, you'll probably end up with an insurance investigation. As Brian pointed out, it's to keep airplanes higher off the approach to 32. For little bugsmashers, no problem because we're considerably slower, but it doesn't hurt to follow the directions.
 
Terrain rises north of the runway and there is a drop off south of the runway. As murphey sez it's not an operational concern for us bug smashers. I prefer to depart to the north but have been known to take off over town at full rpm and max manifold pressure. I'm sure it reverbs pretty good. <insert evil grin>
 
Clarke, isn't that why they have displaced threshholds? If there was terrain north of the airport that affected approaches to runway 14 then why is the threshhold displaced for runway 32 only? Am I missing something?

And... accelerate stop distance being 600 or so feet short of the runway length, for either direction, is because of terrain? The available distance to stop is affected by obstacles off the airport????
 
Terrain isn't really a problem to the north but it can be a bit disconcerting from a visual perspective. It might be a problem for larger aircraft with stabilized descent operating rules...dunno. I don't recall any obstacles off the south end of the runway. They may just want folks higher over town. Landing short of the runway from the south would be a really bad day since it would likely end the approach abruptly rather than with a rough taxi to the runway. That said I haven't seen many thresholds displaced for terrain lower than the runway...
 
Without looking at the airport, the issue may lie in the safety area off the end of the runway. Airport standards for most runways call for 1000 foot safety area off the end of the runway. If the safety area is less than that, the threshold may be displaced far enough to provide that distance. For the declared landing distance from the other direction, they may use the same shortened distance. It isn't that it can't be used, but they don't want pilots planning their landing distance for the full length.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top