Circle Runway

[ScudRunner-d95]

You may have seen this stupid idea floating around Facebook. Seriously WTF I guess anyone can get funding for "research"



[facebook][/facebook]

[woodzi]

Cool. I can take my flying car to the racetrack to take off and land.

[Liquid Charlie]

That has been around for years -- I'm thinking I first heard of that concept 30 years ago -- internet is just catching up -- haha

[red_shiny_ribbon]

Kallang airport in Singapore used to have a similar system during and shortly after WW2.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kallang_Airport


I love all the pretentious pilot comments on Facebook like, "I bet the doesn't have a single hour in the air". Yes, because I'm sure being a pilot is a requirement to being something like, say, and aircraft designer/aerospace engineer.

[Trey Kule]

I have no idea of the guy's aviation credentials, but I really do not understand how this would work in today's environment.  When planes typically needed about 2000 ft or so back in the 40s, any small field would work. Round or square.


I would like to hear this designer answer some of the technical questions.

[cgzro]

There is absolutely no reason physical why a plane could not take off and land in a continuous banked turn. If they should is a different question.



There are probably interesting safety issues with respect to engine failures on the inboard side and I suspect your rotation speed would have to be raised not only as a result of the turn angle but also to accommodate an inside engine failure.


The runway bank angle and radius have to be tailored to a specific speed which means that some aircraft will be landing faster than they would normally in addition to the increased speeds for the angle and engine failure margins. Of course with infinite length there is no risk of going of the end and no need of brakes or reversers.


Perhaps in the day of full automation ..

[Trey Kule]

Well, if you make a circular runway with sides sloped to the down to the inside, you have a bowl.
Now add in wind which will change from the approach to immediately before and after landing...remember you are landing in an arc where the headwind should only be at your point of touchdown.
Now factor in the crosswind that is flowing across the bowl.
Heavy aircraft do not typically have a great deal of tolerance to allow a wind drop to start with.
And we are not talking landing rolls of a few hundred feet here.
then lifting off in what amounts to a turn (not just a bank) raises the takeoff speed, and the aircraft is taking off with a high side so they have to turn inwards into the airport.



then there is the issue of how to set up approaches. Approach lighting. Departure procedures including the multiple types of heavy aircraft that may need  different starting points.
Now throw in a few conditions like contaminated runways...


I am not saying it can not be done with todays heavy, runway using equipment, but the article was a bit light on technical details.
And the fact they did it 50 years ago does not hold water..50 years we flew fighters and transports out of grass fields.
Not sure that would work today either, but you could argue that there should be no problem with doing it.