Talk:Berlin Tegel Airport: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Nodescriptive Runway usage) |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
Does this sentence in the introduction really make sense ? It should be clear that aircraft always operate into the wind, thus specifying runway usage makes no sense, if there are only parallel runways. Only sense would be to point out in case one of the parallel runways primarily is used for departures only and the other for arrivals only. (Procedures like being in place at LHR or CDG). | Does this sentence in the introduction really make sense ? It should be clear that aircraft always operate into the wind, thus specifying runway usage makes no sense, if there are only parallel runways. Only sense would be to point out in case one of the parallel runways primarily is used for departures only and the other for arrivals only. (Procedures like being in place at LHR or CDG). | ||
If nobody complains, I would like to remove the sentence in question from the article. | If nobody complains, I would like to remove the sentence in question from the article. [[User:Archie02|Archie02]] 09:09, 6 November 2008 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 09:09, 6 November 2008
"Approximately seventy percent of operations use 26L & 26R when the prevailing winds are from the west. 08L & 08R are most frequently used in clear weather when prevailing winds are from the east."
Does this sentence in the introduction really make sense ? It should be clear that aircraft always operate into the wind, thus specifying runway usage makes no sense, if there are only parallel runways. Only sense would be to point out in case one of the parallel runways primarily is used for departures only and the other for arrivals only. (Procedures like being in place at LHR or CDG).
If nobody complains, I would like to remove the sentence in question from the article. Archie02 09:09, 6 November 2008 (UTC)