Dangerous Runways In India
Dangerous Runways In India
According to a report there are so many runways in India which are very risky for landing due to many circumstances like short runway or geographical conditions. According to the International Standards, the length of the runway should be 9000 feet. But in India there are many runways which are far short of standards. The risky runways of India are as follows :
1.PATNA : Length of the runways is just 6410 feet instead of 9000 feet.
2.JAMMU : Length of the runway is just 6700 feet and aircrafts has to take a sharp turn because if they take a long turn, they will touch International boundary of Pakistan
3.MANGALORE :Table Top runway with runway length of 8038 feet accounted with bad weather and poor visibility..
4.CALICUT :This runway is also known for Table Top runway.
5.AIZWAL : This runways is also known for Table Top runway and surrounded by high mountains on its sides.
6.KULLU : The runway is extremely short and it is situated in deep valley hence generally hard landing is observed there.
7.LEH :Short runway and aircrafts has to take off and land in one direction only,hence it is very risky.
8.PORT BLAIR : There is a road which cuts the runway and traffic remains throughout the day.
9.LATUR :This is the only airport which has no boundary wall,hence it is risky in terms of safety.
10.AGARTALA: The length of the runway is just 7500 feet accommodated with low visibility & nearness of International Boundary of Bangladesh.
Make Darbhanga international airport, Nitish Kumar urges Hardeep Singh Puri
Mangaluru: Security breach? Toy helicopter lands inside airport compound
Crash in Mumbai; 5 Persons Killed in Plane Crash
About Author
Thanks a lot.
Where did you read that 9000ft is an international standard? 9000ft is only a requirement for naming the airport as an ‘international airport’. It is nowhere a necessity for smaller airports which have no such international operations. It is deemed a necessity for international operations because international ops will mean the occasional bigger jet like the 747 or 340 landing there. An airport which serves domestic traffic which usually constitutes narrow body jets or even smaller private jets in noway requires 9000ft. It can very well do with even 7500ft. A smaller runway does not mean a risky runway. Why would an airport which only serves turboprops and VLJs require 9000ft??? Please get your facts right.
Dear Reader, generally the boeing take around 5500 feet of runway for landing on dry runway .But in cases of wet runway it takes around 1000 feet more and DGCA considers if the touch down is beyond 1000 than there should be enough length for the aircraft to stop.This is the reason why 9000 feet is considered to be safe limit.