TravelTalkOnline Forums Travel and Vacation Forums St. Maarten - St. Martin Air France “reverse” runway-why.

Anyone know why the Air France jets routinely depart doing opposite the traditional direction? It doesn’t save them fuel as they have to turn around the island to her east anyway...

They did it everytime for two weeks in January. If the winds are neutral (calm) to favorable (headwind) it is their choice. Probably saves fuel as you get a normal climbout and a right 180ish turn enroute to Paris. Taking off towards the mountain requires an immediate climbing right turn and then either a left S turn to Paris or 3-3.5 more right turns (270ish) to get on course to Paris.

We fly United to EWR and on occasion they takeoff in the other direction. Few years back the guy just ahead of me as we were getting off the plane asked the pilot why he went that way. His answer was that we were to heavy to go over the mountains.

Also Air France would use runway 28 (280 degrees on compass pointing westish)while all the others in around that time were using runway 10 (100 degrees on campass pointing eastish).

I don’t know anything about the technicalities of why or under what circumstances an over the water take off is made but it is nothing new for the occasional plane to take off this way. We took a photo of Air France doing so in November after watching her do so several flights running during our time at BSV. In talking about it, someone mentioned the ultimate decision of which direction is up to the pilot. True? False? I don’t know and this could be pure fiction but we see it happen often enough that it no longer seems unusual to us and we’re not on island nearly as much as so many others.

Yeah, happens frequently when the wind is light. See it all the time.

We took off in that direction on American on 2/15.

Scott

The ultimate decision on all aircraft operations is the PIC (Pilot In Command/Charge). Ground operations are guided by controllers but ultimately every decision falls upon the PIC. Planes, and helicopters too, prefer to take off and land INTO the wind, it gives better lift and control.

A plane's performance is very dependent on weight. A slight tailwind on takeoff can add hundreds of feet needed to get off the ground so that's the primary consideration for takeoff. Planes are the heaviest at takeoff because they are full of fuel (JetA is 6 pounds per gallon) and need more length to get rolling and overcome the gross weight. If the winds are calm then the pilot may consider the weight and length of runway along with the departure requirements (Terrain or noise abatement) for his or her takeoff.

The AF and KLM jets are quite large, not as large as 747 but the A330 and A340 are large.

Bottom line is that the PIC makes the final decision in conjunction with the tower.

Oh we’ve taken off in that direction too. JetBlue to NY but that does make logistical sense (to me at least ) since you are headed in the right direction



I guess. I found this interesting.



Runway procedures http://www.uvairlines.com/admin/resources/TNCM.pdf] Runway 10 takeoff procedures. Seems the Ai Frances usual runway 28 (these days ) burns more fuel. Ultimately thought, it’s the pilots call
Just interesting.

This discussion reminds me of a joke about French tanks only having reverse gear.

A friend of mine is a Delta 777 captain and I was surprised to learn than short of an emergency, the boys back in Atlanta actually know and interact with what runways they are being offered and can tell them you cant use that one. I always thought they were doing self contained math in the cockpit for landing distances and so forth.

I dont like being told what to do so I wiuldnt like that part on a routine basis.

Haaa. I seem to remember something like that too. He who fights and runs away, lives to fight another day!

Sometimes the choice of runway is what weight it will handle. If a plane is designated “heavy” (max takeoff weight of 300k lbs or more) it may be directed to a particular runway. The ones designated “super” like the Airbus A380 are over 1mil. Lbs (or 500 tons), and are even more restricted regarding runway construction. Regardless, Pilots have to adhere to what the controllers tell them, unless the pilot declares an emergency. At that point the pilot controls what happens, but when it’s all over he will have a serious conversation with the FAA regarding his decisions. Just my 2 cents. Is anyone still awake?

From years ago, total rumor and likely without a single grain of truth in it, it was said that the first Eastern Airlines "Heavy" test flight out of SXM, over the hill and with a full load of fuel, had brush in the landing gear when it returned to Miami. In my opinion, that's implausible, and impossible for any airline to allow to happen. But it was a rumor which was thrown around in the bars for awhile.

I know that Eastern flew at least A300's into SXM, and possibly larger aircraft. I arrived on many Eastern (and Pan Am) flights, but I have zero recollection of the aircraft types.

As an airline nut, I miss most of those airlines. But most of them aren’t here for some operational inefficiencies or bad decisions on how to run the railroad. Pan Am was a stud with all the places they went. They were the “chosen instrument” to get to far flung places and we wouldnt have the 747 without Pan Ams Juan Trippe.

As for Eastern, they were the fun airline and Delta was the businessman’s airline. Eastern went to SXM and the Bahamas for vacation and Delta went to Dallas and Detroit for biz trips.

Same airplanes, same presence in Atlanta, but the efficient horse one the race.

Deregulation didnt help either of them as it revealed their weaknesses.

It would be cool to see them flying though.

https://www.google.com/search?q=pan...biw=736&bih=322#imgrc=8jOhpJNiRlSHoM

Pan Am probably brought the Jumbo into PJIA first if I had to guess.