Taking off from Santa Ana (SNA) - wooo that was fun.

Joined
Aug 15, 2020
Messages
775
Location
Atlanta, GA
Went to visit some family in LA area and SNA (Santa Ana - John Wayne) is closest airport to them so opted to fly into SNA as Delta has a non-stop from Atlanta. Was About 4.5 hours outbound and 3.75 hours back so it was not a bad flight for a quick weekend trip.

I knew SNA had a short runway (5,700 feet) and watched some videos prior to this trip so kinda knew it was a full throttle brake hold takeoff, now experiencing it all I have to say is wowza. This was definitely something special versus the typical lazy takeoff down a 10,000+ foot runway. Video below it from today and the brake release jerked me back in my seat.

I would do this trip again just for the sports car takeoff. For reference 757-200 takeoff speed is typically around 160 MPH, from brake release to takeoff in my video its ~23-24 seconds. Not to shabby - lots of fun.

Delta 757-200 takeoff Santa Ana
 
Been there, done that. At least you didn't have Harrison Ford buzz your plane.


Renton Municipal Airfield has less than 5400 ft and that's where all 737s have their maiden flights. Boeing is currently allowed less than 500 operations per year, and they've been exceeding that. However, they theoretically have room to expand into Puget Sound.

1529607692341


 
Been there, done that. At least you didn't have Harrison Ford buzz your plane.


Renton Municipal Airfield has less than 5400 ft and that's where all 737s have their maiden flights. Boeing is currently allowed less than 500 operations per year, and they've been exceeding that. However, they theoretically have room to expand into Puget Sound.

1529607692341


Mind you those Renton departures are probably empty new planes so you are comparing apples to oranges. Flight I was on today was fueled to fly ~2000 miles to Atlanta with 60ish % passenger and baggage (DL still blocking middle seats). Not quite the same.
 
I love the little tricks on your brain flying does. Most of us are used to riding in cars, and even in a very fast car you only accelerate or decelerate for a handful of seconds at most. My brain always gets a little confused, in an interesting way, when you feel like you've been gaining speed for way longer than you ever have in your life. Same with the landing. The feeling of 'we should have stopped a long time ago', since most of your references have been land-based.

At least that's me.
 
My last flight was on a 757 from London to Washington DC, Dulles. I could tell on take off there was power in those engines. It was a narrow body and it was a long flight especially after missing my previous flight thanks to Brussels Airlines. The most unusual takeoff was from San Jose where the plane did a tight spiral climb until it reached a certain altitude and then resumed coarse to destination. (My guess because of all the small planes flying at lower altitude around the area?)
 
It used to be like that at STT and there was a mountain. Eastern would take L1011s in but on take off they would only put enough fuel in to get to St Croix (and meet regs i suppose) where they would land and refuel for the trip back.

You only other option back then was to go into Puerto Rico and take either PrinAir (sp?) or Virgin Air (DC3's) maybe Antilles Airboats (Grumman Albatross) or a ferry...

They have extended the runway many years ago by rolling what look like huge concrete jacks into the bay and filling with dirt and concrete, and taken the top off the mountain.

Anyway, there was a trip down memory lane.
 
Takeoffs out of SNA (John Wayne) are always a bit of a roller coaster, but it's really not about runway length. The takeoffs are performed that way in order to adhere to noise abatement rules that Orange County has put in place. Airlines can get fined if they don't perform that hot rod roller coaster and conform to noise abatement protocols.
 
However, they theoretically have room to expand into Puget Sound.


Grammatically speaking, that would be a very difficult and a costly measure to do that.

Nothing will happen at Boeing Field. Paine Field in Everett built a small passenger terminal and have been running flights out of there. I think that’s where the satellite airport will be. The problem at SeaTac is the terminal. They have been working on it for years and years now but the new international south terminal project plus the remodeling and expansion of the north terminal will help. It is not as passenger friendly as some airports I’ve been in.
 
Orange County has a lot of celebrities that live by the beach, who sued about noise decades ago, and got noise monitors installed all along the departure corridor. Huge fines are imposed on the airlines if the noise threshold is exceeded. Like, $50,000 for each instance. Don’t quote me on that, but it was big.

We used to train specifically for Orange County in the simulator. Full flap and max thrust takeoff. (flaps 3 in an A320, flaps 20 in a 757).

The procedure: Hold brakes, apply max thrust, with engines spooled, release the brakes, accelerate, rotate to 20-25 degrees nose up at max thrust and full flaps, at 1,500 feet, set climb thrust (big power reduction) and immediately lower nose to about 10 degrees.

The big change in thrust and pitch would really worry passengers and flight attendants.

The simulator training was dealing with an engine failure at that initial pitch attitude. You had to immediately lower the nose to maintain control.

Careful analysis by our engineering folks a few years ago revealed that our A320 and 757-200 were quiet enough to comply with all the noise regulations without all the special steps.

We do a normal takeoff now, flaps 1 in an A320, flaps 5 in the 757. Normal rotation and climb.

I suppose Delta hasn’t done the analysis if they’re still doing the max thrust, full flaps deal. It’s fun. Just not required any more.
 
Mind you those Renton departures are probably empty new planes so you are comparing apples to oranges. Flight I was on today was fueled to fly ~2000 miles to Atlanta with 60ish % passenger and baggage (DL still blocking middle seats). Not quite the same.

Sure. But it’s still a ridiculously short runway and where Boeing built the 757. I find it rather insane that they’ve used it for a 747.
 
Grammatically speaking, that would be a very difficult and a costly measure to do that.

Nothing will happen at Boeing Field. Paine Field in Everett built a small passenger terminal and have been running flights out of there. I think that’s where the satellite airport will be. The problem at SeaTac is the terminal. They have been working on it for years and years now but the new international south terminal project plus the remodeling and expansion of the north terminal will help. It is not as passenger friendly as some airports I’ve been in.

I don’t know about grammatically incorrect, but I was geographically incorrect since it’s on Lake Washington.
 
I don’t know about grammatically incorrect, but I was geographically incorrect since it’s on Lake Washington.

I just realized that I was referring to Boeing Field and not the Renton Municipal Airport so my geography was bass ackwards.
 
I love the little tricks on your brain flying does. Most of us are used to riding in cars, and even in a very fast car you only accelerate or decelerate for a handful of seconds at most. My brain always gets a little confused, in an interesting way, when you feel like you've been gaining speed for way longer than you ever have in your life. Same with the landing. The feeling of 'we should have stopped a long time ago', since most of your references have been land-based.

At least that's me.
I guess this is why my slow corolla with bouncy suspension and worn out mufflers feel faster than it really is.
 
It used to be like that at STT and there was a mountain. Eastern would take L1011s in but on take off they would only put enough fuel in to get to St Croix (and meet regs i suppose) where they would land and refuel for the trip back.

You only other option back then was to go into Puerto Rico and take either PrinAir (sp?) or Virgin Air (DC3's) maybe Antilles Airboats (Grumman Albatross) or a ferry...

They have extended the runway many years ago by rolling what look like huge concrete jacks into the bay and filling with dirt and concrete, and taken the top off the mountain.

Anyway, there was a trip down memory lane.

I was always shocked that 747s took off from Princess Juliana Airport all the way to Europe.

There was a plot line in the show Pan Am where a 707 makes an emergency landing in Haiti after a storm damaged it. Something about a passenger with a heart attack. Among other things they go looking for medical care but he dies anyways. But the runway is damaged and the pilot walks out to estimate how much runway he has to work with. All luggage is taken out, and he makes the command decision to leave the deceased passenger behind in order to allow a Haitian orphan on. And finally he burns off as much fuel as he can where he should have enough to make it to Miami.

As far as why even try, 747s have landed and taken off at Renton. They did a bit of interior work. Like this one where they undershot the runway.



 
I was always shocked that 747s took off from Princess Juliana Airport all the way to Europe.
IIRC on the return they had to stopover elsewhere in the Caribbean to fuel up for the trans-Atlantic. KLM did a stop in Curacao when they flew their 747-400's there and also picked up passengers.
 
IIRC on the return they had to stopover elsewhere in the Caribbean to fuel up for the trans-Atlantic. KLM did a stop in Curacao when they flew their 747-400's there and also picked up passengers.

I looked it up, and it was a nonstop from Amsterdam to St Martin. But the return flights on 747s and MD-11s went backwards to Curacao or Aruba.

I always wondered why the runways at Andrews weren't lengthened to 10,000 ft. That seems to be the magic number.
 
MUCH shorter runway than what airline pilots operate in and out of and many never will get to experience it. Lots of 7000 foot runways around regularly used by airline jets but less then that is rare ( New York LaGuardia is 7003 feet ).

Very impressive performance to be able to take off from a 5700 runway in a 757 and be able to fly to Atlanta. That plane is amazing. Is it load restricted, anyone know.

SXM is a lot longer, 7500 but the hill on departure can be a performance issue ( east wind all the time , they always take off towards it ). Our airline operates non stop flights ( 4.5 hours ) out of there , not sure if they were load restricted ( 767 ) but I do not think so. Another amazing performance machine like the 757. Wish I could have flown it ( 757 ).
 
Last edited:
MUCH shorter runway than what airline pilots operate in and out of and many never will get to experience it. Lots of 7000 foot runways around regularly used by airline jets but less then that is rare ( New York LaGuardia is 7003 feet ).

Very impressive performance to be able to take off from a 5700 runway in a 757 and be able to fly to Atlanta. That plane is amazing. Is it load restricted, anyone know.

SXM is a lot longer, 7500 but the hill on departure can be a performance issue ( east wind all the time , they always take off towards it ). Our airline operates non stop flights ( 4.5 hours ) out of there , not sure if they were load restricted ( 767 ) but I do not think so. Another amazing performance machine like the 757. Wish I could have flown it ( 757 ).

Oakland International Airport is pretty interesting when they have repaving work on their primary runway. I hear they'll land on a modified taxiway for aircraft needing a longer runway, but then use North Field (general aviation) for smaller aircraft. Not sure what qualifies though.

Although Oakland’s North Field has two runways certified for air carriers, they traditionally use the 10,000-foot Runway 11/29 at the airport’s South Field, adjacent to the passenger terminals. Using the North Field for take-offs was troublesome, as some homes are as close as 1,500 feet to the runway. In addition, only a single taxiway links the two fields, meaning that ground congestion would have resulted if the North Field runways had been used for both take-offs and landings.

Also, the North Field’s runway 9R/27L is 6,250 feet in length which is not sufficient for the larger air cargo aircraft. Nor was it practical to use the temporary runway at South Field for both landings and takeoffs. Because there was no parallel taxiway, incoming planes would have had to backtaxi to reach the terminal, also creating ground congestion.

The airport, FedEx’s regional hub, also has significant cargo traffic at night, making overnight closures of the runway impractical.

Long before the August work could start, there were four separate projects, including creating the temporary runway, to be completed on schedule. Otherwise the date could have slipped into fall, with added delays from fog and rain, said Frank Lobedan, the Port of Oakland’s engineering project manager.

Not only was the preliminary work finished on schedule, but there were no major glitches during the repaving. "Our biggest concern was that we were moving so quickly that the materials might not meet specifications, and we would have to tear out part of the overlay and redo it," Lobedan said. "Fortunately, the quality control was just as on target as the rest of the project."

Another concern was flight delays, as it took aircraft an extra five to seven minutes to taxi the one mile from the North Field runway used by incoming planes. Thanks to careful planning and faster turnaround times by the airlines, no flight delays were reported.
** ** ** **
Making the project more palatable to neighbors was another key reason for the temporary runway, which meant departing commercial aircraft could fly over San Francisco Bay instead of over homes during construction.

Consideration for neighbors also was a reason for the August date, as schools in the flight path for incoming traffic would not be in session. Work started on a Friday, as the airport has the fewest cargo flights over the weekend.

Incoming aircraft used a flight pattern over part of the nearby City of San Leandro, where residents received offers of discount airline tickets and free tickets to their choice of 10 area attractions to thank them for their cooperation. Approximately 600 discount airline tickets were issued, and about 8,500 tickets to area attractions were distributed.

Homebound San Leandro residents were offered temporary relocation to health care facilities if the flight pattern changes were likely to impact their health. Although a number of residents inquired about this, none signed up for the program.
 
Our Gulfstream G550/650 will skid all 4 main tires if the brakes are held too long... We've done a number of max performance takeoff's. I brought my G-Tech along and it recorded 11.69 seconds 1/4 mile at 144 MPH. Rumor has it that 10 second 1/4 mile runs are possible if you hold the brakes longer. But risking $20K worth of tires is probably not smart.

If light, the G550/650 will climb at 45 degrees pitch up and still accelerate!
You airline guys might like the fact that normal climb in the G650ER is M0.87.

 
Back
Top