8

I was going through this PDF document on Logan International Airport's runway usage and I saw that Runway 32/14 only has arrival activity. Why is that the case? Is this the the reason or part of it why there are only stripe marks on the side of the runway close to "32"?

mins
  • 72,728
  • 27
  • 308
  • 441
SMS von der Tann
  • 11,974
  • 10
  • 68
  • 118

3 Answers3

7

(Much of my answer below will be drawn from "The 30-year saga of 14/32", a 2006 Boston Globe article which is unfortunately subscription-only but which I have access to via an institutional database.)

Runway 14/32 has been a long-standing bone of contention at Boston Logan. Like many urban airports, Boston Logan is constrained by the fact that there are many people living nearby who don't particularly like jets flying low over their houses, and who are willing to organize in opposition of any increase in operations at the airport. Massport, the organization in charge of Boston Logan, had originally proposed to build a new runway in the late '60s. This met fierce opposition from community members in East Boston who were opposed to additional take-offs and landings over their homes.

[I]t's taken no less than 33 years for 14/32 to become reality, a testament to how politically charged Logan expansion has been ever since demonstrations in the 1960s, when East Boston mothers lay in the streets to protest the destruction of Eastie parks and homes. ...

The Hyatt Harborside Hotel (now the Hyatt Regency Boston Harbor) was built in the 90s to act as an impediment to runway expansion:

In the 1990s ... Frederick P. Salvucci engineered construction of the 270-room Hyatt Harborside Hotel, a stone's throw from the end of the new runway, largely to create as big an obstacle as possible to Massport extending 14/32 or using it for planes flying over the city.

In the end, Boston Logan was barred by court order from allowing takeoffs from 32 or landings on 14, except in emergency:

By court order, use of 14/32 will be restricted to planes taking off and landing over Boston Harbor, so Massport will be legally forbidden - except in emergencies - from using the runway to let planes take off or land over South Boston and downtown.

This still allows for three runways to be operative when winds are from the northwest or southeast (along with 15L/R or 33L/R), so the hope was that even this "half-runway" would result in fewer delays at BOS during bad weather. Whether or not this has panned out to be true in the decade since, I do not know.

Michael Seifert
  • 1,722
  • 12
  • 18
4

A quick look at Google Maps shows a large building to the north west of the runway which would make arrival to 14 or departure from 32 hazardous.

enter image description here

Airsick
  • 41
  • 1
  • 1
    Welcome to Aviation.SE! The building is 174 ft. tall, lighted, 1364 ft. from runway, 70 ft. left of centerline. It's no issue. Main issue is in comments below question. –  Jun 28 '16 at 19:46
  • 6
    @ymb1 the building is the one mentioned on Wikipedia as being intentionally placed to block the runway on that end, and the obstruction note is followed by APPROACHES TO RWY 14 NOT AUTHORIZED. – fooot Jun 28 '16 at 20:00
  • @fooot Indeed. The local authorities chose the spot carefully to ensure that the runway could not be extended. – Simon Jun 28 '16 at 21:23
  • @fooot as Simon said, "... could not be extended," but still, at its current length and with that building it can be technically used for landing on 14, like in an emergency. –  Jun 28 '16 at 21:26
  • 2
    @ymb1 the obstacle is less than a 737's wingspan off centreline. The slope from the runway threshold to the roof exceeds 7 degrees. By what measure do you come to the conclusion that it's no issue? May I suggest you to ask some questions on runway protection zones? – DeltaLima Jun 28 '16 at 21:51
  • @DeltaLima It's a grey area. RPZ is 2D and is for excursions after landings/RTO's, it extends 1000' beyond the runway. OFZ (obstacle free zone, the 3D area you mean), only applies if there is an approach light system, else it's only 200'. So technically as I said, RWY14 can be used, definitely not by a 737 or A380. The runway itself is a mere 5000' long. A business jet can handle it. If the city allows it that is. –  Jun 28 '16 at 22:32
  • 1
    @ymb1 -- A380 no -- but 737s operate in and out of KEYW which is 4800' (albeit with a payload restriction) – UnrecognizedFallingObject Jun 29 '16 at 00:20
  • I'm sorry, but I'm confused; is the building why there are no normal landings on 14, or was it build to prevent landings there. OK, my own sentence confused me now. Which came first, no landing, or the building? – CGCampbell Jun 30 '16 at 18:20
-2

Landings on RWY 14 and takeoffs on RWY 32 at KBOS are prohibited according to the A/FD, most likely for the obstacle clearing reasons stated above.

Romeo_4808N
  • 73,674
  • 7
  • 150
  • 274