8

I recently took a weekend trip to Naples and went to admire the city from above at the Certosa di San Martino panoramic viewpoint which, it turned out, was also offering a distant view at NAP operations that morning (June 15, 2019, around 12PM CEST). After taking a few pictures I couldn't help but spending a good 15 minutes tracking a few landings and departures with the FlightRadar app.

Runway 24 was in use at that time, except for a single departure in that timeframe which used runway 6.

Is this a common scenario - i.e. a single aircraft taking off from the runway opposite to the one currently in use?

I know the general factors taken into account when determining in which direction a runway is used, but what could be the reasons behind such a sudden and isolate (takeoffs and landings just 3 minutes before/after used runway 24) change in the airport operations?

The aircraft in question left NAP with more than 1 hour delay, leading me to think that it could have been pilot's request to spare a few minutes: probably positioning for 6 was faster from their gate?

Giovanni Gonzaga
  • 183
  • 4

1 Answers1

14

It looks like the reason for the Rwy 6 departure was noise abatement. The climb gradient from 6 is not as steep as for 24. The Jeppesen charts state the requirements:

Noise abatement procedure

And it states that if you are unable to comply with the steeper noise abatement climb gradient for rwy 24 (583 ft climb per nautical mile), you should request 6 (300 ft climb per nautical mile). Maybe the plane was fully loaded and the captain wanted to avoid a fine.

Juan Jimenez
  • 12,884
  • 2
  • 25
  • 67
  • 2
    can confirm. this is the METAR at the time: SA 15/06/2019 12:20-> METAR LIRN 151220Z 20006KT 170V240 CAVOK 31/18 Q1015 NOSIG= SA 15/06/2019 11:50-> METAR LIRN 151150Z 20007KT 170V240 CAVOK 30/19 Q1015 NOSIG= – Federico Jun 18 '19 at 10:46
  • Light winds some 40 degrees from rwy heading. I don't think that would be reason to deny the takeoff request. – Juan Jimenez Jun 18 '19 at 11:04
  • 5
    The chart also says: If unable to comply with noise abatement procedures from RWY 24 request take-off from RWY 06. –  Jun 18 '19 at 11:39
  • Aha! A clue, Sherlock! Good one. – Juan Jimenez Jun 18 '19 at 11:41
  • 1
    @JuanJimenez Isn’t LIRN one of the places where financial noise penalties are easily contracted? – Cpt Reynolds Jun 18 '19 at 15:18
  • @CptReynolds Not a clue, but that might explain the t/o rwy requests. The aircraft was an A319, but I don't know under what conditions it might not be able to meet noise abatement restrictions. Loading? OAT? Beats me. Someone above my paygrade ought to be able to comment on that. – Juan Jimenez Jun 18 '19 at 15:30
  • @CptReynolds Whoa. We got ourselves a winner, exactly what @ ymb1 stated. Changed the answer to point specifically at noise abatement climb gradient requirements. – Juan Jimenez Jun 18 '19 at 15:41
  • Strange that I cannot find what the fines are for noise abatement violations... – Juan Jimenez Jun 18 '19 at 15:47
  • I was stationed at the naval base at Capodichino, with my room overlooking the runway (I'm not a pilot). C-5 Galaxies would always take off to the west it seemed. I guess they could make the gradient? They were very loud when taking off. And their exhaust would blow right into my room after they taxied in or were starting up. – Steve Jun 20 '19 at 21:32
  • @Steve But don't you love the smell of jet fuel in the morning? :) – Juan Jimenez Feb 27 '20 at 23:09