Timeline for How could an airliner as big as B777 make a U Turn on ground?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
17 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 11, 2016 at 23:27 | comment | added | Danny Beckett | Related: here's a video of a British Airways Airbus A318 doing a U-turn on the runway at London City: youtube.com/watch?v=noAyUIk89AU | |
| Apr 13, 2016 at 6:58 | answer | added | Ronald | timeline score: 2 | |
| Jul 27, 2015 at 14:39 | vote | accept | anshabhi | ||
| Jul 25, 2015 at 13:28 | vote | accept | anshabhi | ||
| Jul 25, 2015 at 13:28 | |||||
| Jul 25, 2015 at 13:27 | comment | added | anshabhi | @DavidRicherby as said above, Daily mail is a notoriously reported mail.. See this | |
| Jul 25, 2015 at 13:19 | comment | added | David Richerby | The article says nothing about it being a 777; the photograph is a 747. What's your source for the kind of plane? | |
| Jul 25, 2015 at 5:30 | answer | added | Houba | timeline score: 3 | |
| Jul 24, 2015 at 15:48 | comment | added | Alexander | @Pondlife as you already pointed out, U-turn is not return to gate. U-Turn is U-turn and return to gate is return to gate. It's just that Daily Mail is inaccurate, to the point that one may call its articles misleading. | |
| Jul 24, 2015 at 15:38 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/StackAviation/status/624604513672916993 | ||
| Jul 24, 2015 at 15:36 | comment | added | Pondlife | The picture in the article is an illustration, it isn't reality. My point is simply that "U-turn" only means that the aircraft returned to the gate. It doesn't mean that it literally turned around in the taxiway. The article is taking an unusual but not inexplicable event and turning it into a 'drama' with hints of conspiracy theory. This is entertainment, not a factual, accurate news report. | |
| Jul 24, 2015 at 14:47 | comment | added | anshabhi | @Pondlife I have observed the taxiway of IGI several times, through the windows but never really observed any semi-circular pathway.. | |
| Jul 24, 2015 at 14:46 | answer | added | Thunderstrike | timeline score: 29 | |
| Jul 24, 2015 at 14:45 | comment | added | Alexander | From looking at aerial photos of Kjevik airport, Kristiansand, Norway, I can confirm that a 737-class airliner needs no more than a 60m circle of tarmac for a U-turn. | |
| Jul 24, 2015 at 14:41 | comment | added | Alexander | As can be seen on the IGI airport diagram, there is plenty of space where an airliner could "turn around" and head back to the gate. Worst case, they would roll to the runway, and instead of starting, just roll down the runway to the next "exit". | |
| Jul 24, 2015 at 14:37 | history | edited | Pondlife |
edited tags
|
|
| Jul 24, 2015 at 14:35 | comment | added | Pondlife | The Daily Mail is a notoriously sensational, inaccurate newspaper and in this case I think the term "U-turn" is used figuratively, not literally: the aircraft simply returned to the gate and the artwork even shows it following a semi-circular taxiway. On the other hand, your question about the turning radius is a good one. | |
| Jul 24, 2015 at 14:31 | history | asked | anshabhi | CC BY-SA 3.0 |