This video seems to raise a whole bunch of questions, but here's one I have:

Why such a long displaced landing threshold on 22R at JFK/KJFK? (Scroll down to the 4L/22R section for details.)

Certainly Rockaway Blvd. is sufficiently distant from the end of the pavement (TODA) to allow closer landings. And further upstream from that is Idlewild Park. No residential areas for a good distance away from that runway.

That's a 3425-ft. displaced threshold on a 12079-ft. runway. Is that some sort of record? ;-)

  • $\begingroup$ Have you considered the intersection with 31R? $\endgroup$
    – vasin1987
    Jun 19, 2018 at 2:11
  • $\begingroup$ @vasin1987 How would that intersection necessitate having such a long displaced threshold? (For the record, I am not a pilot.) $\endgroup$
    – pr1268
    Jun 19, 2018 at 2:55
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I am not a pilot too. My guess would be the displaced threshold used to be part of intersecting runway but at a point in time they feel having intersecting runway interupt their operation so they turn part of runway into displaced threshold. So both runway can operate without having to make both a LAHSO operation. This is my guess. $\endgroup$
    – vasin1987
    Jun 19, 2018 at 3:00

2 Answers 2


Its to maintain proper clearance over the park on approach from the north and avoid trees. They tried to extend the runway in 2013 but were ultimately denied due to minimum altitudes. Its covered in the October 2013 document Runway 4L/22R Improvements John F. Kennedy International Airport

They submitted for

  • Relocate the displaced landing (arrival) threshold on Runway 22R 3,316 feet to the north.

but ultimately...

Two of the elements, the relocation of the Runway 22R arrival threshold 3,316 feet to the north and the relocation of the Runway 4L end (departure starting point) 460 feet to the north, would have resulted in aircraft being at lower altitudes than existing conditions over areas to the north of the runway, including Idlewild Park. The lower altitude of aircraft would have resulted in up to 800 trees in Idlewild Park becoming obstructions, as defined in FAA Order 8260.3B, United States Standard for Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS). FAA Order 8260.3B specifies the minimum measure of obstacle clearance that is considered by the FAA (the Federal authority) to supply a satisfactory level of vertical protection for aircraft operating at an airport. If the project described in the May 2012 Draft EA were to be implemented, up to 800 trees in Idlewild Park would have required removal to comply with FAA standards. The project described in the May 2012 Draft EA has been modified to avoid this impact as explained in the following paragraphs.

In order to minimize the number of trees to be removed from Idlewild Park, the Port Authority made the decision to redefine the proposed project as described in Section 1.3 of this Revised Draft EA. The Port Authority no longer proposes the relocation of the Runway 22R arrival threshold 3,316 feet to the north. The arrival threshold on Runway 22R would remain in its existing location, which does not result in lower landing elevations north of the Airport.

  • $\begingroup$ Ye link breaketh. $\endgroup$
    – Vikki
    Nov 27, 2021 at 1:33

A runway threshold closer to Rockaway Blvd. would also mean that planes would be flying much lower over the residential communities to the north. The planes are already very low over those communities. Idlewild park is not a sufficient buffer. The residents protested moving the threshold closer to Rockaway. They also protested extending the runway end closer to Rockaway.


You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .