Aircraft Runway Length Estimation

(Part 1)

Dr. Antonio A. Trani

Professor
Department of Civil Engineering

Virginia Tech

Virginia Tech 1 of 59
 Organization of this Section

Understanding basic aircraft weights and its limits

General Equations of Motion to Understand Runway Length
Curves and Tables
General Federal Aviation Regulation Criteria to Develop
Runway Length Requirements at Airports
General Methods to Estimate Runway Length at Airports

Virginia Tech 2 of 59
Understanding Aircraft Weights and
its Limits

Virginia Tech 3 of 59
 Aircraft Mass Definitions

There are several important aircraft operational characteristics to

know about the aircraft mass
Aircraft mass expenditures are signicant and thus need to be
accounted for in the air vehicle runway length analysis.
- OEW = operating empty weight (or mass) is the weight (or
mass) of the aircraft without fuel and payload (just
the pilots and empty seats)
- MTOW = maximum takeoff operating weight (or mass) -
structurally the maximum demonstrated mass at
takeoff for safe ight
- MALW = maximum allowable landing weight (or mass) is
the maximum demonstrated landing weight (or
mass) to keep the landing gear intact at maximum
sink rate (vertical speed)

Virginia Tech 4 of 59
 Aircraft Mass Definitions (II)

- MSPW = maximum structural payload weight (or mass) is

the maximum demonstrated payload to be carried
without stressing the aircraft fuselage
- MZFW = maximum zero fuel weight (or mass) is the sum of
the OEW and the MSPW
- MTW = maximum taxi weight (or mass) of the maximum
demonstrated weight (or mass) for ground
maneuvering. Usually slightly more than MTOW
All aircraft operating weight limits are established during the
certication of the vehicle (FAR part 25 - for transport aircraft or
FAR 23 for smaller aircraft)

Virginia Tech 5 of 59
 Operational Definitions

DTW = desired takeoff weight (or mass) is the weight of the aircraft
considering fuel (includes reserve), payload and OEW to complete
a given stage length (trip distance)

DTW = PYL + OEW + FW

where:

PYL is the payload carried (passengers and cargo)

OEW is the operating empty weight

FW is the fuel weight to be carried (usually includes reserve fuel)

Virginia Tech 6 of 59
 Runway Length Estimation Procedures

Factors inuencing runway length performance

Performance requirements imposed by FAR regulations (such as
FAR 25, 23, 121, 91, etc.)
Environmental characteristics (temperature and pressure) of the
airport in question
Operating limits on aircraft weight
Methods to calculate runway length
AC 150/5325-4 (tables and graphs)
Use of aircraft manufacturer data (such as Boeing data)
Declared distance concept (AC 150/5300-13 Appendix 14)

Virginia Tech 7 of 59
 General Equations of Motion to
Understand Runway Length Curves
and Tables

Virginia Tech 8 of 59
Introductory Remarks on Aircraft Performance

Air vehicles are signicant different than their ground vehicle

counterparts in three aspects:
Aircraft require a prepared surface to lift-off and y which
affects the overall capability of the vehicle to carry useful
payload
Aircraft move in a dynamic atmospheric environment where
changes in temperature, density, and speed of sound are drastic
and cannot be neglected
Aircraft mass expenditures are signicant and thus need to be
accounted for in the air vehicle performance analysis. For
example, a Boeing 747-400 can takeoff at near 390 metric tons
and yet land at its destination at 220 metric tons thus making the
fuel expenditure a signicant factor in how the vehicle performs
along the ight path

Virginia Tech 9 of 59
International Standard Atmosphere (1962)

Characteristics of the International Standard Atmosphere.

Temperature (oK) Density (kg/m3) Speed of Sound (m/s)
Geopotential Altitude (m.)
T a

0 288.2 1.225 340.3

1000 281.7 1.112 336.4

2000 275.2 1.007 332.5

3000 268.7 0.909 328.6

4000 262.2 0.819 324.6

5000 255.7 0.736 320.5

6000 249.2 0.660 316.4

7000 242.7 0.589 312.3

8000 236.2 0.525 308.1

9000 229.7 0.466 303.8

10000 223.2 0.413 299.5

11000 216.7 0.364 295.1

12000 216.7 0.311 295.1

13000 216.7 0.266 295.1

14000 216.7 0.227 295.1

15000 216.7 0.194 295.1

Virginia Tech 10 of 59
Important Aircraft Speed Terms to Know

Indicated Airspeed (IAS) - is the speed registered in the cockpit

instrument
True Airspeed (TAS) - is the actual speed of the vehicle with
respect of the mass of air surrounding the aircraft (accounts for
compressibility effects)
Calibrated Airspeed (CAS) - similar to IAS but corrected for
instrument position errors (airow problems outside the vehicle).
Ground speed (GS) - TAS corrected for wind

Stalling Speed ( V stall ) - minimum speed for safe ight

Mach Number - ratio of the aircraft speed to the speed of sound, a

(note a varies with altitude)

Virginia Tech 11 of 59
 Compressibility Effects

A mathematical expression to estimate true airspeed (in terms of

true Mach number) from CAS follows:
2 3.5 0.286

5 -----0 1 + 0.2 ------------
V CAS
M true = - 1 + 1 1 (2.1)
661.5

where: M true is the true mach number, V CAS is the calibrated airspeed in
knots (CAS = IAS) in our analysis, 0 is the atmospheric density at
sea level, is the density at the altitude the aircraft is ying, and the
constants 0.2 and 661.5 account for the specic heat of the air and
the speed of sound at sea level (in knots), respectively.
Dening true mach number (M true) as the ratio of the true aircraft
speed (V TAS) and the speed of sound (a) at the ight level in question
we have,
V TAS = aM true (2.2)

Virginia Tech 12 of 59
 Example Computation

Boeing 737-300 (a medium size jet transport) ies at 250 knots

(IAS) at an altitude of 5.0 km. in a standard atmosphere. What is
TAS?
A quick glance at the ISA Table reveals that air density at 5.0 km. is
about 0.736 kg/m3 thus yielding a true mach number of 0.51 (using
Equation 2.1). Since the speed of sound at that altitude is 320.5 m/s
(see Table) then the true airspeed of the aircraft is 163.5 m/s or 315
knots.
Note that in this case there is a difference of 65 knots between IAS
and TAS. As the aircraft climbs the value of TAS increases even if
IAS remains constant. Since TAS is responsible for the travel time
of the vehicle it is important to learn how to estimate TAS for any
feasible ight condition.

Virginia Tech 13 of 59
 Aircraft Runway Length Performance
Estimation

Critical issue in airport engineering and planning (the wrong

runway length is costly to the operator and perhaps unsafe)

TE
D

Ff
mg

Figure 2.1 Forces Acting in the Aircraft During Takeoff.

Virginia Tech 14 of 59
 Nomenclature

T - thrust force (also called tractive effort) provided by the vehicle

powerplant

L - lifting force provided by the wing-body of the vehicle

D - drag force to the vehicle body, nacelle(s), landing gears, etc.,

F f - friction force due to rolling resistance

The functional form of these forces has been derived from

dimensional analysis (review your math course notes) and from
extensive knowledge of uid mechanics (wind tunnels and water
tank experiments)

Virginia Tech 15 of 59
 Functional Forms of the Forces

The functional form of these forces is as follows:

1
L = --- V 2 SC L (2.3)
2
1
D = --- V 2 SC D (2.4)
2
T = f (V, ) (2.5)

F f = ( mg cos L ) f roll (2.6)

V is the vehicle speed (TAS), is the air density (kg/m3), S is the

aircraft gross wing area, C L is the lift coefcient (nondimensional),
C D is the drag coefcient (nondimensional), f roll is the rolling
friction coefcient (nondimensional), and is the angle comprised
between the runway and the horizontal plane

Virginia Tech 16 of 59
 Notes on Various Parameters

1) C L and C D are specic to each airframe-ap conguration

2) f roll is usually a function of runway surface conditions and

aircraft speed
T (N) f roll Bias-Ply Tire
Sea Level

Radial Tire
High Elevation

V (m/s) V (m/sec) V (m/s)

V (m/sec)

Figure 2.2 Typical Variations of T and f roll with Aircraft Speed.

Virginia Tech 17 of 59
 Estimating Runway Acceleration

Using Newton's second law and summing forces in the horizontal

direction of motion ( x ),
ma x = T ( V , ) D ( mg cos L ) f roll m g sin (2.7)

linear variations of T (tractive effort or thrust) and f roll can be

assumed to be linear with respect to airspeed for the range of speed
values encountered in practice. For small angles this equation can
be expressed as,
ma x = T ( V , ) D ( mg L ) f roll (2.8)

1 1
ma x = T ( V , ) --- V2 sc D mg --- V2 SC L f roll (2.9)
2 2

1 1
a x = ---- ( T ( V , ) + --- V 2 S ( C L f roll C D ) mg f roll (2.10)
m 2

Virginia Tech 18 of 59
 Remarks About Equation 2.10

The acceleration capability of the aircraft decreases as speed is

gained during the takeoff roll due to a reduction in the thrust
produced by the engines
If Eq. 2.10 is integrated twice between an initial speed, V 0 and
the lift-off speed, V lo the distance traversed during the takeoff
roll can be found
Usually this requires a computer simulation since many
parameters such as T and f roll vary with speed (time varying)
making the coefcient of the differential equation of motion
time dependent.

Virginia Tech 19 of 59
 Aerodynamic Coefficients

The ap setting affects C D and C L and hence affects acceleration

and runway length required for a takeoff. Typical variations of
C D with ap angle are shown below

CD CL
Constant Angle of Attack Constant Angle of Attack

5 10 15 20 25 5 10 15 20 25
Flap Angle (degrees) Flap Angle (degrees)

Figure 2.3 Typical Variations of CD and CL with Aircraft Wing Flap

Angle.

Virginia Tech 20 of 59
 What is the Flap Angle?

Angle formed between the ap chord and the wing chord

Flaps are used to increase lift (but they increase drag too!) during
takeoff and landing maneuvers
Flaps reduce the stalling speed of the aircraft

Wing cross section

(cruise condition)

Wing cross section Flap angle

(landing and takeoff)

Virginia Tech 21 of 59
Remarks About Aerodynamic Coefficients

An increase in ap angle increases both C L and C D . However,

these increments are not linear and consequently are more
difcult to interpret
Increasing the flap angle ( f ) increases C L and thus reduces the
lift-off speed required for takeoff due to an increase in the lifting
force generated (See Equation 2.3 and replace V1 by V).
Increments in ap angle increases the value of C D more rapidly
which tends to reduce more drastically the acceleration of the
aircraft on the runway thus increasing the runway length
necessary to reach the lift off speed

Virginia Tech 22 of 59
 Remarks

The mass of the aircraft affects its acceleration (according to

Newtons second law).
- Larger takeoff masses produce corresponding increments in the
runway length requirement.
The density of the air, decreases with altitude
- Lower thrust generation capability at high aireld elevations
- The runway length increases as the eld elevation increases
- The density also affects the second and third terms in Equation 2.10
(less drag at higher altitude)

Virginia Tech 23 of 59
Aircraft Operational Practices (Takeoff)

At small flap settings (i.e., 5 or 10 degrees) the takeoff runway

length is increased due to small gains in C L (little increase in the
lifting force). Useful for high-hot takeoff conditions.
At medium flap angle settings (15-25 degrees) the gains in lift
usually override those of the drag force. These are the ap
settings typically used for takeoff except under extremely
abnormal airport environments such as high elevation, hot
temperature airport conditions and high aircraft weights or a
combination of both. Note that the maximum allowable takeoff
weight (MTOW) increases as the takeoff ap setting is reduced.
At large flap angles (> 25 degrees) C D is excessive and the
airplane requires unreasonable large takeoff runway lengths.
These ap settings are only used for landing since pilots want to
land at the lowest speed possible thus reducing runway length.

Virginia Tech 24 of 59
Application of Equations of Motion to Takeoff
Runway Length Requirements

Equation 2.9 describes the motion of an air vehicle as it

accelerates on a runway from an initial speed Vo to a nal liftoff
speed V lof
This equation can be theoretically integrated twice with respect
to time to obtain the distance traveled from a starting point to the
point of liftoff
With a little more effort we could also predict the distance
required to clear a 35 ft. obstacle as required by Federal Aviation
Regulations Part 25 or 23 that sets airworthiness criteria for
aircraft in the U.S.
Airport engineers use tabular or graphical data derived from this
integration procedure

Virginia Tech 25 of 59
 Practical Example for Commercial
Transport
Consider the effects of
airport elevation in the
runway performance of a
Boeing 737-800 aircraft

Engines are GE/Snecma

CFM56-7B24/-7B26/-7B27
producing 26,000 lb of thrust

See Boeing document

D6-58325-6: at

http://www.boeing.com/
commercial/airports/737.htm

Airport Planning and Design (Antonio A. Trani) 25a

 Identify the Aircraft
Twin engine commercial airliner

Two emergency exits over the wing

Some versions have winglets

Airport Planning and Design (Antonio A. Trani) 25b

 Sample Performance Chart - Boeing 737-800

Takeoff Runway Length

ISA Conditions source: Boeing (2011)
Airport Planning and Design (Antonio A. Trani) 25c
 Practical Example - Boeing 737-800
International Standard Atmosphere (ISA)
conditions (see ISA table)
Sea Level 8000 ft Elevation
Takeoff Weight (lb)

5900
155,000
11500

4950
140,000
8100

0 3000 6000 9000 12000

F.A.R Takeoff Runway Length (feet)

Airport Planning and Design (Antonio A. Trani) 25d
 Practical Example - Boeing 737-800
Variations with airfield temperature
150,000 lb. takeoff weight
Sea Level 8000 ft Elevation

5500
ISA
10000

6500
ISA + 25deg. C
12600

0 3250 6500 9750 13000

F.A.R Takeoff Runway Length (feet)

Airport Planning and Design (Antonio A. Trani) 25e
 Observed Trends
Airfield Elevation Effect

A Boeing 737-800 requires 94% more runway

departing from an airport located 8000 feet above sea
level than an airport at sea level with a typical weight
of 155,000 lb. (MTOW is 172,500 lb.)

Temperature Effects

The Boeing 737-800 requires 26% more runway

departing from a high elevation airfield (i.e., 8,000 ft)
when the temperature increases by 25 deg. C.

The increase in F.A.R. runway length is 18% when

departing an airport at sea level conditions
Airport Planning and Design (Antonio A. Trani) 25f
 A Word on Stalling and Lift-off Speeds

The stalling speed can be estimated from the basic lift equation
1
L = --- V 2 SC L
2

Under steady ight conditions L mg so,

2mg
V = -------------
SC L

dene C Lmax as the maximum attainable lift coefcient, then

2mg
V stall = ------------------
SC Lmax

Virginia Tech 26 of 59
 FAR Regulation Principles

Regulations (FAR 25) specify that:

Aircraft should lift off at 10% above the stalling speed ( V lof )
Aircraft climb initially at 20% above the stalling speed (V 2 )
Aircraft speed during a regular approach be 30% above the
stalling speed ( V app )
During takeoff aircraft should clear an imaginary 11 m (35 ft.)
obstacle
During landing aircraft should cross the runway threshold 15 m
(50 ft.) above ground)
These considerations are necessary to estimate takeoff and landing
distances (and thus size runway lenghts)

Virginia Tech 27 of 59
 Integration of Equation 2.9

First obtain the aircraft speed at time t ,

1 1
V lof

Vt =
Vo
---- ( T ( V , ) + --- V 2 S ( C L f roll C D ) mg f roll ) dt
m 2
(2.11)

Now get the distance traveled, S t

D lof

St =
o
V t dt (2.12)

Virginia Tech 28 of 59
 Sample Results (Boeing 727-200 Data)

The following results apply to a medium-size transport aircraft

3

Sea Level
2.5
1250 m

2
2500 m

1.5

1
0 10 20 30 40 50
Roll Time (s)

Figure 2.4 Sensitivity of Aircraft Acceleration vs. Field Elevation.

Virginia Tech 29 of 59
 Aircraft Speed During Takeoff Roll

Note how speed increases at a nonlinear pace

120
Sea Level
100
1250 m
80

60 2500 m

40

20

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Roll Time (s)

Figure 2.5 Sensitivity of Aircraft Speed vs. Field Elevation.

Virginia Tech 30 of 59
 Distance Traveled During the Takeoff Roll

3500

3000 Sea Level

2500
1250 m
2000

1500
2500 m
1000

500

0
0 10 20 30 40 50
Roll Time (s)

Figure 2.6 Lift-Off Distance vs. Field Elevation.

Virginia Tech 31 of 59
 Takeoff Roll Distance vs. Aircraft Mass

3500
DTW = 60,000 kg
3000 2500 m. Field Elevation

2500 DTW = 66,000 kg

2000

1500

1000

500
DTW = 72,000 kg
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Roll Time (s)

Figure 2.7 Lift Off Distance vs. Aircraft Weight.

Virginia Tech 32 of 59
General Federal Aviation Regulation
Criteria to Develop Runway Length
Requirements at Airports

Virginia Tech 33 of 59
 General Procedure for Runway Length
Estimation (Runway Length Components)

Runways can have three basic components:

Full strength pavement (FS)
Clearways (CL)
Stopways (SW)
Full strength pavement should support the full weight of the aircraft
Clearway is a prepared area are beyond FS clear of obstacles (max
slope is 1.5%) allowing the aircraft to climb safely to clear an
imaginary 11 m (35 obstacle)
Stopway is a paved surface that allows and aircraft overrun to take
place without harming the vehicle structurally (cannot be used for
takeoff)

Virginia Tech 34 of 59
 Runway Components

Each runway end will have to be considered individually for

runway length analysis

Stopway (SW)

Clearway (CL)

Full Strength Pavement (FS)

Virginia Tech 35 of 59
 FAR Certification Procedures

FAR 25 (for turbojet and turbofan powered aircraft) consider three

cases in the estimation of runway length performance
Normal takeoff (all engines working ne)
Engine-out takeoff condition
- Continued takeoff
- Aborted takeoff
Landing
All these cases consider stochastic variations in piloting technique
(usually very large for landings and smaller for takeoffs)
Regulations for piston aircraft do not include the normal takeoff
case (an engine-out condition is more critical in piston-powered
aircraft)

Virginia Tech 36 of 59
 Nomenclature

FL = eld length (total amount of runway needed)

FS = full strength pavement distance
CL = clearway distance
SW = stopway distance
LOD = lift off distance
TOR = takeoff run
TOD = takeoff distance
LD = landing distance
SD = stopping distance
D35 = distance to clear an 11 m (35 ft.) obstacle

Virginia Tech 37 of 59
 Landing Distance Case

The landing distance should be 67% longer than the demonstrated

distance to stop an aircraft
Large landing roll variations exist among pilots
Example touchdown point variations (=400 m, =125 m for
Boeing 727-200 landing in Atlanta)
LD = 1.667 * SD
15 m (50 ft)
FSland = LD

SD

LD

Virginia Tech 38 of 59
 Normal Takeoff Case

The Takeoff Distance (TOD) should be 115% longer than the

demonstrated Distance to Clear an 11m (35 ft.) obstacle (D35)
Clearway
CLn

11 m (35 ft)
TODn = 1.15 * D35n
TODn - 1.15 LODn

1.15 LODn
LODn Relationships
CLn = 1/2 (TOD-1.15 LOD)
D35n TORn = TODn - CLn
FSn = TORn
FLn = FSn + CLn

Virginia Tech 39 of 59
 Engine-Out Takeoff Case

Dictated by two scenarios:

Continued takeoff subcase
Actual distance to clear an imaginary 11 m (35 ft) obstacle D35
(with an engine-out)
Aborted or rejected takeoff subcase
Distance to accelerate and stop (DAS)

Note: no correction is applied due to the rare nature of engine-out

conditions in practice for turbofan/turbojet powered aircraft

Virginia Tech 40 of 59
 Engine-Out Analysis

Stopway Clearway
V1 = decision speed 11 m (35 ft)

D35eo

D35eo - LODeo

LODeo
DAS
Continued Takeoff
TODeo = D35eo
Aborted Takeoff CLeo = 1/2 (D35eo-LODeo)
FSeo-a = DAS - SW TOReo = D35eo - CLeo
FSeo-c = TOReo
FLeo-a = FSeo-a + SW FLeo-c = FSeo-c + CLeo

Virginia Tech 41 of 59
 Runway Length Estimation
According to FAA AC 150/5325-4

Virginia Tech 42 of 59
Runway Length Procedures (AC 150/5325-4)

Two different views of the problem:

For aircraft with MTOW up to 27,200 kg (60,000 lb.) use the
aircraft grouping procedure
- If MTOW is less than 5,670 kg use Figures 2-1 and 2-2 in FAA AC
150/5325-4
- If MTOW is > 5,670 kg but less than 27,200 kg use Figures 2-3 and
2-4 provided in Chapter 2 of the AC 150/5325-4
For aircraft whose MTOW is more than 27,200 kg (60,000 lb.)
use the critical aircraft concept
- The critical aircraft is that one with the longest runway performance
characteristics
- This aircraft needs to be operated 250 times in the year from that
airport

Review some examples

Virginia Tech 43 of 59
Advisory Circular 150/5325-4

Virginia Tech 44 of 59
Contents of Advisory Circular 150/5325-4

Be familiar with all items contained in FAA AC 150/5325-4

Chapter 1 - Introduction (background)
Chapter 2 - Runway length design based on aircraft groupings
Chapter 3 - Runway length design for specic aircraft
- Aircraft performance curves
- Aircraft performance tables
Chapter 4 - Design rationale
- Airport temperature and elevation
- Wind and runway surface
- Difference in runway centerline elevations
NOTE: The runway length procedure using declared the
distance concept is outlined in FAA AC 150/5300-13

Virginia Tech 45 of 59
 Advisory Circular 150/5325-4

The following examples illustrates the use of Figures 2-1 through 2-

4 in AC 150/5325-4
These procedures apply to a collection of aircraft (a group of
aircraft)
The process requires correction of runway length due to runway
slope and wet pavement conditions
- Wet pavement correction is critical for landing aircraft
- Runway gradient (or slope) is critical for departing aircraft
- Apply the largest correction possible

Virginia Tech 46 of 59
 Runway Length for Aircraft Weights less
than 12,500 lb. (5670 kg)

Refer to Chapter 2 of the FAA AC 150/5235-4b

This group of aircraft includes all single and
twin engine piston powered aircraft
Also included are twin and single engine
turboprop aircraft used for business

Airport Planning and Design (Antonio A. Trani) 47

Runway Length for Small Airplanes with Fewer than 10 Seats

Figure 2.1 in FAA AC/150/5325-4b

Required inputs:

Airfield elevation

Percent of fleet served

Mean daily maximum

temperature of the
hottest month of the
year

Airport Planning and Design (Antonio A. Trani) 47a

Deciding on the Aircraft Population in Runway
Design (for Small Aircraft with fewer than 10
seats)

95% of the fleet

Small and medium size population communities

Low-activity airports

100% of the fleet

Communities near metropolitan areas

Large population remote from a metropolitan area

Airport Planning and Design (Antonio A. Trani) 47b

 Example # 1 AC 150/5325-4

Suppose we want to size a runway for a small general aviation

airport serving all (i.e.,100%) single engine aircraft (MTOW <
5,670 kg)
The airport is to be located on a plateau 915 m. above sea level
The proposed airport site has a mean daily maximum
temperature of the hottest month of 24 oC (75 oF)
Solution:
Using Figure 2-1 in AC 150/5325-4 we obtain:
RL = 4,600 ft. (or 1,403 m.)

Virginia Tech 48 of 59
Runway Length Curves for Small Airplanes with 10 or
more Seats (excludes Pilot and Co-Pilot)

Figure 2.2 in FAA AC/150/5325-4b

Required inputs:

Airfield elevation

Mean daily maximum

temperature of the
hottest month of the
year

Airport Planning and Design (Antonio A. Trani) 48a

 Representative Aircraft for Figure 2.2

Raytheon King Air B300

Mitsubishi MU-2L

Swearinger Merlin III-A

Airport Planning and Design (Antonio A. Trani) 48b

 Runway Length for Aircraft Weights
Greater than 12,500 lb (5670 kg)and up
to 60,000 lb (27,200 kg)

Refer to Chapter 3 of the FAA AC

150/5235-4b
This group of aircraft includes large
business jets and small regional turboprops
Regional jets are not included in this
procedure

Airport Planning and Design (Antonio A. Trani) 49

Figure 3.1 in FAA AC 5325-4b

Airport Planning and Design (Antonio A. Trani) 49a

Figure 3.2 in FAA AC 5325-4b

Airport Planning and Design (Antonio A. Trani) 49b

Correction Factors to the Grouping Method

1) Difference in Centerline Elevations

Increase at a rate of 3 m. (10 ft.) for every 0.3 m. (1 ft.) of
elevation difference between the high and low points of the
runway centerline
2) Wet and Slippery Runways
Runway lengths taken from 60% useful load curves are
increased by 15%, or up to 1,680m. (5,500 ft.), whichever is less
Runway lengths obtained from the 90% useful load curves are
increased by 15%, or up to 2,130 m. (7,000 ft.), whichever is
less.

Virginia Tech 51 of 59
Important Note about the Grouping Method
Analysis

High Altitude Locations

For airport elevations above 1,500 m. (5,000 ft.) the runway
length requirements for aircraft with MTOW < 5,670 kg. may be
greater than those required for turbofan powered aircraft.
This is the result of a higher engine performance degradation on
piston-powered aircraft with altitude

Virginia Tech 52 of 59
 Specific Aircraft Methods

Several sources of information exist to size runway lengths for

specic aircraft
Individual aircraft performance charts and tables contained in
Advisory Circular 150/5325-4
Individual aircraft performance charts contained in the aircraft
manufacturer documents for airport design
Individual aircraft performance charts contained in the aircraft
flight manual and maintained by the airline
Any one of these sources should be consulted when estimating
runway lengths for the critical aircraft
NOTE: the critical aircraft operates at least 250 times in a year from
the airport in question

Virginia Tech 53 of 59
Sample Aircraft Performance Information in
Graphical Format (AC 150/5325-4)

Virginia Tech 54 of 59
 Another Example of Aircraft Performance
Information in Graph Format (AC 150/5325-4)

Douglas DC-9-30 aircraft

Virginia Tech 55 of 59
Sample Aircraft Performance Information in
Table Format (AC 150/5325-4)

Boeing 727-100 aircraft

Pratt and Whitney JTD8-7 engine
Flap setting is 300 (landing configuration)

Virginia Tech 56 of 59
Sample Aircraft Performance Information in
Graphical Format (Aircraft Manufacturer)

Boeing 777-300 aircraft

Virginia Tech 57 of 59
Few Observations About AC 150/5325-4 Tables
and Charts

Many aircraft performance charts contained in AC 150/5325-4

belong to aircraft that no longer y in NAS (in the U.S.).
Example: Douglas DC-4, Convair 990, etc.
However, some of these aircraft still y in other countries so the
charts have been left in the AC for completeness

Virginia Tech 58 of 59
Correction Factors for AC 150/5325-4 and
Specific Aircraft Performance Method

1) Difference in Centerline Elevations

Increase at a rate of 3 m. (10 ft.) for every 0.3 m. (1 ft.) of
elevation difference between the high and low points of the
runway centerline
2) Wet and Slippery Runways
Runway lengths contained in performance tables account for
wet and slippery runways
Runway lengths charts in Appendix 2 do not account for wet
and slippery runways so correction is needed for landing
computations (increase by 7% only because a 5-knot tailwind
condition is factored in these curves already)

Virginia Tech 59 of 59