PerfectGriffin wrote:

Not good. No wonder they only predict a 2% growth rate in passenger numbers this year.

jetblastdubai wrote:

mercure1 wrote:

replacement of ground lighting. The aim is “to boost safety, service and capacity levels”.

I worked ATC at DXB for a number of years and as a controller, I thought the runway lighting system was the absolute worst system I've ever seen. The runway lights were directional meaning you could only have the runway lights on for one end of the runway at a time. If the lights were on for runway 12R, there would be no visible runway lights for 30L (the opposite direction of the same runway).

The ATC tower is abeam the approach end of 12R and when runway 30L was in use, from the tower you could not see any runway lights. It was like looking into a black hole. At night, a controller could not tell by visually looking out the window if the lights were on or off, if they were on step 1 or step 5 or if there were successive runway lights out of service. Worse yet, if traffic needed to cross the runway at the far end of the landing runway, there would be no runway lights visible from the cockpit, only the red "runway" sign co-located with the painted hold bars. We had many more runway incursions than we should have had for a relatively simple, 2 parallel runway airport. Although it could have been coincidental, you have to wonder if not having a clearly-visible runway at night might have complicated things for some pilots.

The runway reconstruction should surprise no one. Between the hot conditions and the amount of heavy aircraft making sharp, 90 degree turns at the runway entrance points or sitting on the hot, soft pavement at the holding points for extended periods of time waiting for departure opportunities, the surface gets abused on an almost continual basis. A DNATA (airport operator) told us once that the A380s landing gear configuration literally chews up the concrete making turns at the holding points.

Looking at the satellite view, you can see the major reinforcements that have already been done at the holding points (departure intersections for US controllers).

https://www.google.com/maps/@25.2522186 ... a=!3m1!1e3

c933103 wrote:

Is the DWC still having only 1 runway?

jetblastdubai wrote:

Worse yet, if traffic needed to cross the runway at the far end of the landing runway, there would be no runway lights visible from the cockpit, only the red "runway" sign co-located with the painted hold bars. We had many more runway incursions than we should have had for a relatively simple, 2 parallel runway airport. Although it could have been coincidental, you have to wonder if not having a clearly-visible runway at night might have complicated things for some pilots.

The runway reconstruction should surprise no one. Between the hot conditions and the amount of heavy aircraft making sharp, 90 degree turns at the runway entrance points or sitting on the hot, soft pavement at the holding points for extended periods of time waiting for departure opportunities, the surface gets abused on an almost continual basis. A DNATA (airport operator) told us once that the A380s landing gear configuration literally chews up the concrete making turns at the holding points.

notaxonrotax wrote:

Oh, so they need another couple of A380`s full of underpaid construction workers from India and Sri Lanka.
Or would the locals build this one, for once?

No Tax On Rotax

notaxonrotax wrote:

Oh, so they need another couple of A380`s full of underpaid construction workers from India and Sri Lanka.
Or would the locals build this one, for once?

No Tax On Rotax

c933103 wrote:

Is the DWC still having only 1 runway?

jetblastdubai wrote:

mercure1 wrote:

replacement of ground lighting. The aim is “to boost safety, service and capacity levels”.

I worked ATC at DXB for a number of years and as a controller, I thought the runway lighting system was the absolute worst system I've ever seen. The runway lights were directional meaning you could only have the runway lights on for one end of the runway at a time. If the lights were on for runway 12R, there would be no visible runway lights for 30L (the opposite direction of the same runway).

The ATC tower is abeam the approach end of 12R and when runway 30L was in use, from the tower you could not see any runway lights. It was like looking into a black hole. At night, a controller could not tell by visually looking out the window if the lights were on or off, if they were on step 1 or step 5 or if there were successive runway lights out of service. Worse yet, if traffic needed to cross the runway at the far end of the landing runway, there would be no runway lights visible from the cockpit, only the red "runway" sign co-located with the painted hold bars. We had many more runway incursions than we should have had for a relatively simple, 2 parallel runway airport. Although it could have been coincidental, you have to wonder if not having a clearly-visible runway at night might have complicated things for some pilots.

The runway reconstruction should surprise no one. Between the hot conditions and the amount of heavy aircraft making sharp, 90 degree turns at the runway entrance points or sitting on the hot, soft pavement at the holding points for extended periods of time waiting for departure opportunities, the surface gets abused on an almost continual basis. A DNATA (airport operator) told us once that the A380s landing gear configuration literally chews up the concrete making turns at the holding points.

Looking at the satellite view, you can see the major reinforcements that have already been done at the holding points (departure intersections for US controllers).

https://www.google.com/maps/@25.2522186 ... a=!3m1!1e3