Master Plan Update (pdf) - Lansing/Capital City Airport

Table 3-6
AIRFIELD CAPACITY ESTIMATES
Capital Region Airport Authority
Capital City Airport Master Plan Update
Runways Uses Mix Index VFR IFR ASV
Single Runway Small Aircraft Only 0% 98 59 230,000
Single Runway Large Aircraft Only 100% 55 53 210,000
Parallel Runways Capital City Airport Mix 33% 145 57 275,000
Parallel Runways One Restricted to
Small Aircraft
33% 130 56 240,000
Two Intersecting Runways Capital City Airport Mix 33% 77 57 200,000
Three Runways Capital City Airport Mix 33% 63 56 205,000
VFR – Visual Flight Rules
IFR – Instrument Flight Rules
ASV – Annual Service Volume
As shown, the differences in capacity for a single runway are significant in VFR and less so in IFR
between a single runway limited to small aircraft and a single runway capable of accommodating
large aircraft. The ASV is nominally less for the large aircraft scenario than the small aircraft
scenario.
When taking into consideration the parallel runway and the Capital City Airport mix index, the fact
that Runway 10L/28R is restricted to small aircraft reduces capacity in VFR, IFR, and the ASV.
The actual lateral separation is less than 2,500 feet, a condition that requires consideration of wake
vortices. Moreover, because the thresholds are staggered, the effective lateral runway separation
must be considered. The effective lateral separation is 2,260 feet in east flow, but only 1,375 feet
in west flow. The larger effective lateral separation in the east flow is a result of the stagger being
positive. These effective lateral separation adjustments reflect the larger aircraft landing on the
longer runway. Both conditions produce a lateral separation less than 2,500 feet and, therefore,
vortex restrictions apply. The differences in the IFR values show that the combination of a parallel
runway with a restricted small runway that is not instrumented essentially reverts to a single
runway when the ceiling is less than 1,000 feet and visibility is less than three miles. Limited credit
is given for departures (but no arrivals) in IFR.
Considering the two larger intersecting runways only (Runway 10R/28L and Runway 6/24), the
capacity is greater than that for a single runway, but less than that for two parallel runways in the
optimum operating direction (arrivals and departures on Runway Ends 10R and 6). This operation
is less than a parallel configuration since aircraft must be metered through the intersection and
greater aircraft separations are used to accomplish the metering. Converging approaches are not
permitted below a ceiling of 1,000 feet and visibility of three miles (700 feet and two miles if both
runways had instrumentation). This result has the appearance of implying that Runway 6/24 has
limited value or a detrimental effect on the airfield operation/capacity. This is not the case since
maximum crosswind components for small aircraft would limit the use of Runway 10L/28R and the
availability of Runway 6/24 provides the opportunity to maintain a higher capability, even thought it
is not as high as the parallel use.
The last scenario is the simultaneous use of all three runways. Simultaneous use, however, can
only occur in VFR and when winds are less than 10 knots. The capacity for simultaneous use of all
three runways is the lowest of all runway use combinations since the three runways interact to
Facility Requirements 3-9 Final