Proper Runway Usage at EHAM

Just a quick overview of runway usage at EHAM, for both pilots and ATC who want to keep it as real as possible.

09 is not used for landing. It doesn’t have ILS. It’s only used in emergencies.
18L is not used for landing. No ILS.
18R is not used for taking off. There are no taxiways going to 18R.
36L is not used for landing. No ILS and no runway exits.
36R is not used for taking off. The taxiways to 36R are closed.
06 is an exception. There are no taxiways going to the 06 end. It is used for smaller aircraft that take off a little further down the runway, near the R apron.

Although it’s quite a long taxi 18R/36L is the most used runway. 18R for landing and 36L for take off.
Together with 06/24. 06 for landing and 24 for taking off.

There is more, but this should help.

A red X on the runway means it’s not used for taking off.
A red X in front of the runway means it’s not used for landing.
Red taxiways are closed.
I used one of @Kilt_McHaggis’s maps. His maps to all airports can be found here.

32 Likes

Thanks for posting! People do need to pay attention. However the main problem is for ATCs to use only the specified runways at every Airport becomes Impractical, mostly at large airports like this. Pilots often complain about having to taxis long distances and will either 1. Takeoff wherever they want (PG) Or 2, spam the frequency until they are told to follow instructions (Advanced). To increase efficiency at a busy airport, controllers such as myself tend to use what’s open, but also what’s practical. It’s a hard topic to work with, but I always have it on my mind.

8 Likes

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

1 Like

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

Please ATCs… you cannot land at runway 36L. It is not designed for landings.

Also I had an ATC, Robert Young, try to make me land there, telling me to follow instructions. If your an ATC… get to know proper usage of runways… especially on the expert server!

3 Likes

Larose, this is where you’re wrong. I respect that you want to follow realistic procedures in IF, but controllers in this simulator deal with an unrealistic amount of traffic. If it is a runway in IF, we’re going to use it. Don’t ask for a runway change in that situation. Also telling controllers to learn the LOP for every airport they control is ridiculous. You could have been ghosted in that situation, and that would be a valid ghost.

You’re a role model to all new pilots here, you should act like it, not like this.

12 Likes

I agree with @Mats_Edvin_Aaro completely, the traffic we deal with is ridiculous with every one in a hurry to land. Plus to follow these procedures we need very mature pilots too, which IF is always short of as of now.

And SID/STAR procedures, options to expedite traffic flow, conditional clearances etc… Long story short, it’s not gonna happen anytime soon…

@Mats_Edvin_Aaro the issue with 36L at EHAM is that there is nowhere to turn and back taxi past the taxiway only half way down.

1 Like

So? There’s nothing wrong with backtracking :) And THAT is something the controller has to take into consideration

@Mats_Edvin_Aaro… There is no way to back taxi… so I’m not wrong… plus I flew out of EHAM in real life many times. they don’t not use 36L for landings… these are facts so try to correct someone on something you don’t know. That would make this whole post false which it is 100% correct!

My point is there are no turning areas at that end of the runway past around 5000ft.
image

1 Like

A regular medium-class aircraft should be fully capable of doing a 180 on the runway, there are techiques for that. Also, seeing like Larose didn’t have “heavy” in his callsign, there is no reason why he shouldn’t be assigned 36L

I agree it is a stupid runway

3 Likes

Stop trying to prove a point when your incorrect… Fact: they do not use 36L for landings… only take offs.

If you read my comment, you will notice that I’m not disagreeing that it isn’t used for landings IRL, but

  1. The amount of traffic we deal with on IF, especially on fridays is WAY more than they handle in real life, not to mention it isn’t coordinated or planned with relevant sectors at all
  2. The pilots here don’t have the same experience real life pilots have. They do not know which speeds they should be on final, they don’t know how to configure a plane (well, some, not saying all). You might have some coming in at 190 knots.

And no, i will NOT stop proving a point here. The fact here is that you are wrong. You can perfectly fine be assigned 36L for landing, and there’s no reason why you should debate about it. If you have any problems with that request a divertion to another airfield.

Dude… if I would of been ghosted it would of got reversed on the spot… why… the facts in this post is correct… again 100% correct. @jan got it right. The ATC would of been wrong to ghost on a runway where there is NO WAY to back taxi especially for a 777 and again NO WAY TO BACK TAXI… AGAIN… THEY. DONT. USE. 36L. FOR. LANDINGS. dude stop trying to convince everyone… YOU ARE WRONG…PERIOD.

Maybe @Tyler_Shelton could confirm that well :)

Feel free to apply to join the IFATC team and see how hard it is. You want us to memorize the procedures for every single towered airport in the world, especially when global comes? Alone, there are 500+ manned airports in the U.S, and any real world controller you ask on the team will tell you that it takes years just to get a frequency rating to learn the ins and outs of a specific airport.

It’s a runway. Can planes land on it? Yes. Simple as that.

Stuff like this really grinds my gears because after all we do for pilots, they still find ways to nitpick at every aspect of runway usage or whatever. Our controllers are trained to be efficient, not handling planes with one hand tied behind their backs. We don’t have a government telling us what runway to use for noise abatement. We don’t have virtual people to complain and picket protest on runways. We have none of that.

Oh, and speaking of back taxiing… why don’t you take a look at St. Maarten? Heavy 747s seem to backtrack there just fine. ;)

9 Likes

And @Mark_Denton and @joe …you wanna tag anyone else?