Ellington Field Joint Reserve Base

[TheNiche]

What is your source for this factoid about the Houston Airport System losing $30 million per year? My understanding is that airport system is a completely self-funded operation.

It was in their official audited accounting records. Look for them on the HAS website. Should be a big PDF file.

[Travel_n_Transport]

I don't think it has been mentioned...but UPS long ago vacated EFD for IAH.

[Houston19514]

It was in their official audited accounting records. Look for them on the HAS website. Should be a big PDF file.

The official audited accounting records shows 2005 operating income of almost $24 million. I guess you were talking about the interim number titled "deficit before contributions" of almost $33 million. After capital contributions (from the federal government), the true bottom line number for the airport system for 2005 was a positive $31 million. (To paraphrase someone from earlier in this thread, 'statements of gains or losses don't mean anything without including a total measure of revenue.')

[tcole]

Whatever you think, Hobby is not the answer. Hobby is already borderline dangerous, since the city has encroached around it. The expanded terminal and higher volume of operations will only exacerbate this condition. Even Sugar Land has a longer runway.

That situation alone seems to support the need for EFD. I think you'll start to see more of the corporate jets based at Hobby getting squeezed out, too. Hobby traffic is getting heavier and heavier. GA flights -- especially private jets -- will get tired of the delays and dangers of the high-speed, steep descent approaches to HOU and the extended time now required in the pattern, which will make EFD more attractive.

Short answer -- yes, I think it has a nice future.

Just which "high speed, steep descent approach" are you referring to? My approach plates show each precision approach to be at the standard 3* gradient, with the "steepest approach being 3.37* on the VOR/DME for Rwy 4. As to high speed, I have flown into and out of Hobby in both severe clear and minimums IMC in a 172 with no problems. The only discernable "lock-ups" occur with instrument releases when alot are filed for very short intervals of time, but that phenomenon is rare and locks up most airports/airspace when it takes place; in fact it often is an airspace issue rather than an airport issue.

And as to 747 landing distances, the question is really more of takeoff distance. A 747 can easily land at Hobby. The runways are both long enough, wide enough and strong enough. Further, because AF1 is often not loaded for bear on domestic trips (even on intl trips its GTOW is significantly less than a 747 in a typical airline configuration), HOU should be no problem for both landing and takeoff. The question is thus one of taxiing capacity in that most of HOU's taxiways are probably too narrow and may not be rated to absorb more than 250,000 lbs. Sugar Land's runway is long enough and wide enough for landing although a takeoff might be dicey in that the outboard engines would be dangerously close to overhanging unimproved earth and thus pose the risk of possibly ingesting fod. The runway at SGR is probably not rated to absorb a 747's weight though and its taxiways are woefully inadequate.

[dalparadise]

Just which "high speed, steep descent approach" are you referring to? My approach plates show each precision approach to be at the standard 3* gradient, with the "steepest approach being 3.37* on the VOR/DME for Rwy 4. As to high speed, I have flown into and out of Hobby in both severe clear and minimums IMC in a 172 with no problems. The only discernable "lock-ups" occur with instrument releases when alot are filed for very short intervals of time, but that phenomenon is rare and locks up most airports/airspace when it takes place; in fact it often is an airspace issue rather than an airport issue.

And as to 747 landing distances, the question is really more of takeoff distance. A 747 can easily land at Hobby. The runways are both long enough, wide enough and strong enough. Further, because AF1 is often not loaded for bear on domestic trips (even on intl trips its GTOW is significantly less than a 747 in a typical airline configuration), HOU should be no problem for both landing and takeoff. The question is thus one of taxiing capacity in that most of HOU's taxiways are probably too narrow and may not be rated to absorb more than 250,000 lbs. Sugar Land's runway is long enough and wide enough for landing although a takeoff might be dicey in that the outboard engines would be dangerously close to overhanging unimproved earth and thus pose the risk of possibly ingesting fod. The runway at SGR is probably not rated to absorb a 747's weight though and its taxiways are woefully inadequate.

Your points are taken and correct. I was speaking in generalities. Generally, 747s are not designed for 7500' runways and 7500' runways are not designed for 747s, whether it's because of weight capacity or ground hazards. To my knowledge, no 747 has ever landed at HOU.

As for a 172 -- yeah, Hobby or anything longer than 2000' should be fine. I've spoken to some airline pilots, though, who have told me that Hobby is a real challenge for larger and faster planes. The 737s and even the Citations and other corporate jets, because of noise abatement or whatever, are in pretty precarious landing positions there. I believe Runway 4 is the one with Telephone Road right at the edge of the numbers. The point being -- it's cramped there and getting busier. I think this bodes well for continued operations at EFD -- especially for GA aircraft.

[tcole]

Your points are taken and correct. I was speaking in generalities. Generally, 747s are not designed for 7500' runways and 7500' runways are not designed for 747s, whether it's because of weight capacity or ground hazards. To my knowledge, no 747 has ever landed at HOU.

As for a 172 -- yeah, Hobby or anything longer than 2000' should be fine. I've spoken to some airline pilots, though, who have told me that Hobby is a real challenge for larger and faster planes. The 737s and even the Citations and other corporate jets, because of noise abatement or whatever, are in pretty precarious landing positions there. I believe Runway 4 is the one with Telephone Road right at the edge of the numbers. The point being -- it's cramped there and getting busier. I think this bodes well for continued operations at EFD -- especially for GA aircraft.

The 172 referednce concerns the assertion that approaches at Hobby have to be flown fast. Do I fly approaches there at 80 kts in a 172? No, but even pushing final at 95 kts would seem to pose problems for the big boys at sometimes over 140 kts, yet ATC/Twr seem to have no problems handling the slower traffic. There are no real "challenges" for larger and faster planes at HOU save for the left turns on departure from 12R/L and 21, but seeing that most of those larger and faster planes are equipped with an FMC that has already been programmed prior to start-up, I doubt that the manuever is really all that challenging.

Edited November 28, 2006 by tcole

[dalparadise]

The 172 referednce concerns the assertion that approaches at Hobby have to be flown fast. Do I fly approaches there at 80 kts in a 172? No, but even pushing final at 95 kts would seem to pose problems for the big boys at sometimes over 140 kts, yet ATC/Twr seem to have no problems handling the slower traffic. There are no real "challenges" for larger and faster planes at HOU save for the left turns on departure from 12R/L and 21, but seeing that most of those larger and faster planes are equipped with an FMC that has already been programmed prior to start-up, I doubt that the manuever is really all that challenging.

Cool. I'm just relaying what I've heard. I don't dispute your assessment of HOU, but I gotta believe two separate pilots -- one a Southwest captain and another, a private corporate jet captain who have told me that HOU has some buzz among pilots as being a difficult airport in which to land. Perhaps my reasons aren't exactly accurate -- I've interpreted what they've told me from an admitted position of ignorance -- but as I learn more and more, I'm beginning to understand what I think they've told me.

I'm only half-way to my private and talking about this stuff gets me all geeked. You sound like you are instrument rated. I admire that. I look forward some aviation discussions with you.

[tcole]

Cool. I'm just relaying what I've heard. I don't dispute your assessment of HOU, but I gotta believe two separate pilots -- one a Southwest captain and another, a private corporate jet captain who have told me that HOU has some buzz among pilots as being a difficult airport in which to land. Perhaps my reasons aren't exactly accurate -- I've interpreted what they've told me from an admitted position of ignorance -- but as I learn more and more, I'm beginning to understand what I think they've told me.

I'm only half-way to my private and talking about this stuff gets me all geeked. You sound like you are instrument rated. I admire that. I look forward some aviation discussions with you.

I would be willing to wager that those pilots were really referencing the runway layout of HOU causing a number of problems. As it is laid out, there are a lot of land and hold short orders as well as the nervousness of relying on Twr to coordinate landings and takeoffs on crossing runways. It is no wonder that you have to have a squak code just to taxi there. Good luck on your private. and I would highly recommend transitioning directly into an instrument program as soon as you get it. It will make you a significantly better pilot in a shorter amount of time.

Edited November 28, 2006 by tcole

[dalparadise]

I would highly recommend transitioning directly into an instrument program as soon as you get it. It will make you a significantly better pilot in a shorter amount of time.

This is absolutely my intention.

[dalparadise]

I would be willing to wager that those pilots were really referencing the runway layout of HOU causing a number of problems. As it is laid out, there are a lot of land and hold short orders as well as the nervousness of relying on Twr to coordinate landings and takeoffs on crossing runways. It is no wonder that you have to have a squak code just to taxi there.

I can see what you're saying. Couldn't this be a result of the city engulfing the airport and leaving it no way to expand outward? Thus, runway layouts that were originally designed for prop planes have been upgraded and retrofitted for jets, but have not been re-laid out to better accomodate the larger, faster planes and heavier traffic.

[MidtownCoog]

Couldn't this be a result of the city engulfing the airport and leaving it no way to expand outward?

In a word, no. There are shorter runways. 737s can short field land at 3,500ft.

They actually extended 4/22 not long ago when they closed the curve off Braniff St with high speed taxi ways.

[tcole]

In a word, no. There are shorter runways. 737s can short field land at 3,500ft.

They actually extended 4/22 not long ago when they closed the curve off Braniff St with high speed taxi ways.

The runway layout at HOU was based on maximizing use of prevailing wind with the benefit of having crosswind capabilities. Increased traffic loads, not aircraft size or type, have forced the airport to utilize crossing runways simultaneously. That sort of setup spooks a number of pilots in that it introfuces groundspace and runway conflict possibilities. SFO experiences the same conflict as does LGA and MDW.

Incidently, about those short field landings, 737's can get off in about that same distance if lightly loaded. I remember 727s carrier landing and gunning it out of STT in the 70's/80's on what was barely a 4000' runway.

[MidtownCoog]

You gotta love the 737 - what other pax jet can do soft-field takeoffs and landing?

I used to fly the 737 sims at Flight Safety. That was fun!

[Houston1stWordOnTheMoon]

You gotta love the 737 - what other pax jet can do soft-field takeoffs and landing?

Fokker F-100 and Fokker F-28 The little "Dutch Ovens"

[cwrm4]

...and any airplane ever built in Russia.

[MidtownCoog]

Boo to the Boeing rip-offs!

And a big niet to anything Russian. I think I'd fly Scarebus before Fokker.

[Houston1stWordOnTheMoon]

Boo to the Boeing rip-offs!

And a big niet to anything Russian. I think I'd fly Scarebus before Fokker.

Dont like the Russian built jets? Dont like the Fokkers?

Me either

Which Airbus is your favorite to fly on? I dont think we will ever see them at EFD though

[MidtownCoog]

I've only been on Scarebus once with Air France. Not sure if it was 330 or 340. Whatever they fly from IAH.

I do marvel at the Antonov An-225 (?)? They were keeing one at IAH for a while. It took off over our house one evening and it was a sight to behold. It was moving oil field equipment back and forth to Siberia.

Not sure if it's still out there.

[Houston1stWordOnTheMoon]

I've only been on Scarebus once with Air France. Not sure if it was 330 or 340. Whatever they fly from IAH.

I do marvel at the Antonov An-225 (?)? They were keeing one at IAH for a while. It took off over our house one evening and it was a sight to behold. It was moving oil field equipment back and forth to Siberia.

Not sure if it's still out there.

The Antonov still comes to IAH freq. Air france used to fly i think A330-200 to IAH, but now it is the 777-300.

I fly the A330-300 sometimes on US Airways to Britain. Will get a chance to fly Lufthansa A340-600 Dec.13 to Frankfurt---worlds longest plane

[cwrm4]

And a big niet to anything Russian.

Several years ago (due to a mechanic's mistake) I lost the brakes on landing in an L-39 (Russian-designed, Czech-built two-seat jet trainer) in Alabama. We went off the end of the runway at 50 mph, across a field, and into and out of ditch. There was NO DAMAGE to the plane. Try that with your precious Citation or spam-can 172! I'll take a Russian plane over an American one anyday. (Now, Russian flight crews...that's a different story entirely).

On the An-225 at IAH, it is actually an An-124 (a 225 has six engines) Once I was in a meeting in the former TOTAL building on JFK blvd when the ceiling was low and scuzzy. Suddenly, out popped the An-124 from the clouds, coming in to land. The woman next to me screamed. Another ran out of the room. Awesome.

You can yawn and watch the planes come and go all day up close from that building, but that An-124 is just another sight altogether.

[MidtownCoog]

Try that with your precious Citation or spam-can 172!

There wouldbe no need to. I can float a 172 like a feather and stall on a dime ;-)

I am sure the FSDO loved your "I lost my brakes excuse". If they even have a FSDO in Bama.

Mechanical failures are my main problem with the Russian jets.

Edited November 30, 2006 by MidtownCoog

[dalparadise]

There wouldbe no need to. I can float a 172 like a feather and stall on a dime ;-)

I'm learning to treat the 172 I fly with the same skill. I hope I can reach your level of expertise. How long have you been flying?

The 172 I fly has a 180hp conversion that really gives it some climbing power. The engine modifier claims climbing performance of at least 400-500' per minute more than the standard 172. I can really feel it in the seat.

What a nice, forgiving plane on which to learn. I flew a 152 for a few hours and found it sloppy (much of that was me, I know) and poor performing. I also flew a Cherokee 180, which felt heavy and lacked maneuverability -- sorta like a flying brick. The 172 with the extra power is a perfect trainer, I think -- light, fast, responsive and stable. The best of all worlds.

Edited November 30, 2006 by dalparadise

[cwrm4]

I am sure the FSDO loved your "I lost my brakes excuse". If they even have a FSDO in Bama.

There was no damage to the aircraft and therefore no need to inform the FSDO...

[Travel_n_Transport]

On the An-225 at IAH, it is actually an An-124

The An-225 has been visiting IAH several times a year for the last couple of years. The An-124s are probably weekly visitors sometimes 2x at a time.

[MidtownCoog]

How long have you been flying?

Almost 16 years. I got my private at 20 thinking I'd be an ATP, but then I took a few years off. Now I just buzz cows and beach babes in Galveston in a Super Cub.

I spend more time out on the bay now days.

[dalparadise]

Almost 16 years. I got my private at 20 thinking I'd be an ATP, but then I took a few years off. Now I just buzz cows and beach babes in Galveston in a Super Cub.

I spend more time out on the bay now days.

Cool. I wish I would have pursued this at 20. I'm 37 now and thinking I've missed a lot of time up in the sky.

[Hanuman]

I have been asleep at the wheel lately, but a friend just pointed out all the new construction going on at Ellington Field. I drove by, and noted that these all look like combined military facilities, similar to one that was just finished @ a year ago. They are very impressive structures though, and one seems to have a hangar area (?) maybe, on the back side of it. I'm anxious to see what goes in there.

I also noted other unimproved tracts for sale as well. I would really love to see this airport area get some unique development. I personally like the location, and thought of developing a restaurant with a sky bar, right on the flightline. Opinions anyone??

I'll post some pics, if no one else has any, as the architecture is interesting. I'm hoping that a HAIF'er will chime in here with the inside scoop.

[Houstonian in Iraq]

Don’t work nor live down there, but it might be part of the Base Closure and Realignment (BRAC). I know that the units that use to be off of OST transferred there. I think other units from the surrounding area might be as well.

[TheNiche]

Don’t work nor live down there, but it might be part of the Base Closure and Realignment (BRAC). I know that the units that use to be off of OST transferred there. I think other units from the surrounding area might be as well.

I think that it was the reserve units on OST and also some that were in Beaumont that got folded into Ellington Field. Of course, Ellington Field is also part of the Houston Airport System, and so these new structures could also be supportive of general aviation, NASA, or private industry.

[Hanuman]

Don’t work nor live down there, but it might be part of the Base Closure and Realignment (BRAC). I know that the units that use to be off of OST transferred there. I think other units from the surrounding area might be as well.

Thanks for the response on the topic, and yes, it could be BRAC. I'm going to check it out.

On a serious note: Thank you so much for your service to OUR country. WE, the People, are so very proud of our military, and the many, many sacrifices that you GIVE to us so unselfishly. Thank you is sincere in this regard!