Because compasses and directional gyros are in degrees. 
And taxiways are already designated by letters. Having a taxiway and a runway with the same name would be asking for trouble.
Then name them after early aviators, or colors, or vegetables. Having to rename things every X years seems silly.
Do the runways have to be named that way, though? Couldn’t the names remain the same, and the FAA just releases periodic updates as to the degrees?
Having the runway named in degrees gives you a lot of situational awareness. By knowing which way it’s pointing you know how much headwind / crosswind / tailwind there is from the weather report for the airport. You can arrive at an unfamiliar general aviation airport, hear the radio calls from aircraft in the circuit and immediately have a picture in your head of what direction the runway is facing, where the traffic is flying, and how you are going to join the circuit. A quick check of your compass as you line up for take-off or as you make your final approach can easily confirm that you are on the correct runway.
The benefits of having runways named by compass heading are felt all day everyday and it is rare to have to rename them for changes in magnetic variation.
Edit: You don’t get the same benefits if you have to look up the information because it is slower and open to error.
Minor side note–almost all runways are actually two runways. Runway 09 is the same strip of pavement as runway 27 in the other direction. Which direction is in use will depend on the prevailing winds (with some allowance for traffic not switching instantly). If you’re the only one there, you get to choose.
OK, thanks, all.
Just watched/listened to the SWA/FedEX incident. Why did SW refuse to abort? Past the safe point? Amazing how laconic everyone sounded!
The person who told SWA to abort was FedEx, not the tower.
Not that even a directive from tower would necessarily be followed once you’ve got some speed up. Aborts are not hazard-free maneuvers, especially in dense fog.
It’s not real clear at least to me how much either the tower controller or SWA understood about the hazard until it was over. They knew something wasn’t right, but may not have appreciated quite how far wrong it was.
FedEx had their best understanding of the situation right at the moment they saw the runway and SWA on it just ahead. Which is why they called for SWA to abort while they went around. That call was a Hail Mary, but might have worked.
But once FedEx started their go-around they’d lose SWA in the murk and below their nose. So they may not have known how bad it was or wasn’t getting as the two jets drag-raced towards the far end of the runway with SWA climbing beneath them. And prior to spotting SWA, it seems FedEx had not yet tumbled to what was about to transpire in front of them.
Everybody involved had good chances to stop this getting critical. But once all those chances had been passed untaken, the next 30-45 nail-biting seconds were pretty well fore-ordained. The only way to win this scenario is not to play.
There but for the Grace …
I watched one of Mentour Pilot’s YouTube videos a few months back, about a similar incident in which the tower controller misspoke and cleared a United flight to land on 22R, where another plane was already preparing to take off, when she meant to say 22L (I just made up the number 22, I don’t remember the actual runway heading). In that incident the other pilots told United to go around when they saw the 777 coming toward them (Although I think the United pilots saw the other plane on the runway and had already initiated the go around at that point). From what I gathered from Mentour Pilot’s commentary, anyone can, and should, tell anyone else to go around or abort if they notice something is wrong.
He drew comparison to that other incident a few years ago where an Air Canada flight almost landed on a taxiway at SFO. In that case the pilots on the ground just said something vague like “What’s this guy doing?” In his opinion they should have directly told Air Canada to go around rather than waiting for the tower to realize what was happening.
It’s absolutely a good thing to speak up, clearly identify the problem in a way all participants can understand, and propose a solution. All in a short sentence. Proposing / demanding a go-around is almost always something the other airplane can do. Proposing / demanding a takeoff abort is a much trickier request that’s got a much larger potential to be either unheard, denied, or end badly.
Agree 100% that the “What’s this guy doing?” comment at SFO was unhelpful, just clogging up the opportunity for anyone else to take charge more effectively.
In this Austin event after SWA was cleared for takeoff but was apparently not moving very quickly the FedEx pilot said something like “Is FedEx 1234 still cleared to land runway 18L?” with uncertainty in his voice. He was doing what we call “hinting and hoping”: diplomatically inviting the controller to review the whole situation, notice whatever unstated issue was of concern to FedEx, then come up with a new plan if necessary. Instead the controller missed the hint, and reiterated what was already fixed in his own mind: “Yes, FedEx, I already told you you’re cleared to land.” A few seconds later the controller’s lightbulb started to glow and he asked SWA if they were moving. Which they were, barely. By then it was far too late to prevent the close approach.
Imagine if instead FedEx had said “We’re on barely 1 mile final. Southwest stay off the runway, we’re going around now.” This whole thing would have been avoided, even if Southwest had already stuck his nose out there and whether or not Southwest had the presence of mind to then tell FedEx whether he had already fouled the runway or not.
Of such minor less-than-perfect play are mishaps made. Unlike in Hollywood, there’s no scriptwriter guaranteeing that when it’s your 5 seconds to shine you can spit out the right memorable accurate clear unambiguous words. But the more you practice that inside the cockpit the more likely you’ll succeed when you’re the only one of perhaps multiple airplanes, pilots, & ATC folks with a clear picture of the unfolding screw-up.
I still think Fed Ex could have improved the odds by calling of their altitude. Over the runway at 2000… 2100… 2200,., 2500
We had someone open a restaurant across the street from runway 29 at the Municipal airport. They called it “Runway 29”. A couple of years later, runway 29 was changed to runway 30, no doubt causing the staff of Runway 29 to have to answer daily questions about why they weren’t called Runway 30.
Sadly, both the restaurant and the airport fell victim to endless pressure from real estate developers on city council. Now there is a failed development project where the most historic airport in Canada used to be.
Maybe. By the time SWA broke ground there was ~700 feet of vertical clearance which remained pretty constant until their tracks diverged. As long as FedEx kept climbing, there’s no way SWA catches them.
Overall IMO FedEx had the greatest “situational awareness” (“SA”) and the best physical perspective to have and maintain that SA among the 3 participants. In light of that, one of the things that does surprise me a bit is that FedEx did not turn left until told to do so by the relatively clueless tower controller. Passing 400 feet had FedEx turned to crosswind on their own initiative I bet this would not even be the subject of a federal investigation. Much less a hundred posts of speculation in this fine thread. 
JFK Incident
The preliminary report has been released.
Of note:
- ATC were alerted to the unauthorised runway entry by ASDE-X, a type of surface movement radar.
- The Delta 737 was at about 80 knots when the American 777 entered the runway and aborted from about 100 knots and stopped 500 feet short of taxiway J that the 777 had been on.
- The closest the aircraft actually got to each other was 1400 feet as the 737 taxied clear of the runway on J.
- The AA 777 crew are refusing to be interviewed under conditions where the interviews are audio recorded and have been issued subpoenas for their testimony.
Link is to a PDF download.
So has there been any further analysis by experts: if ATC had NOT cancelled takeoff approval would there have been a crash? Or would Delta have seen the other plane in time to stop? Or would they have missed each other anyway?
I got my nixie tube clock from the local electronics enthusiast today. He didn’t have a 9 volt power supply, so he gave me a plug and a battery. The battery lasts almost half an hour. I ordered a power supply from Amazon, and it should be here next Wednesday-Friday.
I’ll need to figure out a case for it. I may have it 3D printed, or I may take inspiration from the images and make the same thing out of wood. I’ll post pics when it’s done.
Does it fly? (-:
Crap. That was supposed to go into the MMP.
time flies when you’re having fun.
@Richard_Pearse. Good to read what they have. Which like all preliminary reports, is all what, no why, and even the whats are pretty superficial and are missing a bunch of intermediate whats that will emerge later.
Sadly, if this goes per the usual timeline it’ll be months before we see much of anything more.
The AA pilots and their union going gangsta on the NTSB is not a good look. Not at all.
As to @PastTense’s question about the collision, I’m sure not a reconstruction expert with access to the real no-kidding radar data.
We don’t know, and the preliminary report doesn’t say, whether DAL aborted in response to tower’s radio call or were already starting / started that on their own initiative when tower called. For darn sure the tower controller did the right thing in the right way as soon as the radar computer noticed the conflict and sounded the alarm.
The preliminary report describes the location and distance of closest approach. At that time, the 777 was ballpark 2 or 3 plane lengths past exiting the runway and still moving away from it. To be sure, DAL got to that spot (abeam K4) a bunch later than they would have had they been accelerating all the way. But they also needed to get all the way to J before they’d have hit or missed the 777. By which time the 777 would have been even farther along.
In my WAG estimation they miss each other if DAL had continued their takeoff all the way to and past J. But it would have been exciting. Way too exciting.