[Bert Presley]

Perhaps, instead of painting numbers on the runway, an LCD display should be installed?

Then, as magnetic north whizzes past, the ATC staff just have to do one click on a rotary switch every morning

[Pete L]

Useful idea. The numbers could alternate with the AVGAS price.

[akg1486]

Perhaps, instead of painting numbers on the runway, an LCD display should be installed?

Then, as magnetic north whizzes past, the ATC staff just have to do one click on a rotary switch every morning

In areas where magnetic north shifts "fast", they use true north to indicate runway heading. To show that, the runway marking contains a "T", e.g. "32T" instead of just "32".

[Bert Presley]

But that would work everywhere. Would save repainting the numbers every so often. Brilliant.

I'm going to tell whoever it is that does the ICAO thingy and say it was my idea. The money's mine. Mine, I tell you. Ha ha ha

[Crash one]

All we need then is a compass adjustable to true north on a daily basis.
Too sensible for aviation use.

[GrahamB]

It’s caused by the truly repellent personality in the White House.

[tomshep]

Everything going South after Brexit. There's your proof.

[akg1486]

But that would work everywhere. Would save repainting the numbers every so often. Brilliant.

I'm going to tell whoever it is that does the ICAO thingy and say it was my idea. The money's mine. Mine, I tell you. Ha ha ha

I do think that ICAO is aware of it..... Can't find the regulation, but here's an example: the runways 17T/35T at Resolute Bay airport.

[matthew_w100]

It does raise the interesting question - why do we bother designating a runway with its magnetic heading? It's just a label, and having a label you may need to change (especially if there is procedure documentation that all needs to be changed with it) can be an unnecessary PITA. The only occasion when you formally use that number is a runway/compass alignment check on take off, and does that really make it worth it?

Actually the (farm) airstrip I sometimes fly from designates the runways from 1 to 7, with the number independent of the direction we're using it. This seems to work quite satisfactorily.

[Paul_Sengupta]

The only occasion when you formally use that number is a runway/compass alignment check on take off

And to identify the correct runway when approaching.

[matthew_w100]

But a label would do that job just as well - it doesn't need to be a heading.

[Crash one]

24 / 06 grass at Kingsmuir has been so since 2000 I think. Not a lot of use for alignment purposes.

[Iceman]

Glenforsa has 26 / 07 .

I'm still trying to find the bend in the runway but a few whiskies usually helps .



Iceman

[PeteSpencer]

Just leave the numbers off:

Our strip main runway was 09/27 when it was built in 1942, but its now a definite 08/26.

But no-one can tell.

Peter

[Paul_Sengupta]

But a label would do that job just as well - it doesn't need to be a heading.

Not really, because you then wouldn't be able to see where it was on your DI to be able to pick out the correct one when approaching.