hahaha 發表於 2016-5-31 10:22 
當戰爭來時
你急著把飛機脫離人家攻擊的範圍內時
不論平時戰時
一架飛機起飛時 因撞擊異物 發生事故 而癱在跑道上
要不要救援 要不要清理
如果要 有時間嗎
如果不要
後面的飛機還能起飛嗎
In the cases you mentioned, BA 38 landed short of the runway.
The airport was closed to arrivals for a few hours, however, and hundreds of flights were delayed, cancelled, or diverted. In the meantime, the
runway in question (27L) was closed entirely for arrivals until 3 days later when the aircraft was recovered. However the runway re-opened on the day of the accident for departures only. As Heathrow typically operates with one runway for Departures and one for Arrivals, this had minimal impact on operations: ref
In Turkish flight 1878, the aircraft impacted Runway 5, then again on Runway 35L, but as far as I'm aware no significant damage was done. The other runways were inspected and used until the aircraft was moved. Ataturk is a busy airport, but not so busy that it can't cope with the loss of a single runway. Again a few hundred flights were delayed, cancelled, or diverted.
In neither incident was wreckage left on the actual runway, so once inspected they could be used as normal. There was some disruption in both cases - although no more than that caused by bad weather. If the aircraft had remained on the runway in either case, however, and had the accidents been at a single airport runway (eg London Stansted rather than Heathrow), the airport would likely have been closed for several days.
Another interesting case is
Asiana Airlines flight 214 - an accident at San Francisco which closed the Airport for a few hours, and the runway for around a day. The other two runways (1/19 L/R which are perpendicular, as San Francisco has 4 runways arranged as 2 pairs) re-opened after around an hour and meant there was minimal impact, along with the parallel runway (10L/28R) which re-opened 24 hours later.
The accident runway (10R/27L) re-opened around a week later.