Runway Construction mishaps and oddities

Gents - posting this as I have to admit my knowledge on this specific topic is "below par" . . .

I am aware that prior to any actual airfield construction, several surveys would have been made to ensure the ground was suitable and adjacent high ground was considered when choosing runway directions etc. I'm also aware of some "oversights" after construction had started - e.g. Pocklington's "original" main runway - abandoned 2/3rd's built when they realised that if used it would take aircraft directly over the adjacent town at a dangerously low height . . .

Was it a simple case of demand exceeded suitable/logical availability - hence airfields being built in less than ideal locations? (like Acaster Malbis)

Linked to this, Breighton appears to be unique in that, due to the proximity of the River Derwent at the western end, extensions had to be built on all other runways almost immediately after construction had been completed - subsequently leading to it (possibly?) being the only airfield where all the runways met at a central intersection and not the standard "A" layout?

Are/were there any other airfields where runways all met at a central point - noting possibly Finmere comes close to the Breighton example?

Many thanks!

Tony

The ones that actually cross that come to mind are:
Dyce
Elvington
Hampstead Norriss
Silloth
Predannack (3 of the 4)

But there are some that are very like:

Condover
Ouston
Scorton
Greenham
Harwell
St Eval

There must be others and probably many in their earlier grass surface only where the landing strips were much wider so they probably don't count. I included Predannack but perhaps it, along with most Fleet Air Arm airfields should be discounted as four or more runways vastly increase the potential for three to cross at the same point. If we had vast amounts of land we could have used the system they had in North America.

We also had a thread on incomplete runways where they were started but never completed , either due to time , cost or changing requirements.

Peter wrote:

We also had a thread on incomplete runways where they were started but never completed , either due to time , cost or changing requirements.

were you thinking of this topic?

Airfields that never were
www.airfieldresearchgroup.org.uk/forum/a...er-were?start=0#2951

Many thanks for the replies - clearly a few more than I thought had all runways intersecting at one point . . . guess demand exceeded logic from time to time!

Tony

netcompsys wrote:

were you thinking of this topic?

No, although Millisle was the rare example. It was airfields like Wattisham, Balado Bridge, Fordoun etc. that had stubs stated but halted at an early stage which was here:

www.airfieldresearchgroup.org.uk/forum/a...mpleted-runways#1629

That topic never got as far as explaining why each airfield had its final runway aborted.