Well, may be, I would say we need to go to their web site to see if they talk about these things...thanks.

As for (1). I think the concern is when the aircraft gets 90 degrees to the wind. The approach would be straight in, but when you get 1/4 the way around the circle, you would have the wind at 90 degrees.....with the wing tip tilted up. I don't have a judgment on how this would affect things, I mean you would have centripetal force helping you keep the wing down to some extent....but I mention this so as to expand on the comment of nickursis. I am not a full scale pilot...I am an RC pilot so I do not have the same range of experience as do you. I do however have a lot of experience, seeing aircraft in unrecoverable situations. [I mean a lot!!!] nickursis does make a valid point on this...however practical application may cause this to not be a problem. I just dot know.
The high wing loadings of full scale aircraft may in fact negate this problem.....these big jetliners really are enormously heavy and have high takeoff speeds. a 40 MPH cross wind is not going to affect an aircraft with a 120 MPH takeoff speed as much as it will an aircraft with a 60 MPH takeoff speed

To always take off with a headwind. Okay! I see the advantage now. Thanks for the posting.
Tried to watch the video but watched the little "I'm warming up" arc thingie go around and around for just too long.
Thought the glitch kinda circular runway ironic.

Most runways are designed to support takeoff and landing operations in low visibility (1/8 of a mile, 600 RVR) and in less then optimum runway contamination due to rain snow and ice. Adding to the directional control oroblems does nit help, even on a clear day. The approach and departure procedures need to likewise be designed to stay clear of obsticles and terrain in the vicinity of the airport. This concept may look cute on paper but has not use in a practical world, in the opinion of this airline captain and retired navy fighter pilot.
Cheers,

Wonder how Harrison Ford would handle this?

I shudder to think of the kind of retraining program, for pilots of all grades, on how to take off and land with the wheels turned clockwise. Whew! Are they sure about this?!? I understand the appeal of efficiency--you would never have to worry about where the wind was blowing. But still...!

These people wouldn't happen to be from Colorado, would they? This is the kind of idea that could only result from smoking dope. I don't see the feasibility of landing a 100 or 200 ton airliner on a banked circle track at 140+ mph without having major issues with the landing gear.

Silly.

Does not fix crosswinds problems.
Trades runway length for a three-dimensional landing problem.
Does not increase the use of runways. If you could land two planes behind each other, it could be done now.
I think this is a joke, or a basic nutty person trying to solve a problem of no land in Europe.

Flying at supersonic speeds requires the correct aircraft design - typically much more expensive and holding fewer occupants and less cargo. It's also very costly from a fuel perspective as it's not very efficient to drive a plane through the sound barrier. Yes, it may be a little disappointing, but they aren't going for overall speed but efficiency and profitability.

All seem valid, especially since you actually fly. Having been interested in planes since I was a tyke, I just have what little I know from watching lots of movies, videos and simulators.

Interesting, of course. I learned to fly in the 1990s, but have not flown in 15 years. I read the comments here and have these replies:

(1) As for the problems with crosswind, I assume that for landing and take-off you would be given a pattern and runway than brings you head-on into the wind for touchdown (or take-off). After that, it would be a matter of controls to keep the wings level on the ground.

(1.a.) It would depend on how large the circle is. Most runways are a mile long. Commercial runways are two miles long. But you need much less than that in good conditions. At small county airport, you can land on the numbers (end of the runway) and take the first turnoff ... but at a large commercial airport, the event is different. A circle is just a set of straight lines, really. But if the intent is to create a 2-km runway as a circumference of a circle 600 m in diameter, then it is going to be dicey learning.

(1.b.) When you learn to "fly", you are really learning to land. Planes pretty much are built to fly; anything will fly if you push it hard enough. It is landing that is the challenge. The last minute is the hardest. Then you push in the throttle, take off and practice again... and again... and again...

(2) The actual test was run with fighter pilots. They tend to be a bit better than the private pilots who go out for a $100 hamburger once a month.

(3) Before we see a blossoming of circular runways and a complete restructuring of 100,000 American county airports, teleportation or high-speed tunnels or a quantum leap in virtual reality (or just a "quantum leap" in something else we do not yet know about), will change the social structure.

Neither was I, as it seemed you are much more prone to uneven lift when the crosswind goes under the upward wing.

Well, they have a website, so we can go see what there is, maybe they discuss it, I haven't had time, thought this was an interesting idea, if a bit weird...

Nope, they are serious:

http://www.endlessrunway-project.eu/

Yes. You are correct. There would be a higher stall speed and, therefore, higher landing speed. There would be a side load to be evaluated on the aircraft landing gear when the centripetal force dies off as the speed slows. Crosswinds could actually be a nightmare as control inputs would have to change as the aircraft heading changes throughout the landing flare...at reducing airspeed.

I'm a pilot and former Boeing stress engineer on the 757, 777...FWIW

Most don't understand that a crosswind landing is properly done by STABILIZING your control inputs and approach down to the runway. The commercial liners are often different in that they must make an adjustment in yaw right at the last minute (tough). But, to say that this circle would help deal with crosswinds...uh, not convinced of that yet....

Hmmm. Looks heavily banked like a NASCAR track. Maybe it could work. I suspect pilots would need to begin training with smaller lighter planes before landing a big one. Who knows, next would be a circular aircraft carrier you could land a B52 on, LOL!

Not being an expert in this field...
my first reaction is this has probably been copied and re-posted on the web
since, I guessing... April 1st ??

Yeah. I would think the plane would have a higher stall speed when banking. The narrator said there have been successful trials. It would be neat landing on one. I'm disappointed that the technical aspects of commercial planes hasn't changed in my lifetime. I imagined all planes would fly faster and at supersonic speeds. They've improved engine efficiency, but it still takes nine hours to get to Europe from Chicago.