Could a 757-200 land on a runway 2600 ft long?

[Martin Kaareng]

Last week a Britannia 757-200 almost landed at our local airfield, instead of at the larger international one. In our gliding club we are heavily debating whether it could stop in 2600 ft or not provided it landed exactly at the beginning. With brakes set to max auto and at the slowest speed would it be a possibiliy? Anybody have any info on this, preferably some performance charts?

Martin

[quid]

My old DC-8 will have a ground roll of about 2400 feet under those conditions at sea level, zero wind. (We've proven that in actual flight testing.) I'm sure the 75 will do even better.

------------------

[jtr]

never touched a 75' bit I'll go out on a limb and say it'd come pretty close, through in a bit of H/W, (or even better 30 kt) and you might just have it. Mind you, there isn't too many jets stonking around out there at min landing wt.

[BEagle]

Probably - but only once!!

[Lurk R]

Sounds like there's a chance of it landing in 2600'. The question I'd be asking is would it get out!!!

[mutt]

Definitely can't dispatch to a 2600 ft runway. Boeing Ops Manual Landing data chart starts at 3,000 ft.

Mutt

[Brenoch]

Hate getting the ol books out but according to my Pilots Ref Manual it would be quite possible to stop the aircraft on that distance.. Example at 82.5 tons (typical lndwt) flaps 30 at vref30 from 50 ft zero wind at SL and observe, as always no reverse thrust as this is a performance calculation.. The thing would stop at 2453.125 ft
The real trick would be to get the b****rd out of there.. :)

[Brenoch]

Might I ad that those numbers are demonstrated by Boeing testjocks and are therefore factored for us normal mortals by 1.92 so you won´t find those numbers in the book but it still is technically possible to stop the darned thing allthough i´d rather not try it.. :)

[av8er]

From Boeing Ops manual.

Unfactored landing distance with Ctr Hyd system inop (which shouldn't affect landing distance at all) 2745' (yes ft) at 86000kg, including distance from 50' (ie 1000ft of air distance).

ie will STOP in 1745' (-50'/2000kg lighter and other factors for wind etc...)

Bet he's glad he went around though!!

[Martin Kaareng]

2745 or 1745 feet? Big difference!

Martin

[Buffy Summers]

It would have been interesting to see. Landing an Airbus on a 5000 feet runway is exciting enough for me.
Anyway, never mind the length of the runway he "nearly" landed on, tell us more!
How did he come to nearly land there, what is meant by "nearly" landing there, I mean, how close did he get? What was he doing?
Where was he meant to be landing?
Come on then, dish the dirt :) :)

[mutt]

Brenoch

Will you please explain your statement:

therefore factored for us normal mortals by 1.92

I know that there is a rule that for dispatch you must be able to land in 60% of the available runway, but i have never heard of an increase to the actual stopping distances?

Thanks.

Mutt http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/cool.gif

[This message has been edited by mutt (edited 04 October 2000).]

[Brenoch]

Mutt: The landing distance demonstrated by the boeing testpilots (i dunno exactly how many shots they had at doing them) was multiplied by 1.92 as to compensate for our shortcomings in handling the aircraft compared to the testjocks.. The figures where all done by boeing but they are in my company just used as a rule of thumb.. We normally don´t operate to fields where landing distance is a factor as much as the takeoff performance but still.. Gives us a ballpark idea of what turnoffs we can use etc.

[Brenoch]

av8er: I do think a C hyd inop would affect landing distance since some of the spoilers would not be operational..

[av8er]

Brennoch,

I agree, Spoiler panels 1 and 12 will probably not deploy. However, I suspect this is marginal as the lift would probably dump with 10 almost as well as with 12.

Extra distance for no speedbrake (from Flight Crew Training Manual) is 800-1400'. In any event, the thing will stop real quick in less than 1745'.

Pretty impressive if you ask me.

[ockham hold]

Martin, tell me a bit more, where and when was this?????

[Martin Kaareng]

It happened here in Norway. My local airport (ENJB) and the airport it was supposed to land at (ENTO), lie within 5 miles of each other, in fact my local airport has same runway headings and lies within the TMA of ENTO, or Torp. The PIC was presumably familiar with the area, but being swedish one never knows :)
Incidents like this have happened before, but luckily aircraft have never landed at the wrong airport.

Martin

[Brenoch]

Martin.. Have an idea of how many times this has happened before at ENTO??

[Brenoch]

av8er: The 757 is all the way around an impressive piece of kit.. Makes you smile everyday you go to work, doesn´t it?? :) :)

[Doors to Automatic]

It certainly is an impressive piece of kit. I remember getting a jumpseat ride in one a few years back from ABZ-LHR. The captain explained to me during the taxi out to Runway 35 that we would be using full power on take-off.

The rocket-like take-off run was in the region of 1800 feet and we managed a climb rate of around 5000 ft/min!

Amazingly our crusing level for this flight was FL410! We were there for about 2 minutes.

[Brenoch]

We pull those stunts once in a while on the ferries to amuse our selfs.. :) :) Doing one tomorrow..

[ZK-NSJ]

well here in christchurch,nz
a air nz 744 comes in from tokyo on
sundays,and then departs for auckland
quarter full, runway length is 3250m,
this bird gets airborne in 1200m.
(around 3600ft if i'm correct).

[near enuf is good enuf]

This straight from BOEING FORUM:

757 PERFORMS IN CHALLENGING ENVIRONMENTS
....."Although it is the largest Boeing single aisle model, it can operate on the shortest of runways. Currently it serves the Yichang, China, airport with its 5,250 foot (1,600 mtr) runway and the 5,577 foot (1,698 mtr) runway at Funchal on the Atlantic island of Madeira."

If it were operating into anything shorter I'm sure they would have it in black and white.
I think the guys have answered the "can" but I don't think it ever would.

------------------
So that you may not be the martyred slaves of Time,
get drunk, get drunk,
and never pause for rest!
With wine, poetry, or virtue,
as you choose!"

[Bally Heck]

Martin Kareng.

Don't leave us in suspense!!! Dish the dirt. A Britannia 757. Where? When? Why has the Daily Crud not heard of it? Just gimme da facts. Only da facts!

[Brenoch]

near enuf is good enuf: There is a new runway at Funchal now thank god.. 2700mts.. Makes it alot more undramatic flying in there.. :)

[buck-rogers]

Ah Funchal!

A small ski ramp bolted to the cliffs I remember. A bit cheeky saying that '75s are good aircraft becouse they land there -(even though they are). There's a big chunk of gravity helping you stop on that slope.

Without a headwind I do remember a short load of fuel helped you to skip to a nearby island to get a full tank, and then you left properly.

I would love to have been on a landing/take off when it was the original, original runway - the one that didn't have the extension in the sea! I bet there was some real bum clenching moments in those days!

Is the new runway at the same location or have they found a different bit of the island that's flat now? Been a while.

[Brenoch]

The new runway sits just next to the old one.. Ahh, good ol Porto Santo, gets a bit crowded when FNC closes.. :) :) Room for no more than five crafts on the apron..

[ironbutt57]

Physically possible..oh most definitely yes...but i want to be there with a video camera to watch it leave!!!!

[4dogs]

Brenoch,

The standard factor is 1.67. In some jurisdictions, an additional 15% is applied to aircraft without reverse thrust and some apply an additional 15% for wet runway. In any event, 1.92 is the result of applying the 15% to the 1.67 dry factor.

Can you confirm the derivation of the 1.92 factor to which you refer? Your previous reply did not really elucidate your original statement.

------------------
Stay Alive,

[email protected]

[Brenoch]

4Dogs.. Aye, you are right.. Overlooked it in the mist of battle.. 1.92=1.67*1.15 for the fact that reverse thrust is not used..
Please excuse my ignorance.. :)

[AndrewE]

I know it might see impractible but in MSFS2000 i can land the 757 at meigs feild chicago at close to it's MLW with full brakes/reverse thrust/spoilers, slight breeze, and a dry runway.
I'm sure in real life you could land it on a 2400ft/runway assuming hte runway was dry....Then again..i stand corrected.....

------------------
Great Quotes:
"Flying is an unnatural act, probably punishable by God."

"London Heathrow has been described as the only building site to have its own airport."

"A good landing is one you can walk away from. A great landing is one you can still use the plane after."

[Johan Dees]

Not for long anymore Andrew...

FS2000 planes brake way too hard. Not real. Also the reversers give way too much braking.
For example; Most 747's can be land anywere, but not the one from my site. Braking is set to real values, and you need more runway to get to a stop.
Busy on the 757, and then Meigs will be a real challenge after that.

Johan

[Doors to Automatic]

FS2000 aircraft are improving as we speak. The new 767s from project Opensky stop very realistically. 40% fuel, Aurobrake level 1 and full reverse requires around 6000-7000 feet to land and stop.

[AndrewE]

uh, Doors to Automatic, you might already know this but...the guy who replied just before you (Johan Dees) is the one who is actually making the flight dynamics for that very 767. He also made the dynamics for the Meljet 747

hehe
regards,

------------------
Great Quotes:
"Flying is an unnatural act, probably punishable by God."

"London Heathrow has been described as the only building site to have its own airport."

"A good landing is one you can walk away from. A great landing is one you can still use the plane after."

[reverserdeployed]

http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/cool.gif http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/cool.gif

[Doors to Automatic]

Andrew,

Didn't actually know this - thanks for letting me know! To Johan - full marks for an excellent set of aircraft. The only thing that would make them better is to be able to have a wing-view from inside when you look left/right.

Rgds, D to A