Originally Posted by
Council Van
Runway 08L currently reduced length at the start of the runway being closed between N and W. Down to 2237M from 3500.
Did they have the correct date in the performance calculations or did they put in full length numbers I wonder. My companies perf on the iPad has the reduced runway length as the first option I guess to try and prompt you to use the correct data. If the wrong runway length was used it will be interesting to find out why such an error was made, fatigue, distractions, no doubt there could be a whole host of reason's.
Could be some interesting lessons to be learned from this one, fortunately no one hurt and nothing damaged except perhaps for some ones pride.
I wonder if there was any tailstrike/lights that were hit or it just looked very close but the clearance was more than it appeared to be.
We usually do not consider the headwind during takeoff to make things conservative. That way if the wind drops off quite a bit, there is no issue at max derate/ATM. But what about if the wind is already calm as it was here and then a tailwind arises during takeoff. I notice that they took off toward the east but for landing, the westerly runway was the preferred runway. Only three knots but that can be an averaged wind over ten minutes. Maybe it is best to reconsider the reducing of takeoff thrust to the maximum possible extent when the headwind component is minimal.
Any thoughts?