Originally Posted by
aterpster
Like drivers over-relying on automobile anti-lock brakes? I don't believe a professional pilot would consider EMAS as a "buffer."
Indeed, I don't believe EMAS lets you land at a higher weight or with less braking ability. On the other hand, I think a non-EMAS overrun can improve your FAA FAR takeoff numbers if it qualifies as a stopway for an RTO.
Is 737 takeoff and landing performance figured differently from that of the larger Boeing twins? I somehow got that impression from an earlier discussion of the 2005 Southwest MDW overrun.
Originally Posted by
RatherBeFlying
The various formulae for landing distance provide margins, but real world surface conditions and variations in touchdown point, weight and speed (seemingly minor approaching the threshold) can blow past those margins.
Originally Posted by
RatherBeFlying
Instituting larger margins can require lower weights and reduce revenue.
An FOQA program would do well to monitor performance on shorter runways and raise flags when too much margin is getting used.
The FOQA program looking over our shoulders supposedly does see things like long landings. If I'm not stable on approach or won't put it on in the touchdown zone even if there are miles of runway left, I can expect a call if I land or no call if I go around (and do it right
). Back in the 'good old days' it was considered manly to salvage a botched approach and a lot of metal was bent as a result. I cringe when I think of some of the 'watch this' stunts I saw with paying passengers decades ago on the 727.
