Originally Posted by
FlyingStone
Have you got any specific figures by chance? It'd be interesting to see how long runways are we talking about.
Max Land weight, F40, 1000 airport elevation, 29C, no wind, 2 Reverse, dry "Good" runway: 9200' Advisory Landing Distance. No Reverse? 11,000'
Going "Wet-Good" changes to 10,800' with Reverse, 14,400' No Reverse. Example of these conditions is Guayaquil (although sea level). Useable landing length approx 8450'
Having a statistically very bad day departing Quito, Ecuador at 175K with a deferred Engine Generator followed by the loss of the APU and remaining Generator? (low prob of course), Dry runway, 12,500' (1000 cushion), Wet-Good, 15,100', both with Reverse. No Reverse Dry? 14,200', Quito runway length is 13,445'. Guayaquil not an option.
My example over the Amazon on a rainy night? My previous equipment of 777,767,757 would involve a Split-S into Manaus and grumble about hotel rooms as I imagine all the Airbus series along with the 787/747. The MAX seems to require more runway than MAO would offer. I don't pretend to be an expert. I don't know what the reason is for the high numbers with that condition. Anti-skid degradation is understandable. There is a loss of spoiler capability as well and maybe a loss of the LAM (Landing Attitude Modifier) spoiler function may have an effect.
Long travel through the proverbial line up of Swiss Cheese holes, but someone usually finds a way eventually.