Originally Posted by
Boeingdriver999
I think the attitude from certain training departments that all landings should be the same and all runways should be treated the same is a) choosing to be naive to the point of negligence and b) completely and utterly ignores the human factor of the pilot looking out the window and actually experiencing these runways on a daily basis. It brings to mind SOPs that are routinely ignored or worked around by crew but yet the management choose to remain blind to the reality of the situation and ignore the clearly poorly designed/implemented SOP.
If you tell me that landing lightweight, with a ten knot headwind, CAVOK, 3,000+ runway, ops normal should be precisely the same as landing up to MLW, contaminated, possibly tailwind, high autobrake required in-flight calculations then you are either telling porky pies or are genuinely that low-skilled as to not be able to discern/operate as required by the situation.
It may be the training department but it’s also the manufacturer and the regulator. Doing non-standard stuff invalidates performance calculations and sets you up for failure in limiting conditions. There are plenty of examples of aircraft going off the end of 3,000m+ runways through a combination of factors, including a lack of concern because “it's a long runway”.
Using standard technique and being totally open about rejecting the landing should it not work out is the way to proceed. The videos showing the majority of flights into JSI crossing the road at a reasonable height, doing a “standard landing” and rollout with room to spare shows this.
Part of being a professional pilot is to have the ability to get creative when needed but also to follow SOPs when they have been demonstrated to work.