Originally Posted by
Ixixly
Yes, a Test Pilot does it and then those figures are adjusted for an average Pilot because of course they don't expect you to fly it like a Test Pilot. If you want to go landing on an Airstrip prior to the numbers on a section of ground that isn't part of the regular inspections required to approve that Airstrip, you go right ahead, but when you hit a hole that no one knew about don't be surprised when you're the one responsible.
Did someone suggest landing "on a section of ground" that presumably is off the airstrip?
No, what is suggested is that, on a really short strip, no bush pilot who wants to maximise the margins is going to waste valuable stopping distance by flying large air transport 50 ft heights at the threshold, then relying on maximum braking to compensate for being only average and maybe landing a bit longer than the test pilot did.
50 ft looks bloody high when you have only a few hundred metres to get down and stopped.
If we were to scale things down according to aircraft size and responsiveness, 15ft would probably feel right for most pilots and provide adequate clearance 'over the fence', but no, in aviation we often use arbitrary numbers because it's easier for the rule makers. The rule makers are not out there doing it in the weeds.