Having some experience on this topic, I am not sure that the answer is that simple. I have run some numbers though my trusty laptop, that has factory provided, JAR approved software on it, MARK I for the purpose.
With the following data: RWY 10L
Landing Weight 17800kg
LDA 2200m
Slope –0.436
Temp 24
Tailwind 8kt
Flap 45
Ice Speeds ON
The
UNFACTORED landing distance is 1140m. That means there should have been over a kilometre to play with. This is assuming that the crew crossed the end of the runway at Vref (in this case 136kts) and touched down in the first 300m of the runway.
Just for the record, as all the facts about this incident are
NOT available,
I AM NOT IN ANYWAY QUESTIONING THE CREW ACTIONS. This is an academic discussion on landing on wet/contaminated runways.
In the case of contaminated runway, factoring is normally 40 – 100%. In the incident in question, 1.95 x unfactored landing distance was available.
If memory serves, SAA have had a B742 in Rio and an A320 at Lusaka in the mud, in recent years. Both aircraft were fitted with reversers. In both these incidents, it was a directional control problem, caused by aquaplaning. Just for interest, have a read of this incident:
http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/group...ty_025504.hcsp
I know for a fact that most British operators DO NOT have the reverser option. Having insight into the math of the reverser/no reverser decision, I believe that the no reverser option was correct.
I think the question here is, should we not have a rethink about attempting approaches in pi**ing rain!! Have we, as an industry, not become a little too complacent, also too schedule driven. We all hate to be late.
In aviation, it pays to have your spirit of adventure about 4 steps behind your sense of self-preservation!!
P.S. I have to get my 5c worth about the comment:
“Many of us would not even be flying the EMB135 were it not for the astute business skills of Mr Foster!!! Lets give credit where credit is due.”
History will judge RF and his “astute business skills”. Me thinks history will not be kind. It is a pity hindsight is a 20/20 science.