Captain Airclues
I have flown as PIC in the US under various part of the FARs, the LAHSO procedure is discretionary; I agree with you, there is a risk associated with poor judgement and execution. I have never had the situation where I felt that I would arrive at the intersection at the same time as another aircraft – but I agree there is that chance.
In the UK, we have the 'Land-after' procedure, which could also be poorly judged and executed. The difference between this and LAHSO is that with LAHSO, you can easily detect a contant relative bearing and get out of the situation before it develops. Land-after however, if the chap on the ground grinds to a halt and you happen to be close to the ground ATC will be shouting at the chap to expedite his vacation. In addition, there are a number of airfields within the UK that issue a landing clearance when the departuring aircraft is still on the runway but has travelled, I believe 2000 metres. This is based on the assumption that the aircraft departing has actually passed V1, but a declaration for the aircraft in question has not been made.
Ranger One
Thanks for posting, I was under the impression that the FAA did not like the decision made and no doubt believe they are not only acting in the interests of US nationals. From the details I have read the original failure occured within US airspace and this would have the FAA a strong case for arguing their point.
Dagger Dirk
Excellent point.
Last edited by Crash and Burn; 14th May 2005 at 17:32.