Avoiding an overrun: what should be trained?

[Tee Emm]

I suggest the following as an effective measure to combat landing technique complacency:

Simulator training should be conducted on runway lengths just within the landing length performance limit, be it wet, dry, or slippery. A crosswind should be present. More often than not simulator runways at the destination are well in excess of the minimum length required.

It is important to demonstrate the dangers associated with excess speed and/or excess threshold crossing height. Briefings are fine, but seeing the result of a poorly managed approach and landing is better. A picture is worth a thousand words.

Have the pilot deliberately approach too fast, too high and with a tailwind. All things being equal the aircraft will over-run and presumably an intelligent pilot will see the result of his "folly." Do this on a slippery runway to make the point the over-run potential is greater. From then on train pilots in the simulator to land consistently safely on a runway limiting weight. This does not mean autoland either but raw data hand flying.

The manufacturers speed additives need to be looked at as well. An example of this is where the additive called for is half the steady headwind component and all the gust.

For example the 737 FCOM requires the steady headwind to be bled off approaching touch down. Few pilots accept that and many hang on to all addditives until the flare. On a wet runway this results in excess speed and invariably a long float. Boeing does not explain why the half the steady headwind component is required as an additive and does not give accurate advice as to when the pilot deliberately starts to bleed off the additive.

"Approaching touch-down" is imprecise and open to liberal interpretation. The FCTM does however state that the flare manoeuvre washes off 3-4 knots. But if you have a 15 knots additive then at what altitude or distance from the threshold should speed bleed -off commence? It's anyone's guess but presumably the pilot should start reducing speed at the point where ground friction starts to take place. Free stream air is considered to start around 2000 ft so the half the HW component should start to be bled back once below 2000 ft. The support pilot needs to be briefed not to squawk Mayday when he sees speed reduction occurring.

Overrun accidents are often due to excessive threshold speed with subsequent float. A common denominator is the manufacturer's recommended additives to Vref. You will not bleed off 15 knots in the 3-4 second flare manoeuvre - no way. The gust factor additive is usually held until the flare and if the gust or lull fails to materialise a long float is likely.

Too many simulator sessions are on runway lengths far in excess of landing length limits. In turn this causes complacency. In the simulator we see pilots conducting the non-normal all flaps-up landings (B737) on runway lengths of at least 9000 ft and there is no sweat in pulling up even after a long float. When the same pilots are required to use shortened runways just within the length limits of a all flaps up landing, most over-run because of excess speed and float.

There is probably no harm with psycho-babble to explain why people land long and fast - but I see proactive training in the simulator as the answer to preventing over-runs on wet and slippery runways.