My english isnīt the best.
but numbers, I think are the same in all langages.
The operating rules are really irrelevant. Consider the practical wisdom of restricting yourself to planning to not have reverse available. I understand completely what you're saying, and any time you have to justify something by saying "what can I get away with," you're in error.
Time to check yourself.
You may legally proceed and plan for the use of reverse. If you're wise, you'll plan for landing without it, and take any reduction in landing distance you actually achieve with reverse, as a bonus.
SNS3Guppy, did you read my post ??
My airplane can land without reverse on 3000 ft runways.
But I canīt land at a 3000 ft runway without reverse, because JAR-OPS asks to add 42 % safety margin.
So to be legal the runway has to be 4260 ft long. The aditional 1260 ft are for the worst case.
What I am planing to do is:
My airplane can land at 2500 ft with the use of reversers.
To be legal according to JAR-OPS I need to add 42% to that as well.
That makes 3550 ft Runway available to plan legaly acording JAR-OPS with reversers.
So the runway will be 3550 ft long.(planning with reversers)
My plane can stop at 3000 ft without reverse.
So when the reverser donīt work, I will come to a stop after 3000 ft.
550 ft runway left in front of me.
And all this is calculated overflying the treashold at 50 ft.
Normaly the treashold is the place where I touch down.
Now tell me, why do I have to check myself ?
Inbalance