Keg,
That's longer than my whole aeroplane!
esreverlluf
In this day and age of litigation, I reckon if the mini-backtrack thingy was required or even a good idea, then it would be recommended by Boeing and also by the Qantas and Virgin training departments.
The only legal requirement is that you line up within the lineup allowance. In some aircraft, that requires a near pirouette on the inboard tyres (My dad used to do them in DC-3s - but they had a big shiny round steel plate to do it on to help). Have close look at a set of tyres doing such a manoeuvre. To give yourself even more of a surprise, watch a two-axle bogey during a really tight turn.
A bit of a wider turn to line up with a micro "backtrack" is good sense to me. If you don't have to, what's the point subjecting the structure to unnecessary wear? You might find later on it does a QF Rome gear collapse...
A380 Driver,
Bloggs- Surely you are not suggesting that the figures you use for 21 takeoff (full length) are in anyway limiting even at a full flex at Max TOW.
No, I am not. But the Ops Manual says that you must line up within the lineup allowance, so that's what pilots do. Sounds fair to me.
If you feel the 90deg is allowance is not enough then push them to change it.
I suggested an alternative but was ignored. Yes, it would be nice to apply commonsense to aviation sometimes, but, particulary in this day and age, why bother setting yourself up for a punch in the nose?