Originally Posted by
RAT 5
The only reason I can surmise for doing F15 landings is fuel economy and perhaps noise, but the latter is debatable. I thought there were already operators certified for F25 normal landings. F15 must be considered a non-normal as you need to select flap inhibit on the EGPWS.
You say your "operator finally authorised..........." I wonder what the discussion was between Boeing, FAA inspector & operator. I would have expected great scepticism from the former 2 under economic pressure from the latter. This will be until the first overrun or set of burst tyres.
Is there a minimum runway length that is stipulated for this? And I assume no braking issues or tailwind. I can imagine some interesting flight deck debates from a disagreeing pilot. CRM could be tested.
I believe AA already does F15 landings, so there is at least one major operator in the US and I was trained for them at KAL, but never needed them. The FAA has already approved this, IAW.
One of the uses is for Hot&High go-around limits.
I'm preeetty sure wind and breaking issues affect all landings, but we can always run the numbers to see if it needs to be F15, F30, or F40.
I bet there are some CAs who will want to try this as soon as they can and others who will never want to even hear it suggested (the "F1 takeoff? Is that even legal?? Not on my watch!!!" crowd).