Landing Distance Required

[Christophglex]

Hallo

Ich habe mit einem Kollegen eine Diskussion über die Landing Distance Required geführt, bin aber zu keinem Ergebnis gekommen.
Wenn ich einen Flug plane, und am Zielflughafen gibt es sowohl eine veröffentlichte "Runway length" als auch eine "Runway length beyond glideslope", welche Distanz ist dann für die Planung relevant?
Wann darf ich die ganze Runway für meine Planung verwenden und wann nur "beyond Glideslope"(als kommerzieller JAR OPS Flug)?

Meistens liegt der Glideslope ca. 50ft über der Schwelle.
Auch die AFM Landing Performance geht davon aus, die Schwelle in 50 ft zu überfliegen(Steep Approaches ausgenommen).
Somit müsste man ja wohl kaum die "Beyond Glideslope Distance" für die Berechnung verwenden.
Was ist wenn VMC bestehen? VFR dürfte man ja wohl sogar auf den "Nummern" sitzen oder?
Ist man selbst in VMC/nach VFR verpflichtet am PAPI zu bleiben?

Wenn sich jemand bei diesem Thema auskennt, wäre ich sehr dankbar für eine Klärung.
Leider habe ich weder in meinen ATPL Unterlagen noch in der JAR OPS etwas genaues gefunden, daher probiere ich es einmal hier.


Grüsse

Christoph

[Atishoo]

ooo eeerrrr

Whadda he say? LMAO

[mad_jock]

Christoph

The only thing you need to worry about is the LDA (Landing Distance Available)

And in commercial operations it doesn't matter if you are VMC you still try and put it down in the same place as you would on an instrument approach. So you don't stick it down on the numbers if you can.

If you can tell us which field you are having problems with we can maybe help you.

And in English as well please as my german is ****e.

[Christophglex]

Hi mad_jock

The dicussion I had with a colleague of mine started with talking about steep approach landing charts. As they give you lower LFL values he suggested to use that procedure in VMC but at "Non steep app." airports and I am not very convinced by this method. Reading Jar Ops and the AFM you'll find out that you need a visual reference or a Glideslope for the Steep Approach procedure, therefor in my opinion it's not permitted as the standard PAPI is only 3°.
We were using Florence as an example. Using steep app. charts landing is no problem at all, using the full available landing distance makes a landing possible under certain conditions(weight, wind, temp...) even using the "normal approach" charts(not steep). But using the landing distance beyond Glideslope would make it impossible to use this airport.

And in commercial operations it doesn't matter if you are VMC you still try and put it down in the same place as you would on an instrument approach. So you don't stick it down on the numbers if you can

What if you are flying to a VFR airport like Samedan and/or you don't have a PAPI? Are you allowed under JAR OPS to sit on the numbers?

[mad_jock]

Thus proving my german really is ****e I didn't quite get what you were on about.

Can I recommend a book called Performance by Swatton. It really is the bible for performance theory and definitions.

No you are quite correct you can't just invent your own steep approaches with no guidance.

Read Swatton it's the sort of book which stays with you the whole of your career.

http://www.amazon.de/Aircraft-Performance-Theory-Pilots-Swatton/dp/0632055693

[Christophglex]

Thanks for the link, i'll order it.