"Land after" clearances: worldwide usage?

[linuxgal]

To what extent are "land after" clearances used around the world? The only info I have found so far is on the Jepp charts for LHR, and after browsing, some info regarding Manchester. What about everywhere else? Are there any standards and terminology applying to this?

[flower]

In the UK according to Manual of Air traffic Services Part 1 , the ATCO's Bible the following applies to Land after:

When aircraft are using the same runway, a landing aircraft may be permitted to touch down before a preceding landing aircraft which has landed is clear of the runway provided that:
(a) the runway is long enough to allow safe separation between the two aircraft and there is no evidence to indicate that braking may be adversely affected.
(b) it is during daylight hours;
(c) the controller is satisfied that the landing aircraft will be able to see the preceding aircraft which has landed clearly and continuously, until it is clear of the runway ; and
(d) the pilot of the following aircraft is warned, (responsibility for ensuring adequate separation rests with the pilot of the following aircraft)

There may be some local additional rules at certain airfields but in general this is how it applies here in the UK , I am unable to comment on other countries procedures.

phraseology is:

Land after (aircraft type) ,runway (designation)

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

Just to add to the confusion, Heathrow (and maybe some other UK airfields) also has "After the landing XXX cleared to land" procedure, which has slightly different criteria to the "land after".

[spekesoftly]

An abbreviated summary of the UK MATS Pt1 rules on the 'land after procedure' is also in the UK AIP (Gen 3-3-5, 6.3).


And just to add to HD's post:-

Heathrow, Gatwick, Stansted and Manchester all have special landing procedures - ( "c/s .... after the landing/departing XXX .... cleared to land" ) - for specific details and criteria see UK AIP Gen 3-3-5, 6.4 and Gen 3-3-6.

[Dances with Boffins]

'Land After' isn't an accepted ICAO procedure, and so it's down to individual states to adopt it. UK has, but I know that Netherlands and Hong Kong definitely don't use it.

[Short Approach?]

We use it here in Denmark as well

[Pinky95]

The Netherlands indeed don't use it, you won't get your clearance to land until the runway really is clear. I remember flying in the USA and getting on downwind: "your #2 cleared to land" that took some getting used to coming back home to hear cleared to land at 500 ft or below :-)

[LN-ATC]

The "land after/after the landing xxx, cleared to land" is not used in Norway.

Anyway, we are allowed to issue a landing clearence when we are "pretty sure" that the runway will be free, at the time the landing aircraft passes the threshold. However, we can not issue landing clearence for #2 before #1 has passed the threshold.

I don't bother metioning all the exceptions... :)

Good night from Sola TWR!

[Scott Voigt]

In the US....

Number four, cleared to land...

regards

[linuxgal]

Well, I'm afraid that it answers my question - that it needs to be adopted by the individual country. As everywhere, capacity is limited here in South Africa, and could be used to improve matters, but it wouldn't be a simple task to get something like that approved in our present ATC climate.

Thanks for your info all, I wish you in advance a happy Day of the Air Traffic Controller!