Landing Clearance

[samotnik]

Perhaps because when an arrival is at 12nm, we can launch two departures before him, or give someone additional 3 minutes of working time at or near the runway... ;-)

[Crazy Voyager]

[...] (although the UK book does say that the aircraft should not be allowed to cross the beginning of the runway until the clearance can be issued - I think this is one of the most commonly flouted rules) [...]

MATS pt 1 Sec2 Chap 1, 19.3

Unless specific procedures have been approved by the CAA, a landing aircraft shall not be permitted to cross the beginning of the runway on its final approach until a preceding aircraft, departing from the same runway, is arborne.

The mats pt 1 never specifies how far an inbound can proceed if it follows another lander, only following a departure.

[xray one]

Slight thread drift but the main reason why I've had late landing clearance is either being fed in tight, or behind an aircraft that slows down too early. I really think it's time these aircraft that don't fly the speeds they're cleared to should be made to go around and not cause others behind them to have a stressful last 200' or, indeed, go around themselves.

I'm always wary of certain airlines, Air France and Iberia to name but 2!

[Talkdownman]

Originally Posted by xray one

aircraft that don't fly the speeds they're cleared to should be made to go around and not cause others behind them to have a stressful last 200' or, indeed, go around themselves

I agree, I always believed that if a non-compliant preceding aircraft was inconveniencing the sequence behind that should be the one which should be sent around, but in practical terms we are all better off if they are on the ground out of the way, they'd only do it again next time round. In my time on Number 2 it was usually the same old perpetrators, and unauthorised speed reductions could often be anticipated so an extra half-mile was thrown in to relieve such stress. Probably no spare capacity for that these days.

[OldLurker]

Venture to suggest that it depends on the exact wording, which country you're in and what the visibility is. Somewhere (USA? Malaysia?) I've been told things like "XXX, clear to land after the Citation on short final" or simply "XXX, clear to land, number two". You're expected to look out of the window, have the preceding traffic in sight and ensure your own separation. Which is fine in the sort of perfect visibility you get in some places more favoured than the UK ...

In the UK you can get "land after" in accordance with CAP413 4.56, e.g. "BIGJET 347, runway 28, land after the B737, wind calm." (Note the missing words "clear to ...") Then "responsibility for ensuring adequate separation rests with the pilot of the following aircraft."

[ShyTorque]

I agree, I always believed that if a non-compliant preceding aircraft was inconveniencing the sequence behind that should be the one which should be sent around, but in practical terms we are all better off if they are on the ground out of the way, they'd only do it again next time round.

I suppose looking on the positive side, if the crew tried to keep the speed up for whatever reason, but messed up the landing, then everyone would be going around, for hours. afterwards.

In the UK you can get "land after" in accordance with CAP413 4.56, e.g. "BIGJET 347, runway 28, land after the B737, wind calm." (Note the missing words "clear to ...") Then "responsibility for ensuring adequate separation rests with the pilot of the following aircraft."

By day only, of course.