Short-Field experience (on jet types)
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: The wino at the end of the bar
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Risk management
When accepting no safety margin You will eventually run out of luck.
The factoring is there for a reason.
In my humble career i've had an hydraulic wheel brake faliure after landing, had to use pneumatic alternate brake procedure with no antiskid. Had no warning beforehand during approach. This is a proceure with a landing distance increase
Of 1.37.
Some of the posters in here Even brag about being such skilled pilots And not needing any safety margins.
I just call it being plain stupid.
The factoring is there for a reason.
In my humble career i've had an hydraulic wheel brake faliure after landing, had to use pneumatic alternate brake procedure with no antiskid. Had no warning beforehand during approach. This is a proceure with a landing distance increase
Of 1.37.
Some of the posters in here Even brag about being such skilled pilots And not needing any safety margins.
I just call it being plain stupid.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Far away from LA
Posts: 1,032
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Distance from a 3° glide at a screen height of 50ft to touchdown is 920ft...
At 50 ft 1.23 Vso and touchdown point at 1.0 Vso Throttles closed, main wheels and all proximity switches energised, within 6 seconds nose wheel touches and reversers can be deployed ( braking may start before nose wheel on the ground), maximum braking to the full stop, that means do not modulate the brakes.
If you increase the approach angle, and keep the screen height identical, the flare will make you touchdown sooner. hence a shorter landing distance. ( some manufacturers like Cessna on their Excel, even computed a special Vref for LCY); Airbus has a special mode as well for this airport, as well as a special flare command call-outs.
All this being legal, because in the AFM, and pilots trained for it.
Factoring at one two three doesn't matter, if you have a failure or encountered unreported conditions, only experience or luck can make the outcome successful , and this is where EXPERIENCE comes into play. If coming from airline ops with 20 dispatchers and barely knowing how the fuel panel is working ( example) towards a small ops, even flying one of the best flying machine ( the other one is the falcon 50EX, awaiting the F8X); one can find it very challenging even with 15k hours of autopilot flying, or island hoping in a piston.
On one side, this is another ILS, on the other side, i can transform my plane in a flying rock and still recover in no time..
Guys, short field is a perception, and of course everyone agrees that more runway, more fuel, more performance, more salary, every is better; just admit that ops dictates the rules, and the set of rules is chosen in order to accomplish the mission. so from a A380 perspective 8000 ft can appear tiny, where a MAULE can land in the width of the same runway.
There is not one type of aviation, but as many as operators or destinations; find the one that suits you the best, and enjoy every minute of it.
I know the aviation which i belong to, and i rather not be flying than to end up FO in a B77 in the sandpit.
At 50 ft 1.23 Vso and touchdown point at 1.0 Vso Throttles closed, main wheels and all proximity switches energised, within 6 seconds nose wheel touches and reversers can be deployed ( braking may start before nose wheel on the ground), maximum braking to the full stop, that means do not modulate the brakes.
If you increase the approach angle, and keep the screen height identical, the flare will make you touchdown sooner. hence a shorter landing distance. ( some manufacturers like Cessna on their Excel, even computed a special Vref for LCY); Airbus has a special mode as well for this airport, as well as a special flare command call-outs.
All this being legal, because in the AFM, and pilots trained for it.
Factoring at one two three doesn't matter, if you have a failure or encountered unreported conditions, only experience or luck can make the outcome successful , and this is where EXPERIENCE comes into play. If coming from airline ops with 20 dispatchers and barely knowing how the fuel panel is working ( example) towards a small ops, even flying one of the best flying machine ( the other one is the falcon 50EX, awaiting the F8X); one can find it very challenging even with 15k hours of autopilot flying, or island hoping in a piston.
On one side, this is another ILS, on the other side, i can transform my plane in a flying rock and still recover in no time..
Guys, short field is a perception, and of course everyone agrees that more runway, more fuel, more performance, more salary, every is better; just admit that ops dictates the rules, and the set of rules is chosen in order to accomplish the mission. so from a A380 perspective 8000 ft can appear tiny, where a MAULE can land in the width of the same runway.
There is not one type of aviation, but as many as operators or destinations; find the one that suits you the best, and enjoy every minute of it.
I know the aviation which i belong to, and i rather not be flying than to end up FO in a B77 in the sandpit.
monkey's tea party
There's a great deal of misunderstanding in this thread regarding how landing performance is calculated and what demonstration the figures are extrapolated from. It probably doesn't matter, as most of it has been lost amongst the mud slinging.
Private operations can do as they please within the realms of the regulations for private operators. As Cambioso, I believe, said - apologies if it was the other chap - the owner assumes the risks as do the crew. A commercial operator simply could not assume the same risks, or rely on the same acceptance of that risk from the passengers, as their passengers are rarely qualified enough to understand the risks or assume them. The commander makes the ultimate judgement - this is true whether we're discussing private, or commercial operations.
Private operations can do as they please within the realms of the regulations for private operators. As Cambioso, I believe, said - apologies if it was the other chap - the owner assumes the risks as do the crew. A commercial operator simply could not assume the same risks, or rely on the same acceptance of that risk from the passengers, as their passengers are rarely qualified enough to understand the risks or assume them. The commander makes the ultimate judgement - this is true whether we're discussing private, or commercial operations.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: If this is Tuesday, it must be?
Posts: 651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Also a lot of misunderstanding about risk management. Likelihood of a particular hazard occuring is very dependent on the scale of the operation.
If we take the proverbial "one in a million" chance, an operation like Jez's that does 750 hours a year - a lot for a corporate operator - can expect this hazard to occur once every 1,300 years. Even allowing for the fact that statistics don't work that way, it seems like reasonable odds to me as a pilot, and certainly to the sort of passengers we fly (often risk takers to have achieved what they have).
On the other hand, if you take Ryanair, their fleet of 400+ aircraft operate somewhere around 2 million hours each year. All of a sudden the same hazard is something it's worth spending a lot of effort to avoid, or you'll be having an expensive major incident every six months or so.
So when considering accepting less than the full 1.67 factor, which doesn't guarantee anything anyway when you look at all the possible scenarios, and allowing for the fact that you rarely need to go all the way down to 1.0, it's not much of an issue provided the crew understand the hazards and aren't just indulging in macho "we're better than airline pilots" bull****.
Of course, even in airlines as soon as the runway is wet you're usually down to about a 1.3 factor anyway, but probably less than 50% of pilots actually realise that.
If we take the proverbial "one in a million" chance, an operation like Jez's that does 750 hours a year - a lot for a corporate operator - can expect this hazard to occur once every 1,300 years. Even allowing for the fact that statistics don't work that way, it seems like reasonable odds to me as a pilot, and certainly to the sort of passengers we fly (often risk takers to have achieved what they have).
On the other hand, if you take Ryanair, their fleet of 400+ aircraft operate somewhere around 2 million hours each year. All of a sudden the same hazard is something it's worth spending a lot of effort to avoid, or you'll be having an expensive major incident every six months or so.
So when considering accepting less than the full 1.67 factor, which doesn't guarantee anything anyway when you look at all the possible scenarios, and allowing for the fact that you rarely need to go all the way down to 1.0, it's not much of an issue provided the crew understand the hazards and aren't just indulging in macho "we're better than airline pilots" bull****.
Of course, even in airlines as soon as the runway is wet you're usually down to about a 1.3 factor anyway, but probably less than 50% of pilots actually realise that.
Last edited by BizJetJock; 2nd Feb 2015 at 17:04. Reason: Spelling
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: The Moon
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pretty emotive thread!! I have no particular opinion either way we all have a job to do but I was reminded of a job I did a few years ago which will stay with me as a lesson in mortality. I was paired up with an infamous Dutch captain flying a beaten up old C550 that was older than me. I had never been to Samedan and he wasn't current within 12 months but this was a private job for the owner so it didn't matter. This particular Dutch Captain had a way of convincing you that all would be ok, he had apparently been there many times. The weather was marginal on the day and TBH in retrospect very little chance of actually getting in. Anyhow who was I to intervene, this guy had it all under control a real maverick!!! We arrived overhead in cloud cancelled IFR thankfully above MSA and by now to be fair we had broken out of cloud. He flew around until he could see a way into the valley and down we went his determination to get the job done and not to disappoint the owner guiding us up the valley dodging gliders and clouds. When we landed the old girl decided to throw a brake failure at us!!! My illustrious Dutch companion managed to stop us eventually in a Bambi style slither and cool as a cucumber he waved off the owner. It turns out that this same Dutch character had a list of misgivings as long as his hair and he went on to torment people the length and breadth of Europe. Can anyone here remember this guy? Where is he now?
Wayne
Wayne
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Far away from LA
Posts: 1,032
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C550 - SAMEDAN
Impressive but not really a limiting airport for this type of plane, and the runway is twice longer than required.
Failures occurs, granted.
In my time in the Falcon 10, total hydraulic failure would make us to look at anything longer than 8000 ft just for the minimum length...
By the way in EASA land, when failure occurs, what is your factored landing ? is it not 1 ?
I do not know this particular Dutch, but i remember a particular britisch/french/nigerian bloke, that had a very specific way of looking at the AFM..lol
Impressive but not really a limiting airport for this type of plane, and the runway is twice longer than required.
Failures occurs, granted.
In my time in the Falcon 10, total hydraulic failure would make us to look at anything longer than 8000 ft just for the minimum length...
By the way in EASA land, when failure occurs, what is your factored landing ? is it not 1 ?
I do not know this particular Dutch, but i remember a particular britisch/french/nigerian bloke, that had a very specific way of looking at the AFM..lol
Last edited by CL300; 3rd Feb 2015 at 06:40.
CL300,
By EASA land, I assume you mean European AOC holders? Once you're airborne, the pilot applied factor is x1.0 for non emergency situations, so yes, emergency situations are no different. Now, how you got anywhere near a factor of x1.0 from your operational dispatch planning of x1.67, x1.92 or the relevant contaminated runway data, would be an interesting story, but the preflight landing assessment essentially is just that. You have to ensure you have the AFM listed distance and the commander makes his assessment (with input from the FO, before I get slated for suggesting poor CRM…)
By EASA land, I assume you mean European AOC holders? Once you're airborne, the pilot applied factor is x1.0 for non emergency situations, so yes, emergency situations are no different. Now, how you got anywhere near a factor of x1.0 from your operational dispatch planning of x1.67, x1.92 or the relevant contaminated runway data, would be an interesting story, but the preflight landing assessment essentially is just that. You have to ensure you have the AFM listed distance and the commander makes his assessment (with input from the FO, before I get slated for suggesting poor CRM…)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: schermoney and left front seat
Age: 57
Posts: 2,438
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Also a lot of misunderstanding about risk management. Likelihood of a particular hazard occurring is very dependent on the scale of the operation.
OTOH, is there a real issue ? how many overruns with non comm airplanes did really occur ?
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Far away from LA
Posts: 1,032
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Generally, it is done by a system of points for a given flight, with a committee assessing the danger associated with each condition
Night, single runway, new crew, late arrival,MOR received etc... at the end you sum up the points and have a "risk assessment' , of course this is full of bs in our segment, since most of charter AOC have the "prior management release thingy" leaving the final go to the DOA.
From Green to Black, cover your back.
It is working very well in an airline environment , in ours it is more or less a textbook exercise, sometimes overshadowing the real day to day issues.
This is only reflecting my experience of course.
Night, single runway, new crew, late arrival,MOR received etc... at the end you sum up the points and have a "risk assessment' , of course this is full of bs in our segment, since most of charter AOC have the "prior management release thingy" leaving the final go to the DOA.
From Green to Black, cover your back.
It is working very well in an airline environment , in ours it is more or less a textbook exercise, sometimes overshadowing the real day to day issues.
This is only reflecting my experience of course.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: schermoney and left front seat
Age: 57
Posts: 2,438
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Night, single runway, new crew, late arrival,MOR received etc... at the end you sum up the points and have a "risk assessment'
My contempt for these bureaucrats is on an all time high...again...
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think for 99% of the trips what you have well exceeds the margin of what the book calls for and the plane usually exceeds the capability of the pilot.
To put all pilots in the same bucket isn't fair. There are times when the aircraft needs a ferry over water, flown in difficult places, in difficult weather, special permit approaches, private ranches, single pilot so all seats filled, long trips that stretch the fuel with bad weather at the other end, alts right to max for fuel, squaks, the list goes on. Sometimes a company needs an aircraft and pilot that are flown to their capability instead of milk runs.
To put all pilots in the same bucket isn't fair. There are times when the aircraft needs a ferry over water, flown in difficult places, in difficult weather, special permit approaches, private ranches, single pilot so all seats filled, long trips that stretch the fuel with bad weather at the other end, alts right to max for fuel, squaks, the list goes on. Sometimes a company needs an aircraft and pilot that are flown to their capability instead of milk runs.
