Landing
This is priceless - thanks to this thread, the stupid PPRuNe advert-suggester is coming up with 'Me ruvv you big time' LBFM dating sites.....
Strange, I never recall a Plotter taking the chance to opt out of extra circuits.
And I've started getting emails from a 'lady' in Bangkok!
"Ahh Courtneeee! Me so horneeee!! Me ruvv you rong time!!"
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Glasgow
Age: 61
Posts: 909
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Or, as I once got in a hotel in Brunei: -
Day 1 - You won girl? -
No thank you
Day 2 - You won girl?
No thank you
Day 3 - You Wont girl?
NO!
Day 4 - You Won boy?
???&^£$@@@
Day 1 - You won girl? -
No thank you
Day 2 - You won girl?
No thank you
Day 3 - You Wont girl?
NO!
Day 4 - You Won boy?
???&^£$@@@
Last edited by hval; 3rd Oct 2012 at 19:34.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Glasgow
Age: 61
Posts: 909
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, did you? 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Should have done the old "Crocodile Dundee" test 
(Squirrel grip placed on a tranny in the Bar scene in the movie
for those that haven't seen it !)
.
(Squirrel grip placed on a tranny in the Bar scene in the movie
for those that haven't seen it !)
.
Last edited by 500N; 4th Oct 2012 at 12:02.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: West of Akrotiri & the B Sours
Age: 73
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Taken from
Operational Landing Distance
by Thomas Bos (Dutch - ALPA)
Threshold Crossing Height and Touchdown Dispersion
As discussed previously manufacturer data is normally based on a threshold crossing height of 50 ft and a touchdown point that may not be achievable in line operations. The actual crossing height over the threshold will depend on a lot of factors such as the positioning of the aiming point, the accuracy of the guidance used (precision versus non-precision), the glidepath angle, PAPI / ILS alignment, calibration reference for visual slope indications, aircraft type and last but not least piloting accuracy and missed approach criteria.
For a 3 degree glidepath the effect of a higher threshold crossing height is best illustrated by the following figure:
Another complicating factor is the actual position of the aiming point. ICAO Annex 14 contains the requirements for the runway markings:
For runways longer than 2400 meters the touchdown zone has a total length of 900 meters and the aiming point markings are located 400 meters beyond the threshold. This means that when touching down at the aiming point the landing distance is increased by 95 meters as compared to a 1000 ft (305 m) reference. When a touchdown would occur at the end of the touchdown zone the landing distance would increase by 595 meters. Runways with a length between 1500 m and 2400 m should have a touchdown zone with a length of 600 m and aiming point markers 300 meters beyond the threshold.
An important thing to consider here is the fact that ICAO Annex 14 prescribes the minimum distance from the threshold and an IFALPA survey indicates that in reality things may be quite different. As an example it was found that for Charles de Gaulle airport all aiming point distances exceed 400 m and the aiming points for runways 27L and 27R actually exceed 500 m.
FAA research has confirmed that actual air distances may exceed the current assumptions used in the manufacturer advisory landing distance tables for dry and wet runways*. The FAA research shows the effect of pilot motivation and glideslope/runway intercept on the actual air distance achieved in service. The figures below present this air distance for two airports: Washington National (6869 ft / 2094 m runway) and London Heathrow (12743 ft / 3884 m runway) with glideslope/runway intercept points of 1000 ft / 305 m and 1157 ft / 353 m respectively. When the data is reviewed it appears that when the runway is shorter and has approach guidance that results in a shorter aiming point the flight crew will put the airplane on the runway sooner (in less distance).
I also guess a military pilot gets more manual landings in a single sortie than an ATPL gets in a year. In which case, I wouldn't want them to try to hit the numbers when I'm a few feet behind them.
And I say all this having practical experience of hitting the undershoot
at Yeovilton in an F4 by 20ft (and I got just as much blame as the pilot).
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 226
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There were certainly some gaping knowledge gaps (the likes of Tourist for example) which raised a few eyebrows amongst us, thankfully though there were some true experts (the likes of Beagle) who were able to restore one's faith in the Royal Air Force training system!
