Late touchdown to get to terminal quicker?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: England
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Late touchdown to get to terminal quicker?
I was recently on an ATR72 flight. Domestic terminal was at the opposite end to the TDZ. Instead of touching down at the beginning of the runway we didn't touch down until about 2/3 of the way down the runway and then braked fairly hard to exit to the domestic terminal. There was maybe 100ft of runway left judging by the distance markers. It didn't seem like we were having difficulty touching down but more like the pilot was deliberately holding it there to touch down later to get to the terminal more quickly. I was wondering if this is an acceptable procedure? Never seen anything like it before. Must admit I started to panic a bit when we had long passed midway before touching down.
Not exactly late touchdowns, but anecdotal evidence suggests that BA flights to LHR use less runway when landings are easterly (and they therefore need to turn about face to reach T5) than when the airport is on westerlies, when they will brake more gently and exit later.
Could be all a scurrilous rumour, of course.
Could be all a scurrilous rumour, of course.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hotel this week, hotel next week, home whenever...
Posts: 1,492
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Deliberate long landing = Bad practice. You never know what Murphy will throw at you. Land in the TDZ, ensure the safety of the aircraft then braking as required (could be light or delayed) to make the exit.
Bryman Dash 7s flying into Heathrow (from Newquay?) used to do that very frequently. Would touch down about halfway along, stop in about 250 metres exactly opposite the domestic gates at Terminal 1.
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: world
Posts: 3,424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Deliberate long landing = Bad practice.
At the other end of the spectrum, you have those landings followed by heavy braking just to make a particular taxiway so as to shorten taxi time!
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: world
Posts: 3,424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So is deliberately touching down late a no-no or is it frowned upon but acceptable?
I lived in the Gulf . Qatar way back in the 70s, Gulf air , the then pan gulf regional airline who had a fleet of Bac 1-11 and F27s. In Qatar for the wind is pretty negligible much of the year and the F27s -like all turbo props can stop on a sixpence would fly a loooong way down the runway before making a late touchdown . The terminal was close to one end of the runway and the runway was 18000 feet long. Taxiing for about 15000 ft would probably take close to the same as the flight time from Bahrain
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Either the back of a sim, or wherever Crewing send me.
Posts: 1,031
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Landing long is bad practice, however I can understand the temptation.
Landing in the right place and moderating the breaking to achieve a certain runway exit is excellent practice.
Landing in the right place and moderating the breaking to achieve a certain runway exit is excellent practice.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 422 Likes
on
222 Posts
I sometimes land across the width of the runway and land on the turn off link, rather than bother with landing along it.
Which airport was this at LadyL2013?
I would say it is bad practice even with a long runway - in fact talking of BA I know they place a lot of emphasis on touching down in the TDZ. It is drummed in time and time again that if you miss the TDZ you go around - no exceptions. Recently I saw reported in their monthly safety brief that a 319 went around as they passed the last TDZ marking at LHR at only a foot or two above ground and what a good decision that was. This is despite the fact that the aircraft could have stopped in just over half the runway from that point!
I did see one of their 757s land a bit further down 25 years ago or so - but that was after advising ATC and asking if it was ok.
I would say it is bad practice even with a long runway - in fact talking of BA I know they place a lot of emphasis on touching down in the TDZ. It is drummed in time and time again that if you miss the TDZ you go around - no exceptions. Recently I saw reported in their monthly safety brief that a 319 went around as they passed the last TDZ marking at LHR at only a foot or two above ground and what a good decision that was. This is despite the fact that the aircraft could have stopped in just over half the runway from that point!
I did see one of their 757s land a bit further down 25 years ago or so - but that was after advising ATC and asking if it was ok.
So if it is required to land within the TDZ regardless of the length of runway in front of you, why is it OK to do a de-rated take-off? Surely it should be full throttle on departure regardless of the length of runway in front of you?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: England
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Which airport was this at LadyL2013?
I would say it is bad practice even with a long runway - in fact talking of BA I know they place a lot of emphasis on touching down in the TDZ. It is drummed in time and time again that if you miss the TDZ you go around - no exceptions. Recently I saw reported in their monthly safety brief that a 319 went around as they passed the last TDZ marking at LHR at only a foot or two above ground and what a good decision that was. This is despite the fact that the aircraft could have stopped in just over half the runway from that point!
I did see one of their 757s land a bit further down 25 years ago or so - but that was after advising ATC and asking if it was ok.
I would say it is bad practice even with a long runway - in fact talking of BA I know they place a lot of emphasis on touching down in the TDZ. It is drummed in time and time again that if you miss the TDZ you go around - no exceptions. Recently I saw reported in their monthly safety brief that a 319 went around as they passed the last TDZ marking at LHR at only a foot or two above ground and what a good decision that was. This is despite the fact that the aircraft could have stopped in just over half the runway from that point!
I did see one of their 757s land a bit further down 25 years ago or so - but that was after advising ATC and asking if it was ok.
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: world
Posts: 3,424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DtoA, the thread was about an experience in an ATR72. Using A319s and B757s to support your opinion is misleading. The runway length at Havana is 4000m.
Last edited by Hotel Tango; 18th Oct 2018 at 10:24.
I had many illuminating discussions with indoctrinated f/o's who objected to autobrake off no reverse landings in a light 319 on 18R at Schipol for instance - just because it wasn't usually the config they used elsewhere. Perfectly OK by the manual and you still needed power taxiing off if you coasted more than ⅔ of the way down.
Did it save time? A few seconds perhaps but not really significant.
But we were forbidden to land long.
As for DtoA's comment, I don't think the reference to A319s and 757s was intended to support the proposition that landing long was bad even with a long runway, which was just, well, an opinion. It's my opinion too, and I'm not offering any supporting evidence either.
Havana 4000m runway -I wonder why it is that long LoL.
I also suspect that my Gulf Air experiences in the 1970s while perfectly safe would still be allowed today with so much adherence on SOPs
I also suspect that my Gulf Air experiences in the 1970s while perfectly safe would still be allowed today with so much adherence on SOPs