Landing above max landing weight
Thread Starter
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
From: Honolulu, HI
Landing above max landing weight
Scenario:
You are flying an aircraft with no fuel dumping capability. You are taking off right at your MGTOW which is higher than your MLW. Your engine flames out at 400 feet and doesn't auto-relight (if you have that capability).
Runway length/terrain not an issue. Weather is VFR. You are going to be put in the hold about 15 miles away from the airport to sort things out.
Are you going to make an overweight landing? If so, why not burn off fuel? If not, why not?
We got into a discussion about this today, and I'm really curious to see other people's opinions... also which type of airplane you're flying, and what segment of the industry you're in.
You are flying an aircraft with no fuel dumping capability. You are taking off right at your MGTOW which is higher than your MLW. Your engine flames out at 400 feet and doesn't auto-relight (if you have that capability).
Runway length/terrain not an issue. Weather is VFR. You are going to be put in the hold about 15 miles away from the airport to sort things out.
Are you going to make an overweight landing? If so, why not burn off fuel? If not, why not?
We got into a discussion about this today, and I'm really curious to see other people's opinions... also which type of airplane you're flying, and what segment of the industry you're in.
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 96
Likes: 1
From: h&h
With a 'normal' engine failure, our company SOP advise us to make an overweight landing. No rush so we land after completing all the checks etc. in the holding near the airfield. Why land overweight? Because you've just lost redundancy, with just 1 operative engine remaining (B737). Same with all other faults/failures, for example if you've just got 1 hydraulic/electrical source remaining: land nearest suitable airport. Boeing has written this in the chapter 'Checklist introduction'.
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
From: Somewhere down the road
I guess my Bus could hold up to MTOW for its landing capabilities, so I my answers:
Troubleshoot, ( prefer to go to Holding area ), preparation that include the Overweight ldg Cx, approach, write the problem and Overweight Landing on Maintenance log book,
Troubleshoot, ( prefer to go to Holding area ), preparation that include the Overweight ldg Cx, approach, write the problem and Overweight Landing on Maintenance log book,
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,974
Likes: 0
From: Choroni, sometimes
Troubleshoot, ( prefer to go to Holding area ), preparation that include the Overweight ldg Cx, approach, write the problem and Overweight Landing on Maintenance log book
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 4,835
Likes: 85
From: Boldly going where no split infinitive has gone before..
I doubt there is any operator of twin Boeing's anywhere that would advise anything other than to land overweight. It should even be considered in aircraft that DO have fuel jettison capability.
From my POV if the engine "Just flamed out" for no apparent reason, you have no way of knowing if whatever caused it to stop won't cause the other to do likewise.
MLW is simply a structural consideration. If you regularly landed over it, you would excessively stress the airframe and reduce it's life.
Do it rarely in emergency situations, and all that it will mean is an inspection before the aircraft flys again, so it's a no-brainier.
From my POV if the engine "Just flamed out" for no apparent reason, you have no way of knowing if whatever caused it to stop won't cause the other to do likewise.
MLW is simply a structural consideration. If you regularly landed over it, you would excessively stress the airframe and reduce it's life.
Do it rarely in emergency situations, and all that it will mean is an inspection before the aircraft flys again, so it's a no-brainier.
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,275
Likes: 0
From: Planet Moo Moo
Bus',
Turn the packs off (reduce demand on the remaining engine), select Flap 3 (reduce drag if the LDA allows) and land it. 319 is certified for overweight autoland (as it was demonstrated and certified by the Airbus test pilots), 320 + 321 needs CAT 1 conditions for overweight landing.
Not a problem.
Turn the packs off (reduce demand on the remaining engine), select Flap 3 (reduce drag if the LDA allows) and land it. 319 is certified for overweight autoland (as it was demonstrated and certified by the Airbus test pilots), 320 + 321 needs CAT 1 conditions for overweight landing.
Not a problem.
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,974
Likes: 0
From: Choroni, sometimes
Okay, my 2 cents
Troble shoot ? Holding? Maintenance Log book?
Man, you are on single engine!
Declare Emergency! Try to stay overhead or near the airport (ATC) prepare for approach and get the dam thing down..
Troubleshoot, ( prefer to go to Holding area ), preparation that include the Overweight ldg Cx, approach, write the problem and Overweight Landing on Maintenance log book
Man, you are on single engine!
Declare Emergency! Try to stay overhead or near the airport (ATC) prepare for approach and get the dam thing down..
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
From: Kerikeri, New Zealand or Noosa Queensland. Depending on the time of year!
3 or 4 engines different situation, 'cause not time critical/less risk so no need to land overweight.
"Mildly" Eccentric Stardriver
Joined: Jan 2000
Aviation Qualifications: ATP+Mil
Posts: 4,332
Likes: 486
From: England
A thought about landing ASAP. Don't forget that the maintenance team who serviced the one that's just failed probably serviced the one you're relying on. The Queen's Flight 146 springs to mind. Don't rush things;you'll get it wrong, but get down fastish.
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 451
Likes: 0
From: Scotland
From a maintenance point of view an overweight landing inspection is usually no big deal - an overweight heavy landing might cause a wrinkle or two but just because the landing is overweight there is no need to panic.
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 2
From: In a far better place
Part of the certification process is to demonstrate that the aircraft can land at it's intended MTOGW.
Anyway talk to maintrol and see what they want you to do. Long runway, cost of fuel, overweight landing? It's a non event event.
Done it on long runways a few times on the 727, and the breaks didn't sweat a bit. But then again, the thrust reverse on the 727 is much more effective than on the slugs of today.
Anyway talk to maintrol and see what they want you to do. Long runway, cost of fuel, overweight landing? It's a non event event.
Done it on long runways a few times on the 727, and the breaks didn't sweat a bit. But then again, the thrust reverse on the 727 is much more effective than on the slugs of today.
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 2,132
Likes: 3
From: on the golf course (Covid permitting)
Boeing Commercial Aeromagazine did an article a few years ago that some may find useful reading from a company that has some knowledge in the matter.
I won't cut and paste excerpts, as it is useful background reading.
http://www.boeing.com/commercial/aer...7_article3.pdf
I won't cut and paste excerpts, as it is useful background reading.
http://www.boeing.com/commercial/aer...7_article3.pdf
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 2,627
Likes: 2
From: UTC +8
Don't forget that the maintenance team who serviced the one that's just failed probably serviced the one you're relying on.
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
From: 31000FR
There are two main considerations, if the situation warrants an overweight landing:
- Performance; LDA etc. and in case of a go around.
- Structural. All commercial (FAR/JAR 25) jets are certified with a certain max touchdown g-load equal to approximately 600`/min ROD at Maximum Landing Mass. This load is reduced linearly to approximately 200´/min touchdown ROD at Maximum Takeoff Mass. There are a few exeptions ( e.g. upgraded A340s).
So unless you smash the heavy bird into the ground, the structure is capable of an overweight landing witout major problems. As a rule-of-thumb you can always land on the T/O runway with the same weight.
The decision to wait and burn off fuel or not lies with the risk of loosing a non-redundant system or being on a time critical system only:
- On batteries only: Land
- On fire: Land
- On one engine: Land
- Loss of cabin pressure: Wait
- Gear problems: Wait
So to answer the original question : Do not hurry, but land with the overweight since the conditions are favourable.
T
- Performance; LDA etc. and in case of a go around.
- Structural. All commercial (FAR/JAR 25) jets are certified with a certain max touchdown g-load equal to approximately 600`/min ROD at Maximum Landing Mass. This load is reduced linearly to approximately 200´/min touchdown ROD at Maximum Takeoff Mass. There are a few exeptions ( e.g. upgraded A340s).
So unless you smash the heavy bird into the ground, the structure is capable of an overweight landing witout major problems. As a rule-of-thumb you can always land on the T/O runway with the same weight.
The decision to wait and burn off fuel or not lies with the risk of loosing a non-redundant system or being on a time critical system only:
- On batteries only: Land
- On fire: Land
- On one engine: Land
- Loss of cabin pressure: Wait
- Gear problems: Wait
So to answer the original question : Do not hurry, but land with the overweight since the conditions are favourable.
T