PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Tech Log (https://www.pprune.org/tech-log-15/)
-   -   Could a 757-200 land on a runway 2600 ft long? (https://www.pprune.org/tech-log/10081-could-757-200-land-runway-2600-ft-long.html)

Brenoch 16th October 2000 18:45

We pull those stunts once in a while on the ferries to amuse our selfs.. :) :) Doing one tomorrow..

ZK-NSJ 25th October 2000 13:20

well here in christchurch,nz
a air nz 744 comes in from tokyo on
sundays,and then departs for auckland
quarter full, runway length is 3250m,
this bird gets airborne in 1200m.
(around 3600ft if i'm correct).

near enuf is good enuf 28th October 2000 02:11

This straight from BOEING FORUM:

757 PERFORMS IN CHALLENGING ENVIRONMENTS
....."Although it is the largest Boeing single aisle model, it can operate on the shortest of runways. Currently it serves the Yichang, China, airport with its 5,250 foot (1,600 mtr) runway and the 5,577 foot (1,698 mtr) runway at Funchal on the Atlantic island of Madeira."

If it were operating into anything shorter I'm sure they would have it in black and white.
I think the guys have answered the "can" but I don't think it ever would.

------------------
So that you may not be the martyred slaves of Time,
get drunk, get drunk,
and never pause for rest!
With wine, poetry, or virtue,
as you choose!"

Bally Heck 28th October 2000 15:02

Martin Kareng.

Don't leave us in suspense!!! Dish the dirt. A Britannia 757. Where? When? Why has the Daily Crud not heard of it? Just gimme da facts. Only da facts!

Brenoch 30th October 2000 21:02

near enuf is good enuf: There is a new runway at Funchal now thank god.. 2700mts.. Makes it alot more undramatic flying in there.. :)

buck-rogers 31st October 2000 02:34

Ah Funchal!

A small ski ramp bolted to the cliffs I remember. A bit cheeky saying that '75s are good aircraft becouse they land there -(even though they are). There's a big chunk of gravity helping you stop on that slope.

Without a headwind I do remember a short load of fuel helped you to skip to a nearby island to get a full tank, and then you left properly.

I would love to have been on a landing/take off when it was the original, original runway - the one that didn't have the extension in the sea! I bet there was some real bum clenching moments in those days!

Is the new runway at the same location or have they found a different bit of the island that's flat now? Been a while.

Brenoch 31st October 2000 20:29

The new runway sits just next to the old one.. Ahh, good ol Porto Santo, gets a bit crowded when FNC closes.. :) :) Room for no more than five crafts on the apron..

ironbutt57 3rd November 2000 00:10

Physically possible..oh most definitely yes...but i want to be there with a video camera to watch it leave!!!!

4dogs 19th November 2000 10:42

Brenoch,

The standard factor is 1.67. In some jurisdictions, an additional 15% is applied to aircraft without reverse thrust and some apply an additional 15% for wet runway. In any event, 1.92 is the result of applying the 15% to the 1.67 dry factor.

Can you confirm the derivation of the 1.92 factor to which you refer? Your previous reply did not really elucidate your original statement.

------------------
Stay Alive,

[email protected]



Brenoch 30th November 2000 17:37

4Dogs.. Aye, you are right.. Overlooked it in the mist of battle.. 1.92=1.67*1.15 for the fact that reverse thrust is not used..
Please excuse my ignorance.. :)

AndrewE 1st December 2000 11:11

I know it might see impractible but in MSFS2000 i can land the 757 at meigs feild chicago at close to it's MLW with full brakes/reverse thrust/spoilers, slight breeze, and a dry runway.
I'm sure in real life you could land it on a 2400ft/runway assuming hte runway was dry....Then again..i stand corrected.....

------------------
Great Quotes:
"Flying is an unnatural act, probably punishable by God."

"London Heathrow has been described as the only building site to have its own airport."

"A good landing is one you can walk away from. A great landing is one you can still use the plane after."

Johan Dees 2nd December 2000 12:44

Not for long anymore Andrew...

FS2000 planes brake way too hard. Not real. Also the reversers give way too much braking.
For example; Most 747's can be land anywere, but not the one from my site. Braking is set to real values, and you need more runway to get to a stop.
Busy on the 757, and then Meigs will be a real challenge after that.

Johan

Doors to Automatic 4th December 2000 19:05

FS2000 aircraft are improving as we speak. The new 767s from project Opensky stop very realistically. 40% fuel, Aurobrake level 1 and full reverse requires around 6000-7000 feet to land and stop.

AndrewE 5th December 2000 16:32

uh, Doors to Automatic, you might already know this but...the guy who replied just before you (Johan Dees) is the one who is actually making the flight dynamics for that very 767. He also made the dynamics for the Meljet 747

hehe
regards,

------------------
Great Quotes:
"Flying is an unnatural act, probably punishable by God."

"London Heathrow has been described as the only building site to have its own airport."

"A good landing is one you can walk away from. A great landing is one you can still use the plane after."

reverserdeployed 5th December 2000 17:36

http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/cool.gif http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/cool.gif

Doors to Automatic 7th December 2000 04:58

Andrew,

Didn't actually know this - thanks for letting me know! To Johan - full marks for an excellent set of aircraft. The only thing that would make them better is to be able to have a wing-view from inside when you look left/right.

Rgds, D to A


All times are GMT. The time now is 13:38.


Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.