Contaminated runway - Performance
 

Useful info on these links:
http://uk.geocities.com/[email protected]_Runways.pdf
http://brahimtahiri.googlepages.com/...ry_Runways.pdf
http://www.pilots.or.kr/upfile/aip/9...ryRwys2.ppt#11
http://www.dcs.gla.ac.uk/~johnson/in...es/Tony.ppt#30
http://transport.swooplinux.org/B-narrow_rwy.pdf

For heaven's sake... Drop the Dunlops already had a go at this, and I reassured him (on page one of the thread) that I had read that line. Please, do pay attention at the back!

Braking Action Medium
 

As has been pointed out previously, all contaminated performance is 'ADVISORY' and has not been demonstrated by flight test. These numbers are arrived by mathematical models used by the manufacturers to arrive at very conservative numbers to GUIDE you in these circumastances.
As mentioned, POOR for a braking action is a non starter.
Also, many of the Nordic/Arctic have braking actions of medium and even better when the compacted snow is covered with grit.
If you take in to account all the available data and info from pilots who have taken off or landed prior to you then you should be able to arrive at a sensible set of numbers for most situations that you will meet in your career. Just don't be first in the queue for the dawn departures!

Kit - You need to pay attention. The reason DTD wrote his last line was to make it clear he did not intend to take off from a contaminated runway but was seeking to expand his knowledge.
The reason people are having a go is that the tone of your response was entirely inappropriate (which actually suggests you did not read the last line and are trying to save face... or you are non too bright).
There are too many people on PPRUNE who don't take the trouble to read,understand and then respond in a condescending/objectionable manner.

My responses may have been somewhat robust, but were certainly not 'entirely inapropriate'. As to your second remark quoted above, would you say that to my face?

This is not a kindergarten - even though some here do seem to behave like children.

Evidently most people here have a different view ... you don't seem to realise how you come across to others (we have one or two trainers with your approach to good questions...they don't teach people very much).
My response to yours was robust and certainly not inappropriate...and if you can't take it don't dish it out.

I'm extremely aware how I come across to others, thank you.

And as a trainer, I can assure you that I'm not of the old school. I am, however, perplexed that (a) some people ask such elementary questions here (Yours about cloud ceiling was a case in point - are you a professional pilot? Your profile says you're not), and (b) that people ask the questions here, rather than of their trainers.

And if you think that your response was not inappropriate, then one day somone is going to belt you for your impertinence.

Yes, I can take it, and yes, I do dish it out. Routinely in much better company than this.

I'm somewhat surprised how long it took this thread to conclude that the runway would be too short. It was obvious to me just reading what the OP wrote and I'm only a ex glider pilot who never had to worry about this stuff.

Forgive me if I'm wrong but I get the impression that some of you might be "working the equations" without considering what the answers really mean. This suggests that a minor error in doing the sums could produce an answer thats just accepeted without question and leads to an accident.

The statement "in which case the runway is too short" should be in the SOP but it shouldn't need to be in the SOP if you get what I mean.

cwatters, you're absolutely on the money, though not because any given runway is 'too short', rather, the dynamics involved are so complex that runway length soon becomes irrelevant, as the contaminant does its fiendish work in front of the tyres...

Not to mention the possible effects of wet snow flung up by the NLG trying to put the fires out, or the other odd stuff that goes on in wet snow, for example.

(Strictly, SOPs are not the same as performance calculations, but you're right that this is elementary stuff).