Gust additives
 

What’s your aircraft manufacturer/airline say about gust additives, carry to touch down or bleed off prior to?

Boeing fleet in my company FCOM has us carry the gust to touchdown.

Procedure is that wind additive “can” be bled off” below 50ft. Doesn’t say it has to be tho. Pragmatically most people land at the higher speed.

Our procedures allow the wind additive to be bled off, however the gust additive remains until touchdown.

When I flew the 777, it was half the wind and all the gust up to 20 knots….i think.

Very few aircraft land short. Most go off the end!

According to my 737 manual 1/2 constant+all of gust up to 15 kts

GS Mini takes care of it... Not entirely true, but mostly is. No mental arithmetics, just let the bus do its thing.

Shooting themselves in the foot on the 737-800 whose wing has a tendency to fly forever. Not me but I've witnessed it time and time again. It gets even more interesting when for mum and dad additives are also kept till touchdown. I'm a firm believer that correct speed and touchdown point are of great importance for a successful landing

On the various types from different manufacturers I've flown, unless it's extremely windy or there are very strong gusts, I'll carry all the speed down to about 50ft, where I'll allow it to bleed off to the usual Vls or Vref at touchdown. Not always successful, but there's no point in carrying the extra 15kt all the way to the flare then having to fight a wing that's not quite ready to land.

Some thoughts from an earlier thread on this matter ..

737 Wind increment to Vref - PPRuNe Forums

But every aircraft I’ve flown, the performance figures are based on being at Vref at 50ft and some unspecified lower speed at touchdown, so effectively you are keeping the additive with that technique.
All types are also equally vague about when/if you are meant to bleed the speed off. But since the way we plan flights you should be able to land with zero headwind then additional airspeed is not an issue from a performance perspective - the logical basis of gs mini on the Airbii. So it comes down primarily to the handling of each type whether it needs the speed bled off or not.

It's all a bit academic when the airspeed indicator is all over the place, me thinks...
Make sure you land it in the correct spot, not on the nose wheel. Most important.

Many are not using the Boeing landing technique, cut the thrust abruptly at 10 feet and land at VApp, regardless of gust...

Not for crosswind component, and I tried applying the Boeing rule to the Airbus for crosswind component. At the end I just go with VLS+10 most of the times.

The 737NG allows down to Vref-5kt at touchdown, come in faster than strictly needed and likely say bye to the correct touchdown point. If it's extremely gusty then of course it's going to be a wrestling match. Nothing wrong cutting the power abruptly at 10ft if at that point you find yourself with excess speed, from that height you will definetely manage on that aircraft.

The certification requirements specify a landing demonstration from Vref - 5 at the threshold, without power intervention; thus touchdown speed could be lower.

Performance data calculated by the OLD/FOLD method is based on the planned speed at the threshold, and a speed loss of 7kts during the flare.
The baseline is Vref, thus any approach speed additive - any planned for adjustment at the threshold, must be considered, which will increasing the landing distance required.

As yet no guidance has been found for adjusting distance for speed additives retained during the flare.
A sensible interpretation would be to use the planned threshold speed plus a further 7 kts as the basis for landing, which could result in a very large distance increment:

AC 91-79B 5.2.2 Excess Airspeed; (at the threshold)," As a rule of thumb, on dry or wet runways, a 10 percent increase in final approach speed results in a 20 percent increase in landing distance. "

If the additional speed durning the flare was considered in a similar manner as a tailwind, then "The effect of a tailwind increases the landing distance by 21 percent for the first 10 kts of tailwind."

https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/...91-79B_FAA.pdf

Agree. I guess the point I was making is that the place that pays me allows you to remove it, but doesn’t mandate that you remove it. So neither is actually “incorrect”

To correct my earlier post, I've gone back to the manuals, and it says as ScepticalOptomist says in post 2.

Is that what the manufacturer/company called for?