![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Just kidding, but...
I just heard that the NTSB has recommended that pilots no longer be allowed to include thrust reversers when they calculate landing distances, following the Midway accident. Fortunately, the FAA usually manages to override this sort of bureaucratic BS... |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Lakeview Bill wrote: Just kidding, but... I just heard that the NTSB has recommended that pilots no longer be allowed to include thrust reversers when they calculate landing distances, following the Midway accident. Fortunately, the FAA usually manages to override this sort of bureaucratic BS... This is the part of the article at cnn.com that got my attention: "The pilots had used a laptop computer to calculate how far the plane needed to go to land, the NTSB said. When the runway's condition was entered as "wet-poor," the computer calculated they would be able to stop with 30 feet to spare." -R |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
You have misread something. This is taken from Chapter 15 of the Airplane
Flying Handbook, "Transition to Jet-Powered Airplanes:" "Certified landing field length requirements are computed for the stop made with speed brakes deployed and maximum wheel braking. Reverse thrust is not used in establishing the certified FAR landing distances. However, reversers should definitely be used in service." Moreover, the airplane must be brought to a stop (without reversers) in 60 percent of the effective runway length. If the runway is forecast to be wet or slippery, 15 percent should be added to this distance. These calculations must be made before takeoff, because a pilot cannot file to an airport where s/he cannot land within the calculated landing distance under the conditions forecast to exist. "Lakeview Bill" wrote in message om... Just kidding, but... I just heard that the NTSB has recommended that pilots no longer be allowed to include thrust reversers when they calculate landing distances, following the Midway accident. Fortunately, the FAA usually manages to override this sort of bureaucratic BS... |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Ooops. Clicked on Send instead of Send Later.....
Read the entire press release. Some aircraft are permitted to use reversers in calculating landing distance...the prohibition mentioned in the AFH is not universal. http://www.ntsb.gov/Pressrel/2006/060127.htm "Bob Gardner" wrote in message ... You have misread something. This is taken from Chapter 15 of the Airplane Flying Handbook, "Transition to Jet-Powered Airplanes:" "Certified landing field length requirements are computed for the stop made with speed brakes deployed and maximum wheel braking. Reverse thrust is not used in establishing the certified FAR landing distances. However, reversers should definitely be used in service." Moreover, the airplane must be brought to a stop (without reversers) in 60 percent of the effective runway length. If the runway is forecast to be wet or slippery, 15 percent should be added to this distance. These calculations must be made before takeoff, because a pilot cannot file to an airport where s/he cannot land within the calculated landing distance under the conditions forecast to exist. "Lakeview Bill" wrote in message om... Just kidding, but... I just heard that the NTSB has recommended that pilots no longer be allowed to include thrust reversers when they calculate landing distances, following the Midway accident. Fortunately, the FAA usually manages to override this sort of bureaucratic BS... |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I think the "30 feet to spare" already includes a safety buffer though.
-Robert |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
GIGO
"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message oups.com... |I think the "30 feet to spare" already includes a safety buffer though. | | | -Robert | |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Lakeview Bill wrote:
Just kidding, but... I just heard that the NTSB has recommended that pilots no longer be allowed to include thrust reversers when they calculate landing distances, following the Midway accident. Fortunately, the FAA usually manages to override this sort of bureaucratic BS... The Southwest accident at Midway was the reason for the proposed rule change. Basically air carriers don't/can't use the decelleration of thrust reversers for computations for takeoff and landing distances (they DO use them, they just can't compute for them). Any decelleration produced by the rerversers is just "money in the bank". Certain operators, however, have authority in flight to use reverser decelleration in their computations of stopping distance for landing "only" with contaminated runways. Southwest did that. Their computations showed they could stop barely within the runway length. On the actual landing for whatever reason the reversers didn't get deployed until near the end of the landing roll. That's why they went off the end of the runway resulting in a fatality. The NTSB recommendation will only effect those users who have authority to compute landing distance (in flight) using reversers on a contaminated runway. It would have no effect on most users and minor effect on users who had that authority before. I think it's a good idea. -- Darrell R. Schmidt B-58 Hustler History: http://members.cox.net/dschmidt1/ - |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
I want to build the most EVIL plane EVER !!! | Eliot Coweye | Home Built | 237 | February 13th 06 03:55 AM |
Most reliable homebuilt helicopter? | tom pettit | Home Built | 35 | September 29th 05 02:24 PM |
NTSB: USAF included? | Larry Dighera | Piloting | 10 | September 11th 05 10:33 AM |
Mini-500 Accident Analysis | Dennis Fetters | Rotorcraft | 16 | September 3rd 05 11:35 AM |
OT Funny list of what not to do in the US army | Pat Carpenter | Military Aviation | 0 | March 28th 04 03:26 AM |