Landing Decision

A Cessna Conquest landing at gross weight over 50 foot trees in no wind
and perfect pilot technique needs 2150 feet.

You are flying for hire a Cessna Conquest. The runway is 3,501 feet
long. The 7 knot winds favor runway 8. You're in perfect position for a
landing on runway 26, with trees over the approach end and a cliff at
the far end. Or you can fly around the pattern and take extra time to
get an upwind landing.

What do you do?

I just watched a Cessna Conquest land downwind. He made it with plenty
of room to spare. My much smaller plane took the upwind.

-Charles Talleyrand

A 7 knot direct tailwind is trivial.



Charles Talleyrand wrote:
A Cessna Conquest landing at gross weight over 50 foot trees in no wind
and perfect pilot technique needs 2150 feet.

You are flying for hire a Cessna Conquest. The runway is 3,501 feet
long. The 7 knot winds favor runway 8. You're in perfect position for a
landing on runway 26, with trees over the approach end and a cliff at
the far end. Or you can fly around the pattern and take extra time to
get an upwind landing.

What do you do?

I just watched a Cessna Conquest land downwind. He made it with plenty
of room to spare. My much smaller plane took the upwind.

-Charles Talleyrand

In article ,
Newps wrote:

A 7 knot direct tailwind is trivial.


I just checked a couple of my Cessna POHs.... for the 1981 172P and the
1980 Cutlass RG. In both in notes for takeoff or landing distances that
you should "increases the distance by 10% for each 2 knots of tailwind".

I don't consider 35% as trivial. Of course, that may only apply to those
two models of aircraft.

--
Dale L. Falk

There is nothing - absolutely nothing - half so much worth doing
as simply messing around with airplanes.

http://home.gci.net/~sncdfalk/flying.html

"Dale" wrote in message
...
[...]
I don't consider 35% as trivial. Of course, that may only apply to those
two models of aircraft.

It is trivial for an airplane landing as fast as a Citation. Of course, for
something doing only 40-50 knots at touchdown, 7 knots makes a big
difference.

"Charles Talleyrand" wrote in message
oups.com...
[...]
What do you do?

What do *I* do?

I probably wake up just before the really good part in the dream where I
land the Conquest I'm flying.

I just watched a Cessna Conquest land downwind. He made it with plenty
of room to spare.

Sounds like he knows his performance capabilities just fine. You should
strive to be as good a pilot.

My much smaller plane took the upwind.

Yeah, but you're the troll who thinks 12000' is a short runway for a 150.

Pete

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...
It is trivial for an airplane landing as fast as a Citation.

And yes, I realize it's a Conquest, not a Citation. Sorry...same statement
still applies though. The Conquest lands faster, and thus is less affected
by a given tailwind.

"Newps" wrote in

A 7 knot direct tailwind is trivial.

For what kind of plane? And, for whatever you're talking about now, what is
a non-trivial tailwind? Think.

moo

Dale wrote:

In article ,
Newps wrote:


A 7 knot direct tailwind is trivial.



I just checked a couple of my Cessna POHs.... for the 1981 172P and the
1980 Cutlass RG. In both in notes for takeoff or landing distances that
you should "increases the distance by 10% for each 2 knots of tailwind".

I don't consider 35% as trivial. Of course, that may only apply to those
two models of aircraft.

How much runway do you use? I use less than a 1000 feet when I'm hardly
trying, call it 800 feet. That's an extra 80 feet per 2 knots if all
you have to go by is the book.

Happy Dog wrote:

"Newps" wrote in


A 7 knot direct tailwind is trivial.


For what kind of plane?

Any twin.


And, for whatever you're talking about now, what is
a non-trivial tailwind?

15

"Charles Talleyrand" wrote in message
oups.com...
A Cessna Conquest landing at gross weight over 50 foot trees in no wind
and perfect pilot technique needs 2150 feet.

You are flying for hire a Cessna Conquest. The runway is 3,501 feet
long. The 7 knot winds favor runway 8. You're in perfect position for a
landing on runway 26, with trees over the approach end and a cliff at
the far end. Or you can fly around the pattern and take extra time to
get an upwind landing.

What do you do?

I just watched a Cessna Conquest land downwind. He made it with plenty
of room to spare. My much smaller plane took the upwind.

-Charles Talleyrand


I'm not going to look it up but I don't think that a Conquest flown for hire
could not use rwy 26 since it does not meet the 135 runway effective length
requirements.

Mike
MU-2