Will this be a good enough landing?

[autopilot 3]

Hello, Guys!

 

I've made a picture, you can see below. So Question is that if plane lands at these five yellow lines spots ahead of two big blocks then what will happen? Please See image closely.

 

[ViperPilot 81]

NOTE: This is solely based on personal experience; other opinions or ideas are highly welcomed...

 

Depending on Runway length and the type of aircraft you're flying, landing in the area you marked would be considered "long". In some cases, again depending on length and type of A/C, it would be "too long".

 

Ideally, regardless of A/C type you want to aim 'for the numbers'... that insures you're touching down with the right combination of speed and altitude, and have plenty of runway to spare.

 

IRL, I have heard GA pilots give ATC a heads up on Final that they're landing a little long.

 

Are you violating FAA procedures by landing long? I don't know the answer to that; your CFI would want you to work on that though, if it becomes a habit.

 

Bottom line? Practice, practice, practice! Shoot for the numbers!

 

[Guest]

What will happen... In FSX, you mean? Nothing, really. I am curious what you mean by 'what will happen'. Depending on the plane (and speed) you might not be able to stop the plane before the end of the runway, but even then nothing will happen...

[FloG 148]

It may still be a good landing (i.e. interms of smoothness etc.), but the farther you float down on the RWY the higher the risk to overrun it. So it basically depends on various thing, whether it'll be a good landing or not.

I don't think there'll be any legal consequences, as long as you're cleared to land and thus you don't risk anyone's life, but maybe the company will start some investigations if you do that on a regular basis, so you might risk your job in real life.

Deoending on the runway length and on the type and weight(and the landing speed, which depends on that) of the aircraft, landing outside the landing area will or will not lead to an overrun, and I would not risk a long landing in a heavy aircraft, because I guess you saw what happened when the Tu204 that ended up on a highway near the airport Sheremetyevo (Moscow), which was probably caused because the autobrakes (or thrust reversers?, I don't remember) failed to work. On the other hand, landing a little Cessna on the runway of an international airport outside of the primary touchdown zone will not be very risky.

 

Regards,

Flo

[Lowflyer 97]

If you have done your performance calculation correctly and you have at least 60% runway left when touching down you should be fine even in a big tubeliner. If you do that in real life someone might get a bit upset though.

 

As for landing long with GA it's something I do frequently. My home airport has a runway 2200 m long and the only taxiway to the apron is about 600 m from the south threshold so when landing from the north I normally touch down just before the middle. Not sure about FAA rules but I can't imagine it being a problem over there either.

[1Wolf 8]

I'm sure someone else will step up and correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think there is any issue at all. As far as I know, once you are cleared for that runway....you own it (Provided of course the controller hasn't specified that there is traffic on a crossing runway operating simultaneously or what not).

 

I believe that its more a manner of efficiency of the traffic and common consideration than anything. Sort of like, after landing, taxing clear of the runway as quickly as possible so that the controllers can move the traffic efficiently.

 

Of course...I've never flown anything but small GA aircraft.

 

When I learned to fly, I was always taught to try and make the first taxiway. If you floated long and couldn't stop normally by the first taxiway, it was considered 'long'. You want to have as much of the runway in front of you as possible. Runway behind you is useless.

 

I'm sure someone else will step up and correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think there is any issue at all. As far as I know, once you are cleared for that runway....you own it (Provided of course the controller hasn't specified that there is traffic on a crossing runway operating simultaneously or what not).

 

I believe that its more a manner of efficiency of the traffic and common consideration than anything. Sort of like, after landing, taxing clear of the runway as quickly as possible so that the controllers can move the traffic efficiently.

 

Of course...I've never flown anything but small GA aircraft.

 

When I learned to fly, I was always taught to try and make the first taxiway. If you floated long and couldn't stop normally by the first taxiway, it was considered 'long'. You want to have as much of the runway in front of you as possible. Runway behind you is useless. In situations like Lowflyer described above, it would make sense to float it long so that you didn't end up spending an inordinate amount of time taxiing on the runway to get to the Taxiway.

[g_precentralis 191]

ILR, when I land 172 at long rwy I tend to aim point close to exit, as I do not want to occupy rwy more then I need.

[G550flyer 1,052]

A good technique that I've been using in my real world flying is to land with in the first third or first 3000ft which ever shortest. When I flew DC10s, anything outside of 3000ft resulted in a failed check ride. For heavies, aim for 1000ft(captains bars-2 big blocks) and shift aimpoint to touch down around 1500ft. In the light jets, plan to touch down around 1000ft. If you tend to land long alot, this will bite you on short runways. Big thing is to know your aircraft's flare procedure and techniques to prevent excessive floating. Give rex latitude a try, it will help you tune your landings.

[Rations 102]

Ideally, regardless of A/C type you want to aim 'for the numbers'... that insures you're touching down with the right combination of speed and altitude, and have plenty of runway to spare.

Isn't that the function of the aiming markers? With large aircraft, if one aims for the numbers and miscalculates, he or she could land prematurely and damage the aircraft and runway.

 

I try to land within one large marker from the aiming point. All airports I fly to possess ample runway length for prolonged flotation, but such is undesirable because it feels imprecise and unrealistic. However, I will still try to "save" a floaty landing, as performing a hard landing feels worse than performing a late one.

[ViperPilot 81]

Isn't that the function of the aiming markers? With large aircraft, if one aims for the numbers and miscalculates, he or she could land the aircraft prematurely and damage the runway.

 

I try to touch down within one large marker from the aiming markers. All of the airports I fly to possess ample runway for prolonged flotation, but such is undesirable because it feels imprecise. However, I will try to "save" a landing even if I do float, because performing a hard landing still feels worse than performing a late one.

 

My apologies... I only fly GA aircraft, too.

 

I replied based on my personal experience as the disclaimer noted, since the OP didn't identify the type of aircraft he/she was piloting.

[ESzczesniak 128]

Ideally, regardless of A/C type you want to aim 'for the numbers'...

 

This is incorrect. While on short runways, this would be your aiming point. On larger runways with larger aircraft, you will typically aim further down the runway to give a safety against landign short. As far as the FAA is concerned, any landing where you touchdown on/after the threshold and stop/leave the runway before any runoff is legal. On the diagram posted above, this would mean landing after the perpandicular line just before the 8 longitudinal lines below the numbers and leaving before any of the yellow markings on the other end of the runway. You may taxi or start a takeoff run in the area between the yellow marks and the threshold, but you may not touchdown in this area-it is not reinforced to take the added stress.

 

On IFR markings, the two solid rectangles are 1,000' past the threshold. These are the touchdown aiming points. The FAA does not stipulate where you aim to touchdown. However, most tubeliner SOP's will call to aim for the touchdown aim marker to avoid landing short with the ensuing catastrophic results. Following the touchdown aim point rectangles are two sets of 4 (2 each side of midline) lines and then 2 sets of 2 lines. These are at 500' intervals. Therefore you get markings for 1,000', 1,500', 2,000', 2,500' and 3,000' past the threshold. The specific airline SOP's I am familiar with state that if it becomes apparent you will not touchdown by 3,000' past the threshold, a go-around should be initiated. Obviously, there are operational considerations and these SOP's in any circumstances may not apply for short runways. Minimum landing distance required (MLDR) calculated by performance tools will typically assume a touchdown at 3,000' past the threshold (when tailored for airliners obviously).

[autopilot 3]

It may still be a good landing (i.e. interms of smoothness etc.), but the farther you float down on the RWY the higher the risk to overrun it. So it basically depends on various thing, whether it'll be a good landing or not.

I don't think there'll be any legal consequences, as long as you're cleared to land and thus you don't risk anyone's life, but maybe the company will start some investigations if you do that on a regular basis, so you might risk your job in real life.

Deoending on the runway length and on the type and weight(and the landing speed, which depends on that) of the aircraft, landing outside the landing area will or will not lead to an overrun, and I would not risk a long landing in a heavy aircraft, because I guess you saw what happened when the Tu204 that ended up on a highway near the airport Sheremetyevo (Moscow), which was probably caused because the autobrakes (or thrust reversers?, I don't remember) failed to work. On the other hand, landing a little Cessna on the runway of an international airport outside of the primary touchdown zone will not be very risky.

 

Regards,

Flo

 

This is what was asking. Job problem. Risk of the Job and people will investigate. Good answer man! I'm talking about Heavy B747-400. I sometimes lands long on FSX but still I get success to stop the 747 on runway.

 

I also thinking some wrong that if I landed long then the place of landing may damage, OR it'll be loss to Runway. Is it right?

 

Can you tell me by which materiel a Runway can be built up?

 

Second and totally different topic is that by which materiel a plane's tires made? Is it Air in Tires? OR Plane's tires are without air and someone else materiel is included in a plane's tires? Can you tell me this basic question that by which materiel a plane's tire make and what is their internal materiel? Air or something else?

 

Regards,

[Guest Tom_Tiedman]

All good and interesting answers. My two cents worth is simply to mention how I recall back in the 70's, flying GA aircraft out of KSGS in South St. Paul (and never having personally landed a GA aircraft at KMSP a few miles to the west in Minneapolis), I remember many GA pilots at KSGS who had landed at KMSP recall how ATC had requested that they land quite long in order to clear the runway sooner, to make room for the heavy traffic following them in for landing and/or taxiing around on the ground. ATC's reasoning was to get the GA traffic to roll to a stop nearest the taxiways which were closest to an FBO called Northern Airmotive, which is where most, if not all, of the GA traffic ended up upon landing at KMSP. I don't know if KMSP still operates that way, but I always thought it was interesting that ATC would initiate the 'land long' requests/orders.

[FloG 148]

I also thinking some wrong that if I landed long then the place of landing may damage, OR it'll be loss to Runway. Is it right?

I don't think you will do any damage to the RWY.

 

Can you tell me by which materiel a Runway can be built up?

Generally speaking, it could be any material. Being more specific: All larger airports I know have either asphalt or concrete runways. Smaller airfields may have only gravel, sand, gras, mud or even snow/ice as surface. I think the local conditions (ground, temperature, climate; amount of traffic, size of aircraft etc.) have quite an influence on how the runway surface is designed.

Of course large int'l airports that have to handle 747s, T7s, A380s and so on have to be equipped with very well constructed runways, so that they can bear the weight of an aircraft, basically on a very small area, which means that the ground ahs to resist a very high pressure.

 

Second and totally different topic is that by which materiel a plane's tires made? Is it Air in Tires?

Aircraft tyres are primarily the same as care tyres, i.e. they are made from rubber. But they're not filled with air, because high rpm and especially the skidding on landing cause high temperatures, which could cause the rubber to burn(This rubber burn is actually visible: the smoke you can see the second and aircraft touches down). Hence the wheels are filled with Nitrogen to prevent fires.

[autopilot 3]

I don't think you will do any damage to the RWY.

 

 

Generally speaking, it could be any material. Being more specific: All larger airports I know have either asphalt or concrete runways. Smaller airfields may have only gravel, sand, gras, mud or even snow/ice as surface. I think the local conditions (ground, temperature, climate; amount of traffic, size of aircraft etc.) have quite an influence on how the runway surface is designed.

Of course large int'l airports that have to handle 747s, T7s, A380s and so on have to be equipped with very well constructed runways, so that they can bear the weight of an aircraft, basically on a very small area, which means that the ground ahs to resist a very high pressure.

 

 

Aircraft tyres are primarily the same as care tyres, i.e. they are made from rubber. But they're not filled with air, because high rpm and especially the skidding on landing cause high temperatures, which could cause the rubber to burn(This rubber burn is actually visible: the smoke you can see the second and aircraft touches down). Hence the wheels are filled with Nitrogen to prevent fires.

 

Thanks man for your Answers. You deserve for 1 reputation.