I don't know anyone who flies the 772LR in real life. But by the book on the 773ER at 250tons (MLW is 251.2 TONS), if one doesn't mind have a burning brakes and melting fuse plug, it can stop in on 980M (3215ft) RWY with Max manual braking and full reverse at Sea level , NIL wind and perfectly level rwy and at ISA condition. At 200TONS it can stops at 880M (~2900ft). That 880m includes 305m (1000ft) air distance from 50ft over the threshold to actual touchdown. So the actual stopping distance from the point where the wheels touch down to a complete stop is only 575M theoretically. Pretty amazing.

 

Since every time you do it you probably need to write off the two main landing gears which may costs some millions of dollars each. during normal operation AB 2 to 4 with idle reverse is used most of the time to try to save the engines. People vary the AB setting such that they can decide which taxiway they can use to get off the rwy. Most of the time all they need is around 1900-2200M and the brake temp rarely go above 300~400deg, using full reverse is recommended when Brake temp becomes an issue or landing on contaminated rwy.

 

In summary after all flight sim is not that unrealistic. Hope it helps. Happy flying. : )

most has been said already.

Pretty good stuff!

 

It is correct that the AB try to achieve a certain deceleration rate, so reverse thrust USUALLY does not shorten stopping distance. But like Kyle said it all depends on conditions.

(On a slippry rwy they will help!)

 

At max Auto Brake setting and max manual braking (which is more), weight is going to matter ofcourse. (has been said already).

Deceleration rate and stopping distance will also vary even at AB2 (or whatever) when AB2 is already using max hydraulic pressure to achieve the desired decelleration rate and just cant do it (i.e overweight landing or slippery rwy).

 

But we dont calculate stopping distance, we must calculate Landing Distance!

The Rules and Regulations require you to calculate the distance required from 50ft over the threshold untill stopped. So including the flare!

(it shows this in small print under the QRH tables as well)

 

After that you have to add a safety factor to find the minimum rwy length you are allowed to land at. (size of safety factor depends on dry/wet/malfunctions)

 

But yes, the 777 braking action is better than most other airplanes.

(The A330/340 guys that change to the 777 are usually quite impressed)

 

For a B777200ER at max landing mass of 213.000Kg on a dry rwy, no wind, sea level (EHAM), I get:

 

Dry Required Landing Distance 1713m (based on max manual braking and incl flare and safety margin of x1.67).

(If I calculate WET, I get 1969m. based on the same but safety margin of 1.92)

 

AB1 - 2471m (2472 WET)

AB2 - 2205m (2205 WET)

AB3 - 1960m (1960 WET)

AB4 - 1641m (1647 WET)

ABmax - 1327m (1532 WET)

Note, the AB distances are like raw data. They do not include the safety factor, but do include the flare.

 

So the flare being around 300m, that indead means that at ABmax this 777 stops in 1000m or 3000ft :-)

 

EDIT: makes me think of a Controller in the Caribbean who was aperantely quite impressed by a pilots short field landing, and said over the radio;"Ok, well done,.. now,...when you are done peeling your face of the windscreen, take taxiway B to the ramp", lol

 

Note: Values calculated with official real world software, so no mistakes made ;-)

 

 

Ps, you dont want to hold the nose of the ground for aerodynamic braking.

You want as much weight on wheels as possible to increase grip and reduce stopping distance.

Thats why we have spoilers too!

Without spoilers your stopping distance will be quite a bit more.

Ps, you dont want to hold the nose of the ground for aerodynamic braking.

You want as much weight on wheels as possible to increase grip and reduce stopping distance.

Thats why we have spoilers too!

Without spoilers your stopping distance will be quite a bit more.

whilst it is not 'recommended', I have seen many pilots doing it on long runways in good conditions. Why, well I don't know but was told that it reduces wear on the brakes. See this vid:

 

youtube.com/watch?v=y-tAfIsQGtE

 

So What you say is correct, but not a strict rule it would seem, IF the conditions merit it. On a wet runway or short runway and with crosswinds, it would be less than ideal. You do still get spoilers and reverse and wheel brakes, although yes the total weight on wheels might be a bit less. I was also told that the wing is not lifting the aircraft during this braking, but rather the Horizontal Stabilizer, hence very little effect on wheel braking.

Years ago when I was part of Looking Glass we got to go to the Microsoft Party at Boeing, and I got to fly the 777 Level D sims at Boeing! We did minimal weight (empty except pilots on board) min fuel for just touch and goes! Vref was 117. We did an autobrake max landing on 31R at BFI (only 3300 feet long I think...) and we touchdown at only 111k ... and the autobrakes grinded us to a stop so fast I had no time to unlock the TRs... we stopped in about 3000. or less! So, yes it can be done...remember the Asiana 777 was still flying at 106, before it stalled at 103.... so you can see "how low" the Vref can be at light weight / light fuel loads...

My point is that even with Autobrake 1, dry runway, 436,500 lbs landing weight, no winds at KSFO, I seem to stop ~ 2,500 ft.  (using speed brakes and reverse thrusters or thrust reversers-Fabo)

 

So my question is: (dare I challenge the flight model of the PMDG 777 and risk being thrown to the lions).

 

Is the PMDG 777 braking realistic?

My point is that even with Autobrake 1, dry runway, 436,500 lbs landing weight, no winds at KSFO, I seem to stop ~ 2,500 ft.  (using speed brakes and reverse thrusters or thrust reversers-Fabo)

 

So my question is: (dare I challenge the flight model of the PMDG 777 and risk being thrown to the lions).

 

Is the PMDG 777 braking realistic?

No that does not seem right. Maybe I have time to do the same tomorrow so we can compare.

EDIT: makes me think of a Controller in the Caribbean who was aperantely quite impressed by a pilots short field landing, and said over the radio;"Ok, well done,.. now,...when you are done peeling your face of the windscreen, take taxiway B to the ramp", lol

lol

I do notice, if you land (again - no winds, 450,000 lbs, dry runway) you can come to a complete stop in ~ 8,000 ft WITHOUT using brakes or thrust reversers at all.  Again, I am not sure if wind resistance and ground friction can stop a 450,000 lb plane going 140 kts in 8.000 ft. (to a full dead stop.)

According to the factory brochure, the 777 series is now available with ABS disc brakes.

 

When equipped with that option, the vehicle can stop on a quarter.  They are still working on stopping on a dime.

 

Opps, that was for a 2014 Camaro 2SS (shown).  Wrong brochure.

 

 

I threw up at the sight of that picture.. Camaro, Yuck.  :blink:

I threw up at the sight of that picture.. Camaro, Yuck.  :blink:

 

You're right.  Here's something you'll drool over!

 

It really is a shame that FSX doesn't really model any contamination or sloping - those two factors really can determine the Autobrakes setting also. 

 

Max Auto on a wet NCL runway at MLW in the 300ER sounds excellent  B)

FS9,FSX, and P3D can model runway contamination and runway slope. The aircraft either has it built in or you can purchase additional addons to simulate the effects.

 

First thing I'm doing before installing the 777 is getting FS captain or sim physics setup.

... FS Captain, preferably.

You're right.  Here's something you'll drool over!

 

 

No words needed.

 

I have the 2012 Dodge Charger Superbee like the above in yellow. 

470 HP - 12.1 sec. 1/4 mile. 

I get to drool everyday, I also get 12.5 mpg

 

 

Anyway, back to the topic, I get the 777 brakes are good, just not that good as in our 777.   I'll test and compare the braking distance on the full motion 777 sim vs our little 777 next month.