My son just landed an empty 777F at 7N1 and used less than half of the 3269 ft runway. Is this realistic? If you want to try it you'll have to get the freeware 7N1 by Jim Cook from the library.

 

Here's a picture of it, he touched down right at the beginning of the threshold.

http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=9vglsy&s=9#.V8eb7a0S2M8

If you want a challenge try flying the left handed pattern and landing on 02R at Santos Dumont in Rio de Janeiro. It's 4341 feet long so you'll get a 1000 more than 7N1 but even light it's tough.

My son just landed an empty 777F at 7N1 and used less than half of the 3269 ft runway

 

How would you take it off again? Or wouuld you just taxi to the junk yard?  :smile:

My son just landed an empty 777F at 7N1 and used less than half of the 3269 ft runway. Is this realistic? If you want to try it you'll have to get the freeware 7N1 by Jim Cook from the library.

 

Here's a picture of it, he touched down right at the beginning of the threshold.

http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=9vglsy&s=9#.V8eb7a0S2M8

 

Have a look in the FCOM 1 from page 447/1210 Section 32 but i would guess around 17-1900m

 

Michael Moe

 

 

My son just landed an empty 777F at 7N1 and used less than half of the 3269 ft runway.

 

I used to drive by that airport all the time on the way up to Canandaigua and Rochester. Nice.

 

 

 

Is this realistic?

 

It's probably a tiny bit on the short side, since FSX's ground contact model is pretty unrealistic itself, but we've tried to work around this to the best of our ability.

The thing is the figures in the FCOM include safety margins which are applied to landing and takeoff distances, so they don't provide an accurate minimum. So it's possible you could manage a landing in a surprisingly short distance. It wouldn't be safe to try it in normal circumstances. However there have been instances of large aircraft being flown into very small airfields to be housed in a museum.

Very interesting :smile: 

I see also that at a maximum landing weight of a B777-300ER at 251,290 kg, on a flaps 30, no wind, dry runway, autobrake Max, the stopping distance is 1400'. On a poor reported braking action runway, this then extends to 3260'. WoW :excl: 

No chance of taking off again, then.

A tiny bit on the short side?? :blink: How on Earth do you get a 777 to stop in 1500 feet?

A tiny bit on the short side?? :blink: How on Earth do you get a 777 to stop in 1500 feet?

 

With 12 really effective brakes under wings with a method to spoil lift. Not sure how this is so shocking. Have a look at the perf charts for many aircraft out there. A lot of them can stop very quickly, but it's neither friendly to passengers, nor the aircraft.

Well, it's shocking to me!! I thought it was an achievement to get my Flight1 Cessna Citation Mustang in and out of airfields with asphalt runways only 2000 feet long, so clearly I am clueless when it comes to the braking performance of large airliners :smile:

Persoanlly, I prefer longer rollouts when landing the 737NGX

 

Thought  this  thread was  about  the 777

I used to drive by that airport all the time on the way up to Canandaigua and Rochester. Nice

7N1 is almost literally in my backyard! I do avionics work for all of the tenant aircraft there. If someone DID manage to land a 777, I'm sure airport owner Joe Costa would be impressed.

 

Only problem is that his Jet-A tank is only holds 500 gallons, (mainly used for servicing the occasional turbine helicopter who may stop in now and then), so getting refueled might be a problem!😀

 

Thought  this  thread was about  the 777

 

Is it a criminal offence to mention another aircraft in a 777 thread? :huh:

 

 

7N1 is almost literally in my backyard! I do avionics work for all of the tenant aircraft there. If someone DID manage to land a 777, I'm sure airport owner Joe Costa would be impressed.

 

Nice. It's on my bucket list of places to drop into. I flew over it one dark (and distantly stormy - storms over Lake Ontario) night 9 years ago (as of Sunday, actually) on the way up to PEO. That little 152 had a basic six pack, 2 VOR gauges, radios, and that's it. Compared to the flying I've been doing since then, it's been pretty stupid easy with all these newfangled gadgets. I felt like I was cheating when I was flying my commercial certificate long cross country. Back when it was VORs and NDBs only (<grandpa voice>like when I was flying that Spamcan 152...</grandpa voice>), I was actually working the whole flight on a longer cross country. On my commercial cross country, I actually hit up ATC just to have something to do, since the rest was taken care of by the G1000. To be honest, I would've preferred challenging myself with just steam gauges and no GPS, but the DA40 was a little more cost effective to use for the trip.

 

Is it a criminal offence to mention another aircraft in a 777 thread? :huh:

 

Yes. It's against 14 CFR 91.28.

(For those of you who don't get it. FAR 91.28 does not exist, and I'm joking.)

 However there have been instances of large aircraft being flown into very small airfields to be housed in a museum.

Something like this you mean?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fmakSwlYLs0