Posted: 3/10/2016 3:15:47 PM EDT
| Especially airline pilots. So I'm sitting here at the viewing spot and a 737 is about 2-3 miles out lined up on one runway, but then decides to switch the parallel runway and yokes it over and lands really long. Is that normal, or did someone good up the approach? This was a United 737 landing at Ft. Lauderdale. |
|
Quoted:
Especially airline pilots. So I'm sitting here at the viewing spot and a 737 is about 2-3 miles out lined up on one runway, but then decides to switch the parallel runway and yokes it over and lands really long. Is that normal, or did someone good up the approach? This was a United 737 landing at Ft. Lauderdale. I'm not a pilot, but I know in Tampa they do something similar for noise abatement on southern approaches. |
|
Quoted:
Sidestepping is not an "abnormal" action. I'm willing to bet he didn't land as far down the runway as you think...Unless it was a southwest jet trying to avoid a long taxi. what's a correct distance from the runway to do this? it also struck me as odd because the runway the pilot switched to is mainly used by jetblue and international general aviation since the jetblue terminal and customs is on that side of the field. |
|
Quoted:
Especially airline pilots. So I'm sitting here at the viewing spot and a 737 is about 2-3 miles out lined up on one runway, but then decides to switch the parallel runway and yokes it over and lands really long. Is that normal, or did someone good up the approach? This was a United 737 landing at Ft. Lauderdale. Can't speak to FLL because its been years since I've been there, but, here is a guess... Sometimes, approach control will be forced to vector you to certain runways because of their MOUs with a tower or other approaches, traffic flow, noise abatement, etc. For operational reasons, the pilot will want a runway because its longer, wider, shorter taxi, better navaid and/or lighting, more favorable winds, etc. So, you'll get set up for one approach, and the tower will offer or the pilot can request another approach or landing runway. Usually, if the conditions are VFR, the approach controller will clear you for a visual approach, which in theory allows you to do normal maneuvers to the cleared runway (towered airports) or the prudent runway (non-towered airports.) |
|
Quoted:
what's a correct distance from the runway to do this? it also struck me as odd because the runway the pilot switched to is mainly used by jetblue and international general aviation since the jetblue terminal and customs is on that side of the field. Quoted:
Quoted:
Sidestepping is not an "abnormal" action. I'm willing to bet he didn't land as far down the runway as you think...Unless it was a southwest jet trying to avoid a long taxi. what's a correct distance from the runway to do this? it also struck me as odd because the runway the pilot switched to is mainly used by jetblue and international general aviation since the jetblue terminal and customs is on that side of the field. Per 91 and 121, any place as long as the pilot can land using normal maneuvers within the touchdown zone. Many airlines have SOPs that prevent runway changes below 1000 AGL, or after final configuration, and other airlines prevent the maneuver altogether. |
|
Quoted:
Per 91 and 121, any place as long as the pilot can land using normal maneuvers within the touchdown zone. Many airlines have SOPs that prevent runway changes below 1000 AGL, or after final configuration, and other airlines prevent the maneuver altogether. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Sidestepping is not an "abnormal" action. I'm willing to bet he didn't land as far down the runway as you think...Unless it was a southwest jet trying to avoid a long taxi. what's a correct distance from the runway to do this? it also struck me as odd because the runway the pilot switched to is mainly used by jetblue and international general aviation since the jetblue terminal and customs is on that side of the field. Per 91 and 121, any place as long as the pilot can land using normal maneuvers within the touchdown zone. Many airlines have SOPs that prevent runway changes below 1000 AGL, or after final configuration, and other airlines prevent the maneuver altogether. What does final configuration mean, gear and flaps down? |
|
Not a pilot but some possibilities:
Company dictates must take longest runway if possible Runway could have been fouled and it was switch runways or go around. They were practicing (I've gotten that request) Looking at their approaches none of their ILS approaches have a sidestep. Sounds like a pilot request or maybe something went south ( depature wasnt going to clear, arrival took too long on the runway, plane popped a tire on the runway.etc)and the controller asked if they could accept the other runway. |
|
Quoted:
Fixed it for you. Quoted:
Quoted:Unless it was a southwest who have a habit of landing long Fixed it for you. It really depends. For some people they exit the runway before anyone else. For others they land long. It's all in the operation. I was talking to a friend who said SWA will land long and still exit where every one else does. Keeps their runways clear so it works for them |
|
Quoted:
It really depends. For some people they exit the runway before anyone else. For others they land long. It's all in the operation. I was talking to a friend who said SWA will land long and still exit where every one else does. Keeps their runways clear so it works for them Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:Unless it was a southwest who have a habit of landing long Fixed it for you. It really depends. For some people they exit the runway before anyone else. For others they land long. It's all in the operation. I was talking to a friend who said SWA will land long and still exit where every one else does. Keeps their runways clear so it works for them Yeah, cuz fuck stable approaches and the touchdown zone. That shit's for suckas. |
|
Quoted:
What does final configuration mean, gear and flaps down? Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Sidestepping is not an "abnormal" action. I'm willing to bet he didn't land as far down the runway as you think...Unless it was a southwest jet trying to avoid a long taxi. what's a correct distance from the runway to do this? it also struck me as odd because the runway the pilot switched to is mainly used by jetblue and international general aviation since the jetblue terminal and customs is on that side of the field. Per 91 and 121, any place as long as the pilot can land using normal maneuvers within the touchdown zone. Many airlines have SOPs that prevent runway changes below 1000 AGL, or after final configuration, and other airlines prevent the maneuver altogether. What does final configuration mean, gear and flaps down? Gear down, final flaps, Vref (final landing speed) usually no more than +30 and sink less than 1000 fpm from 1000 AGL and closer to 500 at 500 AGL. Those criteria vary from operator to operator but are generally close |
|
Quoted:
Gear down, final flaps, Vref (final landing speed) usually no more than +30 and sink less than 1000 fpm from 1000 AGL and closer to 500 at 500 AGL. Those criteria vary from operator to operator but are generally close Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Sidestepping is not an "abnormal" action. I'm willing to bet he didn't land as far down the runway as you think...Unless it was a southwest jet trying to avoid a long taxi. what's a correct distance from the runway to do this? it also struck me as odd because the runway the pilot switched to is mainly used by jetblue and international general aviation since the jetblue terminal and customs is on that side of the field. Per 91 and 121, any place as long as the pilot can land using normal maneuvers within the touchdown zone. Many airlines have SOPs that prevent runway changes below 1000 AGL, or after final configuration, and other airlines prevent the maneuver altogether. What does final configuration mean, gear and flaps down? Gear down, final flaps, Vref (final landing speed) usually no more than +30 and sink less than 1000 fpm from 1000 AGL and closer to 500 at 500 AGL. Those criteria vary from operator to operator but are generally close Thanks for all the info! |
|
Quoted:
Hate us because you ain't us.  Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:Unless it was a southwest who have a habit of landing long Fixed it for you. Hate us because you ain't us. Exactly! I'll land long in Denver for a nice landing and rollout but there's no fucking around in MDW, especially in an -800. |
|
Quoted:
Yeah, cuz fuck stable approaches and the touchdown zone. That shit's for suckas. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:Unless it was a southwest who have a habit of landing long Fixed it for you. It really depends. For some people they exit the runway before anyone else. For others they land long. It's all in the operation. I was talking to a friend who said SWA will land long and still exit where every one else does. Keeps their runways clear so it works for them Yeah, cuz fuck stable approaches and the touchdown zone. That shit's for suckas. Like I said it depends. For us, SWA will stick the landing and make the next exit more consistently than other some other airlines. On the other hand some carriers like to stroll down the runway at taxi speed to show the passengers all the exits. If there is no restriction then you gotta plan well. |
|
Quoted:
Especially airline pilots. So I'm sitting here at the viewing spot and a 737 is about 2-3 miles out lined up on one runway, but then decides to switch the parallel runway and yokes it over and lands really long. Is that normal, or did someone good up the approach? This was a United 737 landing at Ft. Lauderdale. The other guys answered most of it, but I need to emphasize how Mandatory, a stabilized approach is. The Aircraft itself will rat you out immediately, in real time, if you aren't within a very tight "slot" of tolerances in the last thousand feet. The UAL pilot didn't goof it up and land really long. The Runways are offset. You probably can't tell from the road. Look up a current RW diagram. As SJ said. Sometimes, the pilots request a sidestep. Sometimes, the Tower does. Either party can decline, but it's always on the Pilots if they accept. |
|
My guess is approach initially said to "expect runway 35R" (for example) and then either 'he' or the final controller offered a sidestep that might have been better in regard to what gate they were going to.
As to turning off early, on some aircraft that have brake temp issues and a short turn, if you do so you fuck the crew that is taking the aircraft back out. And yes, FOQA can be a bitch and a stabilized approach not only keeps the electronic narc from making you get phone calls you don't want, it also keeps you from fucking up and actually bending metal and God forbid hurting people. |
|
Quoted:
Exactly! I'll land long in Denver for a nice landing and rollout but there's no fucking around in MDW, especially in an -800. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:Unless it was a southwest who have a habit of landing long Fixed it for you. Hate us because you ain't us. Exactly! I'll land long in Denver for a nice landing and rollout but there's no fucking around in MDW, especially in an -800. I was joking around with my comment about landing long. Just a jab at all the SWA planes that have rolled off a runway or taxiway. But you admit to landing long on purpose? Is it that difficult to make a smooth landing with the 73 in first 1500 or so feet? |
|
Quoted:
I was joking around with my comment about landing long. Just a jab at all the SWA planes that have rolled off a runway or taxiway. But you admit to landing long on purpose? Is it that difficult to make a smooth landing with the 73 in first 1500 or so feet? No, It isn't. Things tend to be a little more lenient on longer runways. Why taxi the length when you can fly it quicker!?!? I can't tell if you are being inquisitive or condescending either. |
|
Quoted:
No, It isn't. Things tend to be a little more lenient on longer runways. Why taxi the length when you can fly it quicker!?!? I can't tell if you are being inquisitive or condescending either. Quoted:
Quoted:
I was joking around with my comment about landing long. Just a jab at all the SWA planes that have rolled off a runway or taxiway. But you admit to landing long on purpose? Is it that difficult to make a smooth landing with the 73 in first 1500 or so feet? No, It isn't. Things tend to be a little more lenient on longer runways. Why taxi the length when you can fly it quicker!?!? I can't tell if you are being inquisitive or condescending either. Because it can be easy to misjudge and go off the prepared surface. Serious question though. I don't haul passengers. And I've never flown a 737. |
|
Quoted:
I was joking around with my comment about landing long. Just a jab at all the SWA planes that have rolled off a runway or taxiway. But you admit to landing long on purpose? Is it that difficult to make a smooth landing with the 73 in first 1500 or so feet? Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:Unless it was a southwest who have a habit of landing long Fixed it for you. Hate us because you ain't us. Exactly! I'll land long in Denver for a nice landing and rollout but there's no fucking around in MDW, especially in an -800. I was joking around with my comment about landing long. Just a jab at all the SWA planes that have rolled off a runway or taxiway. But you admit to landing long on purpose? Is it that difficult to make a smooth landing with the 73 in first 1500 or so feet? Yes, I admit landing long when it's safe and operationally conducive for the airport and conditions. It's one of those "big picture" kind of things that one must consider for every airport. Landing the 737 is easier than some and more difficult than others, certainly not as easy as the G550. |