Boeing 737 skids off runway in Jacksonville
05-09-2019, 12:29 PM
#61
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Posts: 854
Originally Posted by TiredSoul
Except you’re not supposed to add to Vref for a gusting tailwind.......
Each knot above Vref+5 adds 60' to the landing distance. Each knot of tailwind adds 185'.
05-09-2019, 12:33 PM
#62
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Posts: 854
Originally Posted by Vital Signs
Does the 737 have a 1 or both TR inop chart?
Braking action Medium, Auto brakes 3, +460/+1,340.
Braking action Medium, Auto brakes Max, +620/+1,490.
The adjustments are much smaller with better braking action.
05-09-2019, 03:19 PM
#63
Banned
Joined APC: Dec 2018
Posts: 648
Originally Posted by Larry in TN
A target speed over 160kts is normal with a heavy 737-800/900 in gusty winds. My personal "best" was a target of 165kts landing Rwy 29 at EWR in a 737-900ER.
Asymmetrical reverse is assumed when one T/R is inoperative. The performance penalty is just under 500' of landing distance with one T/R inop. The yaw is minimal.
Where does that come from?
The speed looks about right for the conditions but would depend on their actual landing weight. At max landing weight Vref would be around 151kts plus a max wind additive of +15kts.
Where did you see that they landed at other than idle? The 3 seconds for the speed brakes to extend would also be normal, especially considering a wet runway.
The real key here is the braking action. If there was moderate or heavy rain associated with the storm, on the ungrooved runway, Medium, or worse, braking action would be expected. At Medium, required runway would likely have been over 9,000' (depending, again, on weight). If you only have 7,800' available it isn't going to end well.
Asymmetrical reverse is assumed when one T/R is inoperative. The performance penalty is just under 500' of landing distance with one T/R inop. The yaw is minimal.
Where does that come from?
The speed looks about right for the conditions but would depend on their actual landing weight. At max landing weight Vref would be around 151kts plus a max wind additive of +15kts.
Where did you see that they landed at other than idle? The 3 seconds for the speed brakes to extend would also be normal, especially considering a wet runway.
The real key here is the braking action. If there was moderate or heavy rain associated with the storm, on the ungrooved runway, Medium, or worse, braking action would be expected. At Medium, required runway would likely have been over 9,000' (depending, again, on weight). If you only have 7,800' available it isn't going to end well.
As far as weight, at 143 passengers and likely around 10.0 in fuel assuming a few thousand escaped while it was sitting, it is going to be difficult to reach MLW. More than likely, Vref was in the low 140s. IAS at TD was 168. That's at least 25 kts above ref. Even at a 15 kt additive, you aren't supposed to land that fast. You still control the power so that mains touch at ref or ref+.
05-10-2019, 09:10 AM
#65
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2014
Posts: 924
Originally Posted by ChecklistMonkey
It doesn't take 3 seconds for the spoilers to deploy. TL idle and two wheels spun up or right main WoW. In all conditions, I've never seen it take longer than 1 second for that handle to come back. That tells me he landed with power in.
As far as weight, at 143 passengers and likely around 10.0 in fuel assuming a few thousand escaped while it was sitting, it is going to be difficult to reach MLW. More than likely, Vref was in the low 140s. IAS at TD was 168. That's at least 25 kts above ref. Even at a 15 kt additive, you aren't supposed to land that fast. You still control the power so that mains touch at ref or ref+.
As far as weight, at 143 passengers and likely around 10.0 in fuel assuming a few thousand escaped while it was sitting, it is going to be difficult to reach MLW. More than likely, Vref was in the low 140s. IAS at TD was 168. That's at least 25 kts above ref. Even at a 15 kt additive, you aren't supposed to land that fast. You still control the power so that mains touch at ref or ref+.
05-10-2019, 09:35 AM
#66
Banned
Joined APC: Dec 2018
Posts: 648
Originally Posted by Flightcap
Their correct Vref would have been in the 140s, but what if they had the Vref loaded for 28 and failed to change it for the runway change?
05-10-2019, 01:00 PM
#67
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2014
Posts: 924
Originally Posted by ChecklistMonkey
Then it's another example of poor piloting technique. We can play this what if game all day. If you thought you were landing on a 13000 foot runway and then requested the 6000 ft one but still tried landing flaps 15, it's still negligent. Vref speed isn't runway dependent and the 737 there is no way to set approach speed until flaps are down.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
