I'm sure the load planners have already thought about this. It won't be doing long enough flights to have consistent performance issues. Probably just ORD or IAH

FWIW-I believe it is doing DEN in place of the 757-300, which is full every time I do that flight

The 757-300 still has shorter take of rolls and shorter landing roll outs than a 900 or ER. Better brakes and spoilers!

Saw a 300 roll out of DCA the other day like it was child's play. Love that machine.

Do you guys do the flaps 5 go around nonsense with ludicrous speed target speeds? How is it going in there when it's snowing?

Guppy approach to Denver in the winter:
https://qph.ec.quoracdn.net/main-qim...de012ee8b6f8-c

I haven't seen LGA much the last 10 or so years. And it's apples to oranges, but pre 9/11 DAL took the L-1011 and 764 in/out of there also with just those 2 destinations IIRC.

As they taxied out of the alley you'd practically get blown into Flushing bay if you were at the blast fence.

Ain't called extra runway for nuthin'

Flaps 15 always for go-arounds for us. But, with headwind corrections our Vref speeds can be corrected upwards to 20 knots additional speed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I wouldn't imagine the alternate go around procedure would ever be needed into LGA as it is used to meet landing climb limits which shouldn't be an issue at a sea level airport. However, I have been wrong before.

I thought the "ER" stood for "Entire Runway"!!

That depends upon who you talk to. Chuck Yeager or Captain Sullenberger and Jeffrey Skiles? No one is ever forced to accept an approach to a short runway in ORD when there are other (always and better) options. Try that at LGA.

Short runways coupled with lousy brakes, high approach speeds, circling approaches, tail-strike techniques... What could go wrong? I wonder what FOQA data shows?