Porter Airlines-Off end of Runway

[midwingcrisis]

Does anyone know what Porter's SOP is in regards to use of brakes and/or reverse at YTZ?

[pdw]

Why don't the pilots who are flying Twin Otters off strip in the Arctic touch down one thousand feet into the land-able surface?

The unforseen extra groundspeed produced into late final is at the same decent angle as determined from the crew's experience. An unrealized 10kts of difference are 16 feet per second extra groundspeed (in excess of what is counted-on) in those 'final' seconds of precision approach in smooth air. This builds up into the delay seen here in settling onto the 08 threshold. That extra groundspeed is known until touchdown as headwind groundspeed ... only until a shorter/heavier braking period shows itself in the form of fewer seconds of runway left.

CYTZ rubber marks tell a tale of an average touchdown distance into the runway for many flights. The rubber zone is heaviest at 600ft for both directions (satellite of rwy 08/26).

.

[altiplano]

Ridiculous...

[Cat Driver]

pdw, I truly appreciate your explaining these issues to me and will spend some time thinking about it.

Maybe some day I will find myself in a situation where a wind shift will be so subtle that I don't realize I am to far down the runway to land and stop before I run out of runway.

You must have a vast amount of flying under your belt to be able to teach some of us amateurs here.

[pdw]

There has to be more to this.

Yes, as it starts to flare for touchdown ... a bit tardy (on account of the faster GS picked up in the smooth final approach-course over the lake) the high GS then meets NNW/underpinning offshore flow (Windsock headwind) that is boosting IAS briefly during flare-out/touchdown, also not expected ("so subtle").

[TheFrankestFrank]

The last time I experienced a loss of headwind I lost my erection.

[Cat Driver]

I have been posting on this forum for a long time and as time passes it seems to me that aviation in general is getting so dumbed down with micro-managing of every tiny detail it is getting to be scarey, real scarey.

Maybe I am getting senile?

[Meatservo]

You know what, Cat Driver? VIA rail offers some pretty good deals from time to time. I don't feel scared at all when I travel.

[Cat Driver]

I can remember when flying by airline was something so special people dressed up for the occasion.

Now when you go to an airport you are at risk of some security moron undressing you and probing your private parts.

If I never see an airport terminal again I will die happy.

[Cough Syrup]

"Yes, as it starts to flare for touchdown ... a bit tardy (on account of the faster GS picked up in the smooth final approach-course over the lake) the high GS then meets NNW/underpinning offshore flow (Windsock headwind) that is boosting IAS briefly during flare-out/touchdown, also not expected ("so subtle")."





I'm sure Transport and Porter will look no further than the entries on this thread to do their research.

[double-j]

Here is a novel approach to a subtle headwind-to-groundspeed-to-late-touchdown situation...

Goaround!

[pdw]

Goaround!

Touching down still within the first 1000ft and the braking cycle starts immediately (1300Z metar ... 34004kts "300V360) ... but then it's quickly too late to react to upward fluctuating airspeed forced up as headwind rises again following '290 veers 020' or so on final ( 1400Z metar ... "290V020") where actually ~ 34004kt on the ground. The braking quickly loses a (resulting) spike in airspeed (the same high airspeed necessary for a quickly-chosen goaround) leaving no time to reload thrust at their high GS and 'short remaining' ... to even attempt it.

Safer to stay down in this case as RWY depletes too quick for "Goaraound". PIC would have needed to know about a subtle "290V020" ahead of time, but the 1400Z metar where this shows up is in the next hour's metar. The other two stations on the island (Wunderground history) aren't showing any data ... so not sure if they were even reporting (this info would have shown the wind reversal on the lake as is evidenced by all the other stations around the lake).

(Thanks Frank, ... yes ...the viagra above doesn't always help the limp windsock on the ground, .. deceptive even to approach-control.)

The limp windsock isn't indicative of what's going on above the deck on this particular final ... where GS rises while holding a tailwind airspeed and an early-enough flare wasn't possible to achieve in the deceived limitation (under these circumstances). Very tricky here to win on the steeper glideslope when the change in winds for the approach-area is not possible to see soon enough.

[Cat Driver]

This forum is getting so dumb ed down I actually look forward to how low it can go.

[golden hawk]

This forum is getting so dumb ed down I actually look forward to how low it can go.

Agreed

[GyvAir]

pdw... I've just gotta ask. Are you serious, or is this your version of trolling?

[Colonel Sanders]

DHC-8-400 was landing on runway 08 CYTZ. The aircraft landed long

I'm not sure how this got to be so complicated. With a 120K (estimate) short final speed, and only 4,000 feet of runway, you simply can't afford to discard pavement by landing long.

Ask Air France about landing long at YYZ. Pax got out on the 401.

In both of the above, the pilots knew they screwed the pooch before touchdown, but for their own reasons decided to push a bad approach into a bad landing.

[pdw]

DHC-8-400 was landing on runway 08 CYTZ. The aircraft landed long

In both of the above, the pilots knew they screwed the pooch before touchdown, but for their own reasons decided to push a bad approach into a bad landing.

There was unknown in both. Both unware their negative windvector on the glideslope would lengthen the flare (delay the point of contact with the pavement) to the extent it happened. (AF was extreme windshear, a nearby lightening strike and water on the pavement.) A lot faster to arrive at the decision point whether to stay down, but a lot more RWY goes by in the touchdown where braking can start taking down the higher speed of a still-negligible RWY headwind component on the ground.

(GyvAir, the local high-time CFI at the old flying club is a good guy to ask about 'the "subtle" windsock' of this situation.)

Must admit, felt a little "dumb ed" in contemplating appropriate detail to make the point.

[Colonel Sanders]

It's weird how so many pilots would rather crash than overshoot.

There must be a terrible stigma associated with the overshoot, which
would force pilots to make such horrible decisions. My problem is that
I stopped giving a sh1t what anyone thought decades ago, so I guess
I don't fear the social stigma of the "dreaded overshoot". The crew
room catcalls. The hooting and hollering in the bar. The career-ending
email from the CP.

Landing a 120 knot aircraft on 4000 feet, if you're still in the air at
1000 feet down the runway, the throttles go forward. I know a little
bit about this particular scenario.

Now, the "experts" here will tell me that it's impossible to go around
if you're still flying at 1000 feet down the runway. Not enough energy,
they will say.

I guess when they take off they are always already airborne by 1000 feet

[Cough Syrup]

This forum is getting so dumb ed down I actually look forward to how low it can go.

Dumbed-down or nerded-up? Maybe a bit of both...

[pdw]

I guess when they take off they are always already airborne by 1000 feet

130kts GS over the chevrons at the 08 numbers is 4.5 seconds for 1000ft (220ft/sec).

Those engines are great climbers (flew porter to St Johns last year), .. not surprised up in 1000ft.

I imagine that spool-up takes a few seconds though if I recall ...