Polar742
All the responsibility none of the authority
jtrain,
I never slowed the E145, 170, or the whale (well, the whale just won't do it in a timely fashion) below what I flew the rest of the approach at.
I always flew my "target" airspeed to the flare. Even into EYW at a high landing weight. Again, this is because the performance numbers are a system. The base performance number comes from Vref @ 50' on a calm day. I just happened to have my QRH sitting next to me, and there is a speed adjustment for 10 kts above our Vref.
With all the complex machinations for "legal" performance, you can derive your distance required. Obviously there can be gross performance parameter changes enroute, especially on long flights. Again, every operator is different, but we calculate our expected landing data on a wet runway prior to departure, degrading it as necessary.
This does bring up a point. Let's say you are headed into a performance limited field. You calculated your landing based on a wet runway, using your preferred flaps. Would it not be wise to grab some table, speed card, or where ever your onboard, unfactored landing distance is, add the variables that you intend to use and look at ACTUAL performance? That would be, in my mind good judgement. Do you need it landing on a 12k runway? Maybe not in dry, but if it's snowing to beat the band, it's windy, you might want to take a look prior to leaving cruise alt. How about being a good boy and burning way less fuel than you intended...a higher ref will be more critical to field length. Just some food for thought.
Driving onto a couple issues brought up. If you happen to fly a glass airplane with low-speed awarness, it is a very reasonable action to cross check your ref speed with the real time indications.
If there is an incident, your POI/APM or other FAA person will ask the company how to fix it so they might continue to make it towards the 20-year mark in their careers. The company might take the FAA's "suggestion" of what to change, thus making line pilots go "Derrr?"
Finally, aircraft don't mysteriously do things. Something happened. The cause may not be readily known or discovered, but there was a cause and action. After the 737s continued flying after repeated rudder-hardovers that made them dirt missiles, I can't say that an aircraft type is not close to the envelope. However, an isolated incident does not deserve a widow-maker moniker.
I never slowed the E145, 170, or the whale (well, the whale just won't do it in a timely fashion) below what I flew the rest of the approach at.
I always flew my "target" airspeed to the flare. Even into EYW at a high landing weight. Again, this is because the performance numbers are a system. The base performance number comes from Vref @ 50' on a calm day. I just happened to have my QRH sitting next to me, and there is a speed adjustment for 10 kts above our Vref.
With all the complex machinations for "legal" performance, you can derive your distance required. Obviously there can be gross performance parameter changes enroute, especially on long flights. Again, every operator is different, but we calculate our expected landing data on a wet runway prior to departure, degrading it as necessary.
This does bring up a point. Let's say you are headed into a performance limited field. You calculated your landing based on a wet runway, using your preferred flaps. Would it not be wise to grab some table, speed card, or where ever your onboard, unfactored landing distance is, add the variables that you intend to use and look at ACTUAL performance? That would be, in my mind good judgement. Do you need it landing on a 12k runway? Maybe not in dry, but if it's snowing to beat the band, it's windy, you might want to take a look prior to leaving cruise alt. How about being a good boy and burning way less fuel than you intended...a higher ref will be more critical to field length. Just some food for thought.
Driving onto a couple issues brought up. If you happen to fly a glass airplane with low-speed awarness, it is a very reasonable action to cross check your ref speed with the real time indications.
If there is an incident, your POI/APM or other FAA person will ask the company how to fix it so they might continue to make it towards the 20-year mark in their careers. The company might take the FAA's "suggestion" of what to change, thus making line pilots go "Derrr?"
Finally, aircraft don't mysteriously do things. Something happened. The cause may not be readily known or discovered, but there was a cause and action. After the 737s continued flying after repeated rudder-hardovers that made them dirt missiles, I can't say that an aircraft type is not close to the envelope. However, an isolated incident does not deserve a widow-maker moniker.
