Demoose From Canada, joined Mar 2001, 1952 posts, RR: 23 Posted (10 years 6 months 16 hours ago) and read 3834 times:
I've just got back from Tenerife today, and whilst I was waiting at the airport for my flight home to the UK I, like many people, was watching the inbound aircraft coming into land. Anyway a Hapag Lloyd 737 with winglets was coming into land and was floating way down the runway obviously struggling to get the plane on the ground - at around halfway down the runway the pilot managed to get the rear landing gear on the runway but the nose gear was still high in the air, and I didn't see the spoilers deploy, the pilot was running out of runway and so had to apply full power for a go around. I'm just curious to know if there's a point where once the plane is down its too late to abort and go around - I know pilots do loads of touch and go excercises so I guess its a case of ensuring you either have enough runway to stop or to take off again.
It was just a interesting thing I saw today, i've never seen an aircraft do a go around once the main gear is on the ground thats all.
Frjmx328 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 46 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (10 years 6 months 11 hours ago) and read 3647 times:
If the spoilers didn't pop than he wasn't weight on wheels, or he was still in ground effect. In other words, even though the aircraft had the mains down, the aircraft weight was still being supported by the wings. If the mains were WOW, than you would have auto spoiler deployment, thus spoiling any remaining lift and allowing the bird to settle. You would also have the auto brakes engage, and you would have problably seen a full TR deployment, and max effort braking. The PF problably realized his situation and opted for the go-around while the bird was still in ground effect, actuall he problably opted for the go around before you actually saw him lift off the ground. CFM-56's take a couple seconds to spool up, and get high on the power curve. While it sounds like the NFP should have been yelling bullshit, bullshit ( technical term for go around ) we don't know what the surface winds were doing or runway length, or aircraft weight. Was he hot on final? Lots of factors could be worked in here. In the end though, all's well that ends well.
CX flyboy From Hong Kong, joined Dec 1999, 6639 posts, RR: 55
Reply 5, posted (10 years 6 months 9 hours ago) and read 3561 times:
At my airline it is the same as Max Q's. Once reverse thrust has been selected, even if it is only idle, you are comitted to a landing. Even if you land and the spoilers deploy, that's ok....you just retract them and go, but the selection of reversers, then putting them away takes far too long to then allow the engines to spool up and go-around. The decision to go would (or should) be obvious long before the selection of reverse.
SlamClick From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 10062 posts, RR: 68
Reply 6, posted (10 years 6 months 9 hours ago) and read 3549 times:
When doing Cat III landings in the simulator we often have to make a rejected landing at just about touchdown. If the thrust levers are moved forward toward TOGA the speed brakes should retract and, of course, the reversers will have been stowed by the interlock. The instructors will stress that we continue, even if the plane touches down.
The time for a pilot to make the decision is long before that if it is just because of an unstabilized approach. Lots of airlines want approaches stabilized by 1000' above touchdown and require that they be stabilized by no lower than 500' in visual conditions.
"Stabilized" should include on course, on glidepath, configured for landing, in trim, on speed, rate of descent stabilized to fly the glidepath and power set for the descent rate. All of this should come where the plane is in a position to make the landing. Cleared to land is even better!
Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
Max Q From United States of America, joined May 2001, 4780 posts, RR: 19
Reply 7, posted (10 years 6 months 7 hours ago) and read 3489 times:
You say 'the reversers will be 'stowed by the interlock' On the 757/767 and all
other jet transports I have flown, Boeing & Douglas, reverse has to be cancelled before forward thrust is allowed, the levers will physically not move forward (thats your interlock) and that, along with the engines probably being unspooled or at a very low power setting results in a major time lag for (both hopefully) tr's to stow and the engines to reaccelerate.
Perhaps I misunderstood your post but to imply that a go-around is practical or even safe on any landing Cat111 or visual, after reverse is selected I think is misleading.
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.