Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Shortest Stopping Distance On An Airliner  
User currently offlineSoaringadi From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 472 posts, RR: 0
Posted (9 years 7 months 6 hours ago) and read 8464 times:

Which airliner can stop at the shortest distance from touchdown. I am talking about the modern airliners of today like the 744, T7's, 340's 330 767 etc....

So I think that the 772E.R. has the shortest stopping distance... is it true or is there some other winner ?

 Smile


If it ain't Boeing, I'm not going !
26 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineEMBQA From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 9364 posts, RR: 11
Reply 1, posted (9 years 7 months 5 hours ago) and read 8429 times:

There are far too many variables to give a definitive answer. Weight with Fuel Load, Cargo Load, Passenger Load all playing factors. Braking Conditions, Runway Surface and condition of the brakes also weigh in. How hard they slam on the brakes... You can take a Max loaded 777 and stop really short, but you'll melt the tires and set the wheels on fire.


"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog"
User currently offlineSlamClick From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 10062 posts, RR: 68
Reply 2, posted (9 years 7 months 4 hours ago) and read 8402 times:

For the sake of argument, let's say there is this benchmark distance. It is the ground run on landing where you flew the approach exactly on-speed, touched down on the markers and used very heavy braking and a lot of reverse thrust and you held the braking until the plane came to a stop on the runway centerline. But the reverse thrust was not enough to cause compressor stalling and the braking effort was just enough not to overheat the wheels and blow the fuse plugs. Okay that is the benchmark landing distance.

The most agressive landing you've ever experienced as a passenger probably rolled twice that distance.

If you needed it, a maximum energy stop would use about half that distance.

As EMBQA said, it will generate a lot of heat in the wheel. On a modern airliner I'd consider a fire an unlikely event, but for sure the fuse plugs in the wheels will melt and deflate the tires. If the plane is then left with the parking brake on, it can even weld the brake pucks to the rotors. But you can stop the thing real short!




Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 3, posted (9 years 7 months 4 hours ago) and read 8382 times:

I assume maximum energy stops are reserved pretty much for emergency situations, like a no flaps landing or perhaps an overweight landing?

N


User currently offlineSlamClick From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 10062 posts, RR: 68
Reply 4, posted (9 years 7 months 3 hours ago) and read 8353 times:

I'd say it is likely that a maximum energy stop has never been performed in airline line operations. They are usually only done by the factory test pilots during certification testing.

In a no-flap landing some heavy braking and generous use of reverse thrust may be called for, but you are still going to roll seven or eight thousand feet. The important things here are selecting the longest, most favorable runway availalble and touching down on-spot and on-speed.

In an overweight landing, the landing roll is not going to be much longer than a normal weight landing. The key here is touching down gently and not putting any unnecessary stain on gear and brakes.



Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
User currently offline2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8955 posts, RR: 60
Reply 5, posted (9 years 7 months 3 hours ago) and read 8344 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
DATABASE EDITOR

I'd say it is likely that a maximum energy stop has never been performed in airline line operations. They are usually only done by the factory test pilots during certification testing.


PBS did a video series called "21st Century Jet" that covered the building of the Boeing 777. In it, they show the brake certification testing. They load the aircraft to MTOW, grind the brake disks down to the minimum thickness, accelerate to V1, and abort the takeoff. To become certified, the aircraft had to stop, taxi clear of the runway and then sit for five minutes (to simulate the time it may take emergency crews to reach the aircraft) without catching fire. The brakes were smoking, and all the fuse plugs in the tires melted, but they did it.

Great video series...I recommend it highly.


2H4



Intentionally Left Blank
User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 6, posted (9 years 7 months 2 hours ago) and read 8326 times:

I saw that, actually. Great production.

They have similar works that show 747 brake testing as well. An amazing amount of energy dissipated.

N


User currently offline2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8955 posts, RR: 60
Reply 7, posted (9 years 7 months 2 hours ago) and read 8321 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
DATABASE EDITOR

I reeeeeeeeeally hope they do a similar production with the 7E7....


2H4



Intentionally Left Blank
User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 8, posted (9 years 7 months 2 hours ago) and read 8305 times:

I'm quite positive they will. You can find good productions on the MD-11, 777, 747, and even some about the 380 now.

The loss of DWINGS might not help. Lots of good stuff there.

N


User currently offlineFinningleyMech From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2004, 27 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (9 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 8172 times:

While on the subject of the amount of energy absorbed by maximum braking, you will probably find this pretty interesting, especially the video (click the link).

According to Dunlop aerospace, the amount of energy absorbed by the A380 on a rejected take-off, could power a village for about an hour!

http://www.dunlop-aerospace.com/braking/rto.html



Unofficial A.net Finningley Rep
User currently offlineSoaringadi From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 472 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (9 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 8085 times:

***"Weight with Fuel Load, Cargo Load, Passenger Load all playing factors. Braking Conditions, Runway Surface and condition of the brakes also weigh in."***

Yes I completely agree.... but many times it has happened that I have seen a T7 stop before what 767's or even 737's had stopped.... And all of these were normal landings.... Therefore I asked the question




If it ain't Boeing, I'm not going !
User currently offlineSlamClick From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 10062 posts, RR: 68
Reply 11, posted (9 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 8029 times:

In day-to-day operations stopping distance is maybe 20% pilot technique, 60% exit taxiway location and 10% aircraft braking performance issues.

We all touch down in the "touchdown zone" which is designated by the aiming markers that begin 1000' from the runways threshold. We know where the terminal is, in relation to this particular runway and so, from final approach we can see which taxiway we want to use to leave the runway. In addition, we have a level of braking that we are comfortable with and these are the important factors.

That is in day-to-day operations. We venture beyond those things if they ask and we are wiling to accept LAHSO operations, or a shorter crosswind runway. Stopping anywhere near the limits of the aircraft capability is just such a rare occurrence that, as I've said, most people have never even witnessed it.

To have to stop so short, one must have just had some unusual type of emergency, not your garden-variety engine failure or something, or one has to have exercised bad judgement in using the runway that required it.

That said, some airplanes just like a lot more concrete than others. Most of them, however touch down here and exit the runway there, all day long, just about the same.




Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
User currently offlineAviation From Australia, joined Dec 2004, 1143 posts, RR: 21
Reply 12, posted (9 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 8021 times:

I would go for the 737 NG but in the way of large PAX id say 777-200

Thanks,
Aaron J Nicoli



Signed, Aaron Nicoli - Trans World Airlines Collector
User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17000 posts, RR: 67
Reply 13, posted (9 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 8013 times:

Talking physics, a large aircraft with proportionally larger brakes can theoretically stop in the same distance as a smaller one. However the heat produced by the brakes will also be proportionally larger.

However, braking from a certain speed in a certain distance will feel the same to the sacs of flesh inside regardless of which aircraft you are in. Inertia is inertia.



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineKateAA From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 89 posts, RR: 3
Reply 14, posted (9 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 8012 times:

From talking to pilots who I work with they have said that the Airbus A319 can 'stop on a dime' but the Boeing 777 can stop better then the A340-2/3...

A friend who is a pilot for Monarch Airlines (from the United Kingdom) said the Airbus A330-200 can stop quicker then the Boeing 767-400.

Is it true that the MD11 is the mother of all aircraft when it comes to stopping, due to the cargo (weight) she can carry!?

Kate.


User currently offline2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8955 posts, RR: 60
Reply 15, posted (9 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 8006 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
DATABASE EDITOR

Is it true that the MD11 is the mother of all aircraft when it comes to stopping?








Almost.  Smile


2H4



Intentionally Left Blank
User currently offlineHAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31667 posts, RR: 56
Reply 16, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 7883 times:

2H4......Without Arrestor cable too.  Smile
regds
MEL



Think of the brighter side!
User currently offline2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8955 posts, RR: 60
Reply 17, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 7870 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
DATABASE EDITOR

Well, if that isn't the mother of all aircraft when it comes to stopping, then this at least must be an aunt:






From http://www.penturbo.com:

The following is a summary of the performance data that applies under ISA conditions at the design gross weight of 28,500 lbs. Takeoff and landing distances are given at sea level, zero wind, and from a dry level surface.


TAKE-OFF AND LANDING: SHORT FIELD TECHNIQUE (STOL)
Aircraft Operating Data – PART 8 Charts
_________________________________________________________

Take-off (flaps 25º, both engines at T.O. power):

Ground Run - 800 ft

Total distance to clear 50-ft. obstacle - 1300 ft


Landing (Flaps 40º)

Ground Run - 425 ft

Total distance from 50-ft. obstacle - 945 ft


I love deHavilland Canada...  Big thumbs up


2H4



Intentionally Left Blank
User currently offline57AZ From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 2550 posts, RR: 2
Reply 18, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 7848 times:

Under ideal landing conditions, a 727-100 can land on a 2,000 foot runway. Shortest ground run that I've heard of was 1800 feet by a Boeing crew during the flight testing of the 727-100.


"When a man runs on railroads over half of his lifetime he is fit for nothing else-and at times he don't know that."
User currently offlineSlamClick From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 10062 posts, RR: 68
Reply 19, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 7795 times:

The landing ground run is not that impressive for that Caribou. The feet of stopping distance per pound of landed weight is right in the range of most jetliners.

Where the Caribou shines is getting down to the runway. An airliner on a stabilized approach over a 50 foot (non-existent) obstacle needs a thousand feet just to touch a wheel to the ground. Stopping distance comes after that.




Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
User currently offlineVikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 9781 posts, RR: 26
Reply 20, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 7756 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Not a commercial airliner, but I've heard that C-130s can stop on a dime. At an airshow I was at some years ago, a C-130 did a flight demo, and had a landing run of approx. 1,000 feet (according to the announcer; it was definitely very short). It also proceeded to taxi backwards for a short amount of time. Pretty cool. According to one website I found, a C-130 at 130,000 lbs has a landing distance of 1,400 feet. Who knows how accurate that is, though.

~Vik



"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
User currently offline57AZ From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 2550 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 7757 times:

C-130s probably have the shortest landing run of any large cargo aircraft. Back in the 1960s, the Navy was looking to improve its fleet heavy lift capabilities and actually tested the C-130 in carrier ops. The Herc operated unassisted landing and departing the deck, but the clearance between the wingtip and the island was too close for comfort.


"When a man runs on railroads over half of his lifetime he is fit for nothing else-and at times he don't know that."
User currently offlineMHG From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 776 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 7750 times:

Well, to me the DASH-7 is an airliner, too!!!

And it certainly has the best STOL capability among other a/c of that size or even smaller ones...
Ground run at T/O can be 1000ft and landing roll around 800ft(at MTOW/MLW!). Quite impressive for an a/c of that size!!!! But the DASH-7 is no throughbred in cruise, though... You can´t have it all  Big grin
Yes, the DASH-7 is my favourite among the regionals.



I miss the sound of rolls royce darts and speys
User currently offlineWindowSeat From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 1311 posts, RR: 57
Reply 23, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 7572 times:




Was on a Delta Airlines 767-400 coming into LGA. He braked so hard and reverse thrust were on right until we came to a stop. We came to stop with 3000 ft to go on a 7000 ft runway.

If not the shortest, I think this one was almost there.

cheers





I'm all in favour of keeping dangerous weapons out of the hands of fools. Let's start with keyboards.
User currently offlineXFSUgimpLB41X From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 4191 posts, RR: 37
Reply 24, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 1 day ago) and read 7559 times:

Don't forget the C-17...


Chicks dig winglets.
25 Eilennaei : Starlionblue wrote: "Talking physics, a large aircraft with proportionally larger brakes can theoretically stop in the same distance as a smaller one.
26 Post contains links Manu : The Feb issue of "Airliners" details the unpowered landing of Air Transat's C-GITS in the Azores. (full report at http://gpiaa-portugal-report.com/).
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Shortest Stopping Distance On An Airliner
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Did Wings Ever Fail On An Airliner? posted Fri Jan 20 2006 02:13:15 by TheSonntag
How Do You Change A Wheel On An Airliner? posted Sat May 7 2005 15:47:53 by Ajet
Front Window On An Airliner? posted Tue May 3 2005 21:51:39 by A346Dude
Brakes On An Airliner. posted Sun Jan 30 2005 20:01:00 by Gg190
Turn On An Airliner posted Mon Sep 17 2001 18:49:11 by Salim
Can An Airliner Land On Water? posted Wed Dec 31 2003 21:04:46 by Jutes85
Using Mercury To Bring Down An Airliner? posted Sat Aug 12 2006 03:56:37 by ArmitageShanks
An Airliner That Burn 3 Time Less Gas Than A 737 posted Wed Jun 21 2006 18:06:04 by 747400sp
What Does This Button Do On An A330? posted Wed May 17 2006 20:08:00 by MM
The Effect Of Wind On An Aircrafts Indicated Speed posted Thu Mar 2 2006 21:19:43 by Jamesbuk

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format