Dooker
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2007
- Posts
- 344
Auto spoilers on the ground and they also suplement the aelerons in flight. Carbon brakes on a dry runway is like hitting the 3 wire.
My bad. I was thinking of the 100 Phenom.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Auto spoilers on the ground and they also suplement the aelerons in flight. Carbon brakes on a dry runway is like hitting the 3 wire.
Auto spoilers on the ground and they also suplement the aelerons in flight. Carbon brakes on a dry runway is like hitting the 3 wire.
FYI - The POH has much longer landing distances for standing water than APG or the QRH. Always check the POH for anything other than dry runways and NEVER use wet numbers.
Embraer says wet is wet. None of this reflective nonsense or grooved is effectively dry bs. I'll wait for the facts as far as required runway distance is concerned.
By definition, a wet runway is a pavement covered by less than 3mm (0.125?) of water and the standing water has more than 25% of the pavement covered with more than 3mm of water.
The amount of rain, at the moment of the landing, may be an indicator. Moderate to heavy rain increases the possibility of having greater water quantities on the runway and using standing water numbers may be more adequate than wet. Runway grooving is also a factor, but do not overestimate it. If you know that the runway drainage is good, the wet numbers may be used, but if the runway is unknown, be conservative. Also, be careful when evaluating a light rain over a non-grooved runway or a concrete polished surface. This may result in a slippery surface, which reduces braking action. In this case, the standing water numbers are more recommended than wet.
1. MANUFACTURERS AND AIRPLANE FLIGHT MANUAL (AFM) DATA. In
accordance with Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) certification rules, the FAA-approved
AFM data are determined only for dry runway conditions. Some manufacturers provide
supplemental FAA-approved AFM data for operation on wet grooved runways. Manufacturers
may also provide supplemental advisory landing distance data for conditions beyond those
required by regulation; however, they are not used in lieu of the advised 15 percent safety
margin. The data contained in these supplements, although not FAA approved, are based on the
same flight test data used to generate the FAA-approved dry runway takeoff and landing
performance presented in the AFM. Performance is calculated using analytical corrections to
dry runway performance utilizing methods appropriate for aircraft certification outside the
United States. Again, at least a 15 percent safety margin should be applied to these data.