Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

OPT362 overrun KSGR

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
No problem. The Jetsuite 100 overrun in 2014 had similar circumstances. The FAA did a study on the runway surface. I couldn't find the results of that study. Everything else is speculation so I will wait for the facts.
 
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.

Yep, when the runway's tight and especially if it's wet, give me one of those over a B-jet with the TR's pulled off (KR's signature contribution to the aerospace industry) any day of the week. Hard to fathom how they've overrun two of them now in the past few years. Not pointing to cause in either case, but it's easy to get complacent with the 300 because it stops so well.
 
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.
 
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.

No. They say: (FOL505-018/14)

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.

To rephrase, use wet if the runway is grooved and the rain is light or ended. Use standing water for everything else. Embraer never says wet is wet. Who told you that? Unless the runway is grooved, it is impossible for it to be actively raining and have less than 3mm of water on the surface. A grooved runway can get you a wet surface. A normal runway must be standing water during active rain and for some time after the rain ends.

As to your other question, I can't answer that. All I'm saying is, don't use wet numbers except in those rare circumstances that you can. Use the POH and standing water.

On a side note, the FAA does not approve of using dry data for grooved runways: (AC91-79A)

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.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top