WestWind Airlines

Hello!

Just came to ask if it is essential that the aircraft touches down exactly on the 500ft markes and if the case that the aircraft aircraft touches down before or after these markers what would be the appropriate action - I'm assuming a great deviation would mean a missed approach and go-around and if it is only by  small distance then the landing could continue as normal?

Thanks for any answers. 

---

Graeme Paterson - WWA1965
Command Captain - Toronto Hub
No Real-World Experience (But content on learning more about it!)
Flight Simulator X/Flight Simulator 2004
Radar Contact v4.3
Current Aircraft: Dreamwings Bombardier Dash 8-Q200

You are correct. There is no requirement to touch down on the markers. A good landing will usually be pretty close. As long as you touch down safely and stop before the end of the RW,  you are OK. It is also not good to attempt to land short of the markers as a sudden change in the wind can reduce your lift and cause you to land before the runway. Makes for a very bad day.

---

EVP Hub Operations, Sr. Test Pilot
Senior Command Captain +4
RWP SEL Instrument Rating (almost)
FSX-SP2 + Radar Contact
Orbiter, FaceBook

As far as I'm aware the 500ft markers are only a visual aid for the pilot. As long as the pilot lands after the runway threshold, and lands with enough stopping distance available, there is no problem. Judging the remaining stopping distance is up to the pilot ... he can base this on intersection locations, rwy markings, etc. On our military bases we have additional markers alongside the runway indicating distance to the cable to help pilots in their decision making.

---

Paul Haubourdin
WSSS HM
Command Captain
W7/FSX/ASA/LVLD/PMDG/CS/...
+800hrs VATSIM
Mil ATC & CPL-H

A runway is nothing but a waste of good parking space ... Real pilots only need an H to land on!

I suppose it's common sense.

I'm mainly flying the Dash 8-Q200 and B1900D at the moment so I think I don't need all of the 9,000ft of runways I've been landing at in my little regionals between Canada and the USA.

Thanks everyone for clarifying!

---

Graeme Paterson - WWA1965
Command Captain - Toronto Hub
No Real-World Experience (But content on learning more about it!)
Flight Simulator X/Flight Simulator 2004
Radar Contact v4.3
Current Aircraft: Dreamwings Bombardier Dash 8-Q200

They are indeed for aiming purposes. It's good practice to try and land on them but it's not a problem to land some distance behind them. If you consistently float over them you might be flying a little fast on the approach. Remember that the speed in the lift formula is squared, so a little extra speed (5 knots to fast has a big effect) means a lot of extra lift and thus floating.

---

Wiek Schoenmakers, WWA2351, Command Captain,
HM KATL hub
3x 25 hours in one month
6 x 50 hours in one month
2x 100 hours in one month
100 hrs in A/C type: A306, A320, A332, A343, B763
5 million pounds
P001
Longest Passenger route

Bad Landing

 

Good Landing

 

---

Eoin Coates

WWA2351:

They are indeed for aiming purposes. It's good practice to try and land on them but it's not a problem to land some distance behind them. If you consistently float over them you might be flying a little fast on the approach. Remember that the speed in the lift formula is squared, so a little extra speed (5 knots to fast has a big effect) means a lot of extra lift and thus floating.

I love Physics 

L = (1/2) d v² s CL

• L = Lift, which must equal the airplane's weight in pounds
• d = density of the air. This will change due to altitude. These values can be found in a I.C.A.O. Standard Atmosphere Table.
• v = velocity of an aircraft expressed in feet per second
• s = the wing area of an aircraft in square feet
• CL = Coefficient of lift , which is determined by the type of airfoil and angle of attack.

 From NASA's website

I take it if I have all this data - I could calculate on the fly what a good approach speed would be (seeing as some aircraft lack Vref tables making it difficult to predict a good speed) Although I doubt FS is not exactly a full believer in 100% Physics.

---

Graeme Paterson - WWA1965
Command Captain - Toronto Hub
No Real-World Experience (But content on learning more about it!)
Flight Simulator X/Flight Simulator 2004
Radar Contact v4.3
Current Aircraft: Dreamwings Bombardier Dash 8-Q200

Only the stall behaviour is not as it should be. But at speed the physics work pretty well. My instructor called is HELP (High Energy Landing Problem).

 

 

---

Wiek Schoenmakers, WWA2351, Command Captain,
HM KATL hub
3x 25 hours in one month
6 x 50 hours in one month
2x 100 hours in one month
100 hrs in A/C type: A306, A320, A332, A343, B763
5 million pounds
P001
Longest Passenger route

Eoin Coates:

Bad Landing

 

= Eoin's landings

 

 

---

Wiek Schoenmakers, WWA2351, Command Captain,
HM KATL hub
3x 25 hours in one month
6 x 50 hours in one month
2x 100 hours in one month
100 hrs in A/C type: A306, A320, A332, A343, B763
5 million pounds
P001
Longest Passenger route

WWA1965:

WWA2351:

They are indeed for aiming purposes. It's good practice to try and land on them but it's not a problem to land some distance behind them. If you consistently float over them you might be flying a little fast on the approach. Remember that the speed in the lift formula is squared, so a little extra speed (5 knots to fast has a big effect) means a lot of extra lift and thus floating.

I love Physics 

L = (1/2) d v² s CL

• L = Lift, which must equal the airplane's weight in pounds
• d = density of the air. This will change due to altitude. These values can be found in a I.C.A.O. Standard Atmosphere Table.
• v = velocity of an aircraft expressed in feet per second
• s = the wing area of an aircraft in square feet
• CL = Coefficient of lift , which is determined by the type of airfoil and angle of attack.

 From NASA's website

I take it if I have all this data - I could calculate on the fly what a good approach speed would be (seeing as some aircraft lack Vref tables making it difficult to predict a good speed) Although I doubt FS is not exactly a full believer in 100% Physics.

 

Graeme;

I fly a lot of different aircraft at different weights, without tables available. A technique I use is to start with ~150kts and begin bleeding off speed. Once on the glideslope, I pay attention to what kind of attitude it takes to stay on it...

If the nose is pitched up just a couple of degrees (with gear & full flaps down), the speed is good. Nose down I know I'm going too fast, nose up I know I'm too slow. Hard to explain but it seems to work well enough.

---

Matt Smith, WWA2218, CAT IV
Rio de Janeiro (SBGL) Hub
FSX Acceleration/Vista64

WWA2351:

Eoin Coates:

Bad Landing

 

= Eoin's landings

 

 

= Wiek's 747 landings 

(sorry Eoin - beat you there)

---

Graeme Paterson - WWA1965
Command Captain - Toronto Hub
No Real-World Experience (But content on learning more about it!)
Flight Simulator X/Flight Simulator 2004
Radar Contact v4.3
Current Aircraft: Dreamwings Bombardier Dash 8-Q200

WWA1965:

WWA2351:

Eoin Coates:

Bad Landing

 

= Eoin's landings

 

 

= Wiek's 747 landings 

(sorry Eoin - beat you there)

 Naah, mine look like this:

 

 

---

Wiek Schoenmakers, WWA2351, Command Captain,
HM KATL hub
3x 25 hours in one month
6 x 50 hours in one month
2x 100 hours in one month
100 hrs in A/C type: A306, A320, A332, A343, B763
5 million pounds
P001
Longest Passenger route

I've always been taught to aim for the 1,000 foot markers, at least in a jet.  This ensures adequate height across the airport boundary (assuming a 3 degree glideslope) for the entire aircraft, and is the point that a visual glide path system is set up to bring you too if you are on the glide path.

Typical approach has you aim for the 1,000 foot markers and then touchdown just beyond that point.  I've never really been sure what the 500 foot markers are for, other than consistency in the markings on the runway.

---

EHAM-YSSY B772LR
ATP, CFI, CFII & MEI, CL30, 727, 737-200, DC-9
FS9, Active Sky 6.5 w/ASG, FSPax

VPCargo:

  I've never really been sure what the 500 foot markers are for, other than consistency in the markings on the runway.

The FAA placed them there for the DE so they can critique exactly how far down the runway you were when you landed on your checkride. 

Actually it has to do with the FAAs definition of the landing area, "the first 3,000' for the runway" and is why that portion of the runway carries the precision runway markings. The Captain's bars are at the intercept of the glideslope and the runway and are located 1,000' down the runway. This is regardless of the glideslope for the approach (be it a 2.5 degree glideslope or a London City 5 degree glideslope). Your visual approach system i.e. VASI or PAPI should also lead you to a glideslope that will land you at the 1,000' touchdown markers. On runways shorter than 6,900' portion of the touchdown zone may be eliminated. Thus on a 5,000' runway you may only have the 500' marker, captains bars, and the 1,500' marker. The 1,000' markers are suppose to be on all runways that have jet traffic.

 From the AIM: Runway Touchdown Zone Markers. The touchdown zone markings identify the touchdown zone for landing operations and are coded to provide distance information in 500 feet (150m) increments. These markings consist of groups of one, two, and three rectangular bars symmetrically arranged in pairs about the runway centerline, as shown in FIG 2-3-1, Precision Instrument Runway Markings. For runways having touchdown zone markings on both ends, those pairs of markings which extend to within 900 feet (270m) of the midpoint between the thresholds are eliminated.

I use the 500' markers when conducting maximum energy (short field) landings.

---

-KenG
A358 (Retired)

Mike Gibbs:

You are correct. There is no requirement to touch down on the markers. A good landing will usually be pretty close. As long as you touch down safely and stop before the end of the RW,  you are OK. It is also not good to attempt to land short of the markers as a sudden change in the wind can reduce your lift and cause you to land before the runway. Makes for a very bad day.

Amen to this Mike!  I landed an A340-600 (world's longest pax jet, right?) "just a little shy" of the 1000' bars...not on purpose but it looked great from the cockpit anyway.

When I watched the replay from outside the plane I saw that my gear barely cleared the threshold. If it had been at TNCM I would have collected  a couple of sunbathers, or at least the chain link fence..

---

Matt Smith, WWA2218, CAT IV
Rio de Janeiro (SBGL) Hub
FSX Acceleration/Vista64