737 to SMO

[overload]

I did an IFR flight from KPSP to KSMO on Monday evening in a 737-800 (C/S Speedbird 1MS - iFly 737), the delivery controller queried that I was taking a 737 to SMO, reminding me the runway was a tad under 5000ft, and even another aircraft on the frequency expressed doubts.
I felt a little unsettled, so went back the my TopCat performance calculator (generally considered to be close to industry standards) to re-check the numbers, which are below - and if either guys tune in here, they may be a bit surprised.

Departing PSP with a full aircraft, 189 pax, 2200kg baggage (a slightly mean 25 pounds each - but fine for a day charter out and back), a healthy 5 tons of fuel - burn off 1.6 tons so 3.4 tons reserves, the numbers stack up like this (round numbers for convenience):

Take off weight 62.5 tons (max 78.4)
Landing weight 61 tons (max 62)

Surface wind SMO 340/8 to 18, so rwy 03 just,
Landing distance required 4892ft
Landing distance available 4973ft

Now that might sound a bit scary, but these landing distances have a huge safety margin built in, nearly 70% extra allowed for long landings, tardy braking, lack of headwind (only 50% of headwind considered - 3kts on this occasion, negligible).
The landing distance actual is 3000ft, just under 2000 is factored in for safety, so once it's clear there's going to be plenty of stopping room, I can ease off on the brakes.
Using FSX, stopping wasn't a problem, although I appreciate that doesn't prove anything!
But I was real glad not to screw up - boy would my face have been red!
Eugene

[tngarner]

So I think this falls into the category in the real world of is it a good idea. And what is the prosecutor who gets to play Monday morning quarterback going to ask.

The comfort of the passengers comes to mind. While you can stop the plane with hard reverse thrust and standing on the breaks, grandma is not happy that she did a face plant into the seat in front of her.

I have a buddy that drives CRJ's... he hates going into KLGA (7,000ft RWY). Says the amount of reverse thrust and breaking does not make for pleasantry. I have not been on a CRJ going in there (which I think has higher approach speeds than 737's.... Peter can check me on that) but I have been on a MD-88 and 737 many times. 7,000 ft sounds great until you are watching out the window and feel the thrust reverses on full blast and seeing the 4, 3, 2 signs go whizzing by. Sort of unsettling for those of us that know what those signs mean and know what is at the other end of the runway (swim trunks anyone). Anyway, perfectly safe but zero margin for error (ask Southwest and Delta on that one).

I would think that most 121 and 135 ops have SOP's on min runway length and landing distance. I know that at my home airport they shot a movie on the ramp using a MD-88. We have a 6,000 runway and they brought it in empty and as light as they could get it. There was a great deal of planning. More than I would have thought since I would have assumed you would have stuck a MD-88 on the 1,000 footers and rolled it out on a 6,000 runway. Apparently not, seemed to me a lot of concern about over running the runway and bending medal which is bad. Never got more of the story and why but did get to see the landing which was uneventful but WELL watched by many (all pilots and yes we all judged the landing as if we could do better having never flow anything with a turbine in it LOL).

[Keith Smith]

If you've done the flight planning and feel confident that it's going to work, then feel free.

I happened to be doing a commercial demo at the time and happened to be getting my clearance out of SMO when you arrived. You had a room full of pilots watch your landing at SMO in the 737

[NyyDave]

Ah yea I was hoping you'd post on that flight, I was online that morning parked near Keith's demo watching the landing. I heard the slight disbelief from the controller and other pilot but it looked like a pretty fun flight to me! I was however hoping for a tight circle to land but I still snapped a pic I'll post it later if it's still on my desktop.

Also on my scenery you crashed through the parking areas and hangers and ended up over he fence which I think is where a 737 would park at SMO

Dave

[overload]

Ah yea I was hoping you'd post on that flight, I was online that morning parked near Keith's demo watching the landing. I heard the slight disbelief from the controller and other pilot but it looked like a pretty fun flight to me! I was however hoping for a tight circle to land but I still snapped a pic I'll post it later if it's still on my desktop.

Also on my scenery you crashed through the parking areas and hangers and ended up over he fence which I think is where a 737 would park at SMO

Dave

Yep ,I hadn't given too much thought on where I was going to park - I had a chart up, but never know quite what to expect with default airfields! I taxied between 2 hangars, but really have no idea if they took my wingtips with them!
The circling got a bit ragged towards the end, the PFC yoke I used doesn't have a top hat switch, and my hands were full, so couldn't change views, just turning and waiting for the runway to turn up, but was too early on the turn and had to regain the center-line fairly late..
Also I flew way too wide - which wasn't a huge issue practically as I was over water, but I did some research today and found I should have stayed within 2.5 miles (CAT D circling), that would have been a tough call with the visual limitations of FSX...
I think with the ignominy of an over-run if I screwed up the turn on to final, the oversized circling was probably the pragmatic way to go - if not quite legal!
Still, it was good fun!
Eugene

[HRutila]

Half of the landing distance curves in the 737-800 available at smartcockpit.com, including those for maximum reverse thrust and no reverse thrust at maximum gross weight, show that the aircraft is quite capable of landing in under 5,000 feet. In fact you could have bomunk readings 50% less than you'd get on a dry runway (.20), with standard conditions otherwise, and still be able to land in under 5,000 feet. This is why controllers usually let pilots make these kinds of decisions.

[jmiracle]

I'm not sure if they simulate it in the iFly - but it's an actual factory option available from Boeing
"Short-field Performance Enhancement Program"
Bigger problem might be if the runway is rated for the weight..

Refs:
http://www.b737.org.uk/flightcontrols.h ... nt_Program
https://www.facebook.com/notes/pmdg/ngx ... 9443771514

[Nick Warren]

5800 and change at BUR on this overshoot. But look at those gas prices!

[ridikamus]

5800 and change at BUR on this overshoot. But look at those gas prices!

The fella driving that airplane also flew a steep descent down to a 180-ish knot touchdown 1/3 of the way down a wet runway. He got fired.

[Nick Warren]

I definitely remember the details and there is no excuse for poor decision making behind the yoke. Sometimes there just isn't much margin for error though even in the best of decision making scenarios.