PilotEdge Forums

I agree. The trick of course is minimum weight on approach (read, not quite legal maybe, haven't done the calcs yet), and Vref lower than low (there is some slight extra in the specs), land firmer than firm (the tensiometres will start reporting airframe stress immediately; poor captain), and of course run reverse lower than 80 knots (very naughty), maybe blow a tyre or two, cook the brakes with early manual breaking, "cabin crew be seated for landing", LOL (guess which captain is going back into the sim for a while).

Even with the displaced threshold, you have 7590ft of runway at SAN. Not trying to be facetious, but what is the challenge here?

Keith Smith wrote:Even with the displaced threshold, you have 7590ft of runway at SAN. Not trying to be facetious, but what is the challenge here?

For me, it's the lack of glidescope - so constantly referring to the chart (i.e. synching the DME and altitude) while trying to manage the speed, not hit the parking garage, and keep my eyes off the bonobos dancing around Balboa Park.

But you make a good point... the runway length makes for a pretty tolerant landing... no matter how you slice it.

If it helps reduce the workload, it shouldn't be a constant trip back and forth from the chart. Once you are approaching the final approach fix (REEBO), you care about two things...1) the altitude at which you can cross the FAF, and after that, the MDA.

It's really only if you have stepdowns inside the FAF that it requires more memory work, or more referencing of the chart.

So, in this case, once you cross CIJHI, (7.4nm from the MAP), you only need two numbers, "2000 until REEBO, then 680ft". Done

Ok cool. Might give that a try tonight then....... cheers.

Keith Smith wrote:Even with the displaced threshold, you have 7590ft of runway at SAN. Not trying to be facetious, but what is the challenge here?

Interesting question. BTW, it is challenging for me. Sometimes it's easy, most times it's hard. That stupid building is so annoying I let it distract my level of concentration. What idiot approved that, assuming it is real. In the PMDG B747-400, to have a chance you have to be at Vref+ before the building, and then after it you have to get down without going to idle thrust. Invariably I either come in hot or come in too close to stall. I am never happy with any landing on 27. If I ever find a PMDG B747-400 captain who can repeatedlly do the landing well, I will nail their feet to the floor and watch them continuously until I learn their secret.

Kim Ellis wrote:That stupid building is so annoying I let it distract my level of concentration.

I lol'd! I read some interesting history/debate about the glidescope obstruction for rwy 27 the other day. If I find the link again, I'll post it.

Now this is pathetic: last night I wanted to try it one more time (before tonight) and did a quick VFR hop from a private field into SAN/27. Everything was fine, and I was keeping Keith's above advice in mind, but I FORGOT TO DISENGAGE MY AUTO SPEED prior to landing (I did disengage the autopilot, but in the Lear, the auto speed stays alive). So I was pelting down the *ample* 10,000 feet of runway with reverse thrust, full brakes... but still not slowing down fast enough. Very late when I realized, and I busted through the fence at the end of the field and literally put the nose wheel into sand on the harbor. What a dufus.

Hope to do better tonight.

(additional planning for an encore flight, going on in the chat room right now....)

Cyrus wrote:

Kim Ellis wrote:That stupid building is so annoying I let it distract my level of concentration.

I lol'd! I read some interesting history/debate about the glidescope obstruction for rwy 27 the other day. If I find the link again, I'll post it.

I would be interested in that.

My photo journal from the flight here.

My thanks to all the pilots for joining and to the PE controllers for doing such a great job on the other end!