Landing Long (on purpose)!

[TT1900]

Just tell them where you're parking and what you'd like to do. On the off chance they don't permit landing long there is a valid reason. I've always found ATC in YWG to be very proactive and accommodating.

ATC have a job to do as well; if you make their life easier they normally return the favour.

[A346Dude]

Do you have a reference for that A346dude?

Unfortunately I do not, all I have is my experience watching it happen. A long landing may save you 1 minute of taxiing, but if it occurs at the wrong time and costs 3 planes waiting for departure 1 minute each, it's a net loss for the airport.

As others have already said, if you want a long landing just ask. If it can be accommodated without unduly affecting the other users, it will be approved. I'm sure there are exceptions across the country where due to a particular configuration (the first available exit is a common intersection departure point for example), long landings are the norm and are expected.

[digits_]

I'm curious what whould happen if they don't approve a long landing. How much runway are you allowed to use in that case? How many seconds can you stay on the runway? Where do you have to touch down? As far as I know, "long landing" isn't defined anywhere. Let's say they don't approve a long landing, you touch down 60% down the runway and come to a stop at the end of the runway. Which CAR did you violate?

Another thing to consider: a "long landing" in a 172 could use up less runway than a "short landing" in a 737.

[photofly]

If you ask to land long, and are denied, and do it anyway, you'll probably get told to pull up and go around because you're not fitting in with whatever the ATCO has planned.

That's the case whether your disapproved long landing is deliberate or just plain incompetent.
ATC doesn't know or care about the difference.

And if you're told to pull up and go around and fail to obey then there is a regulation against that.

Regarding the difference between the expected landing roll of a 737 and a 172: most ATCOs are competent enough to plan for the difference beginning when they find out which you are. Unless you can switch aircraft type over the threshold they already have figured out what a "normal" landing for you is, and where they might expect you to exit.

[CpnCrunch]

Do you have a reference for that A346dude?

Ask ATC and they'll confirm this. At a tower tour at YYJ a few years ago they specifically told us they expect pilots to ask if they want to land long, as otherwise it could screw up their plans. They also expect us to exit at the first taxiway we're able to exit on, and ask permission if exiting on another runway.

[lhalliday]

I'm curious what whould happen if they don't approve a long landing. How much runway are you allowed to use in that case? How many seconds can you stay on the runway? Where do you have to touch down? As far as I know, "long landing" isn't defined anywhere. Let's say they don't approve a long landing, you touch down 60% down the runway and come to a stop at the end of the runway. Which CAR did you violate?

I've gotten growled at by Abbotsford Tower "minimum delay!!!" while floating along 07 (9600 feet) in ground effect. YMMV.

...laura

[Beefitarian]

So OP, did you make the flight? If so what happened?

I am enjoying the discussion and it makes me understand a bit of why they chased all the 172s out of YYC. People flying an approach at 65KIAS trying to land on the numbers, then taxiing along the runway at a walking speed?

11000' of runway and I would plan to be on approach pretty fast until maybe a half mile out on final. Then I'm slowing down before ground effect, typically aiming for the second set of the double stripy things. Exiting first taxiway once I'm touched down at a reasonable speed to turn. Plan to get out of the way if using one of those high speed exits since the faster guys behind might need it.

Sure this is just me wistfully reminiscing about something I would do last century but. I got along great with the big planes at the big airports.

I tried to fit in. Stay out of the way, follow ATC instructions, inform them right away if "Unable.", keep my speed up, get down and off the landing surface as quickly as I can. I also recall tower suggesting a few times, "You may want to land a bit long if you are planning to go to xxxxx."

Last month at Springbank, I ended up being too far along and too fast to exit the taxi way I intended to use because I am dreadfully out of practice only flying a couple of times a year. Fortunately I'm still capable of knowing I would never try to turn that fast on wheels and let it go by. I would have ended up going further if I was solo. I had finally slowed down without brakes and the instructor quickly asked if we could exit onto the other runway.

I'm not proud of my lack of currency and of course YBW is a training airport but point being no one was too fussed about things going wrong for me on that one.

I certainly would want to be much more current before going back somewhere busier.

[CpnCrunch]

What about taking off long? A few days ago I did a high speed taxi down the runway for a few thousand feet at YYJ before taking off in a bugsmasher, without telling ATC. But in the circumstances, it was the only reasonable option...

[youhavecontrol]

I fly at a busy controlled airport all the time. I always state my intension if planning to do a long landing because it's abnormal and good airmanship says "nofity them" Sometimes ATC has a particular taxiway they are expecting you to take. The idea that "you are cleared to land on the whole runway, so just land wherever you want" is ridiculous when you are in a small aircraft with a slow approach speed. I've been asked to land short, for the nearest taxiway to get off in time for a large aircraft behind me, and other times, asked to land long to clear the intersection where departing aircraft were waiting for me.
At my home airport, our controllers request that we say our intensions for long landing every time because when someone faster is behind you and you're floating down the runway for no good reason, Tower can't clear the next aircraft to land until you are wheels-down with taxi instructions. They can get pretty pissed-off waiting for you to finally touch-down.

[co-joe]

I always consider it an airmainship thing. If I plan to do anything other than a 3 degree landing in the TDZ markings I'll let tower know on initial call with the expression "with you for 16 long, or with you for 16 short". This prompts the tower controller to let you know if that works.

A great technique for a long landing (in VMC) is to fly the glide slope 2 dots high. This way you still meet all but one of the "stable approach criteria" maximizing safety and efficiency. It lands you a good 400' long. From there in a light single a "hover taxi" is usually acceptable. If you tell tower that you might even get a good laugh out of them.

That said, both are strictly prohibited by my employer and would result in a tersely worded email...

[digits_]

with you

Whoever started using those words over the radio deserves some unpleasantness in his life.

We got rid of the full "ACTPA", let's kill this one next.