AC1804 Montego Bay Report Released

[cossack]

The CSA sidestep was nice to watch as it looked smooth and completely in control. Both turns were gentle as was the touchdown that followed. Maybe they had briefed the possibility and were ready for it when offered? Could/should crews into YYZ brief for the possibility of a sidestep?

What about JFK and the CRI VOR approach to 13L being given, not offered, 13R at CRI VOR?

This practice is common at some airports. Orlando and Marseilles come to mind.
The only time a sidestep could result in an unstable approach is if the threshold of the proposed parallel runway was closer than the one the landing had been planned on, like if one was stable for 33L and was offered 33R.
Otherwise, this should be not be a problem.

Another reason to refuse is if the proposed runway is shorter and the pilot has doubts about the stopping capability on the shorter runway. Again this should not be a problem in YYZ in dry and uncontaminated conditions......

Thank you for your input.
I have offered 33R to traffic on 33L when it has caught up the traffic it is following. Not an uncommon scenario. Having nothing on 33R at the time is more uncommon though so an overshoot is more often the outcome. Its about 2000' (a third of a mile) closer than 33L which would put you 100 or so feet above the glide slope.

Going from 24L to 24R for the same reason also involves a closer threshold, albeit not by much, and a slightly longer runway but with a very unforgiving overrun area..

As long as the runways are being used to the max sidesteps will be offered to avoid an overshoot. If you don't like it, say unable.

Thanks again.

[Eric Janson]

@TheStig

Just to clarify that my post refers only to my personal situation - I'm certainly not calling for anyone to be fired.

I see that what I wrote could be interpreted in several ways - hope this clarifies things.