[Username Protected]

Phenom Pilots are excited to announce our 2nd Webinar - Phenom Accident Study and Runway Overrun Prevention

The main takeaway: When landing on a wet runway (other than a grooved runway) use Contaminated Standing Water numbers instead of WET for landing performance planning.



This is an updated presentation of the excellent session Tom Norton (Phenom DPE) held at the Newport Beach event last September, where Tom reviewed Accident statistics with an emphasis on Runway Overrun Prevention.

[Username Protected]

Thanks for the invite (Username Protected). I intend to be there.
Tom’s presentation in New Port Beach was right on target. I would like to make a comment in support of Captain Norton’s great seminar.
As you know, l am perhaps the oldest Phenom 100 pilot, still flying this fine aircraft!
(I started with JetSuite, the first E-500 operator in the world in 2009.)
Experiencing the initial growing pains with the “Phenom brakes” and watching several of my own colleagues running off the runways around the country, put a respectable amount of fear in me since.
Mind you, like Tom, l come from the airline world where we operated into far more challenging airports and weather. But fortunately with aircraft that were certified and tested under far more rigorous standards and regulations.
For example, l flew many “Checkerboard” approaches into the old Kai Tak airport in a 747 during the Monsoon Season, or landing a United 757 in KSNA in the middle of pouring rains of Southern California, with no problems.
However, I did have a Hyd(Username Protected)lic Failure in a Phenom 100 in the middle of a heavy storm in 2010, that required us to divert to LAX, instead of my original destination SNA.
The only reason, I am still here, sharing my stories, is because I don’t necessarily trust the Embraer’s computer generated performance numbers, or have the confidence to land the “Mighty 100” on a wet 3500’ runway!

[Username Protected]

Did you ever have to fly the missed approach at Kai Tak - it was a back course localizer?

[Username Protected]

Hi (Username Protected),
I sure did, brother!
That approach was basically an LDA Approach into the side of a mountain, followed by a last minute sharp right steep descending turn onto the runway, at minimums.
In the horrendous downpours, associated turbulence and c(Username Protected)winds of the Monsoons. One out of three or four approaches was to a miss!
The old timers l flew co-pilot for in the 707 days used to call it “where they separate the men, from boys!”
Did you ever go there in your KC-135?
Rusty

[Username Protected]

We are up to 175 registrants for the Zoom so far, lots of interest!

[Username Protected]

Never w the tanker but I flew in there several times in a Lear 35. Thought I was going to get hit by the kids playing basketball on my way to the checker-board. Carrying 92% power in the turn to final was sporty as heck.

[Username Protected]

The replay of the webinar is available on YouTube. Thank you Tom Norton - great presentation!

The main takeaway: When landing on a wet runway (other than a grooved runway) use Contaminated Standing Water numbers instead of WET for landing performance planning.

[Username Protected]

A big shout out to Tom Norton for very much needed discussion and presentation.
I discovered last weekend that if one doesn’t want to fudge any numbers, landing with 8400lbs, and wet runway in no wind situation at my home base, difficult to land with a wet runway, at least per the numbers! (Factored landing distance for wet, grooved)
I was/am surprised, because I am sure others have landed there before..

[Username Protected]

That was a fantastic presentation. Thank you very much, Tom! Amazing how many accidents or incidents are coming from landings. It inspired me to put together an iOS app to calculate the operational landing distances. I was thinking about doing that when they came out, but your presentation convinced me it was worthwhile!