Long runway - landing on 2nd half

D

dnhill

Pre-Flight
Joined
Oct 10, 2012
Messages
53
Location
Southeast Texas
Display Name
Display name:
hill
Question. At a controlled airport with a long runway 8,000ft+, I want to land on the last half of the runway because the shop I need to visit is at the end of the runway, do I need to ask permission from the tower to land "long?" My plane can stop without problem in 300' and I really don't want to taxi more than a mile when I can fly that mile down the runway.

Thanks in advance.
 
When I was based at SGF and hangared at the extreme north end of runway 02/20, I would always ask the tower "permission to land long" when cleared to land on 02. Request always granted. Don't know if I needed to ask but I did.

I'd make a normal approach, round out, add power, continue up the runway at 5' AGL, chop power, and set down in the last third.

Good practice.
 
dnhill said:
Question. At a controlled airport with a long runway 8,000ft+, I want to land on the last half of the runway because the shop I need to visit is at the end of the runway, do I need to ask permission from the tower to land "long?" My plane can stop without problem in 300' and I really don't want to taxi more than a mile when I can fly that mile down the runway.

Thanks in advance.
Click to expand...

You should let the tower know. Otherwise they expect you to touch down at the touch down point and exit the runway as soon as reasonable. If you fly a mile down the runway at 60 knots, that's about a minute you'll be taking up the airspace that you otherwise don't have to. It's pretty damn rare that it would matter, so I've never heard this request denied, but it's the smart thing to do.
 
This is dangerous. Why put yourself at extra risk to save a few dollars on the gas?
 
Don't make a long landing without asking first. ATC normally expects you to land near the approach end and vacate the active runway without unnecessary delay. For your situation I'd just make the request on downwind, or some time before you're cleared to land. I did it all the time when I was based at Van Nuys: "Bugsmasher 123 requests long landing for [name of FBO]." That way the controller knew where I was going, and it helped him sort things out.

If a long landing would mess the sequence up too badly, ATC will just tell you "unable" and have you make a normal approach and landing.
 
I'm not into the permission thing but I do advise the tower I will be using the whole runway and turning at the end. Just polite.
 
On sunday I landed at the halfway mark on a 10,000' foot runway. On downwind we told tower we would touch down at taxiway P (the halfway mark). He said no problem.
 
MultiMediaWill said:
This is dangerous. Why put yourself at extra risk to save a few dollars on the gas?
Click to expand...

It has nothing to do with the gas savings as it is negligible in my plane with a 912, it is that it will be over 105 degrees outside the plane (hotter inside) and I would like to avoid a little bit of the heat.

Thanks everyone for the advise!
 
I'm not sure I would use the phraseology 'land long'. I would request 'second half' or 'departure end runway xx'.
 
Direct C51 said:
I'm not sure I would use the phraseology 'land long'. I would request 'second half' or 'departure end runway xx'.
Click to expand...

Always heard it, and always used "land long".

Why wouldn't you use it?
 
FWIW, at SDM (GA is all the way at the end of an 8000 ft runway) I have heard folks request to land long and occasionally the tower will deny the request due to trailing traffic.
 
I give them a heads-up, which they usually acknowledge. It's only unsafe if you can't do it safely. :)
 
I flew into KGJT a few weeks ago and at just past midfield downwind, Tower told me to turn base immediately and make my approach at best speed. The FBO was at the departure end of the 10,500 ft runway so I got a land long opportunity without asking. He didn't say why but I assume it was for spacing reasons. It was a bit strange making a very short approach down the runway but it all worked out in the end.
 
Greg Bockelman said:
What is dangerous?
Click to expand...

This is dangerous because if you have an emergency where extra runway is needed then you will find yourself regretting the 'land long' decision as you plow right into the wall at the end of the runway.
 
At IXD (when landing to the north). I will sometimes throw in a "landing long, will need to exit on Bravo". At least, now that the alternate exit of 4/22 is closed for taxiing.
 
ja_user said:
At IXD (when landing to the north). I will sometimes throw in a "landing long, will need to exit on Bravo". At least, now that the alternate exit of 4/22 is closed for taxiing.
Click to expand...

On the other hand, one of the new controllers (I think he came over from OJC) was working the last time I flew there. He had a jet coming in behind me. I pretty much knew he'd want off the rwy right away - so I pulled off on a twy just as he asked me to expedite.

Keep your SA - help the tower and tower will help you.
 
dnhill said:
Question. At a controlled airport with a long runway 8,000ft+, I want to land on the last half of the runway because the shop I need to visit is at the end of the runway, do I need to ask permission from the tower to land "long?" My plane can stop without problem in 300' and I really don't want to taxi more than a mile when I can fly that mile down the runway.
Click to expand...

If cleared to land without any restriction the full length of the runway is available to you so the short answer is, "No." However, doing that unannounced could gum up the works a bit so you shouldn't. Just tell the controller you'd like to land long.
 
MultiMediaWill said:
This is dangerous. Why put yourself at extra risk to save a few dollars on the gas?
Click to expand...

Danger in using the far half of an 8000' runway? What's the danger in that compared to landing on a 4000' runway when your plane can stop without problem in 300'?
 
When I was in training my instructors would request a long landing on a 5,500 foot runway sometimes because the flight school was at the end of north side so when landing in that direction we would have some fun and try and have somewhat of a spot landing contest as the intersecting runway goes trough at about the halfway point. It was fun but I honestly never ask to land long anymore. The expression "the two most useless things to a pilot are the gas he or she left at the ramp and the runway behind him or her" always rings in my head.
 
MultiMediaWill said:
This is dangerous because if you have an emergency where extra runway is needed then you will find yourself regretting the 'land long' decision as you plow right into the wall at the end of the runway.
Click to expand...

Name one of these "emergencies" you would have in a single engine light aircraft that would put you into a wall after 3-4000ft....I can understand not doing it in a larger twin/turbojet, but losing brakes in a 172 isn't going to ruin your day.

And on that note, wouldn't your same reasoning prevent you from landing on anything LESS than 8, 9...10 thousand feet? Gonna be hard to find easy fuel stops...
 
Used to do it all the time at WPAFB since one of the runways was 12600' and the Aero Club was at one end. If the Tower didn't tell you to enter midway on base, SOP was to fly the length and land in the last 3000'.

Cheers
 
A couple of things:

1 - It is good form and polite to advise "landing long" whether controlled and uncontrolled. Things are better and safer when everyone knows what to expect.

2 - You do not need "permission" or a "clearance" to land long. When cleared for landing, you own and have use and control of the whole runway. Again, better to advise the controller of your intentions, so you don't cause a conflict.

What the controller CAN do, if you advise landing long and he says "unable, make a standard approach and exit as soon as possible", then you argue, his next words may be "cancel landing clearance, fly upwind, I'll call your crosswind and sequence you for a new approach".

We land long all the time at FTG when Runway 8 is in use. The turnoff to the hangars is about 5000 feet down an 8000ft runway.
 
lr60plt said:
Name one of these "emergencies" you would have in a single engine light aircraft that would put you into a wall after 3-4000ft....I can understand not doing it in a larger twin/turbojet, but losing brakes in a 172 isn't going to ruin your day.

And on that note, wouldn't your same reasoning prevent you from landing on anything LESS than 8, 9...10 thousand feet? Gonna be hard to find easy fuel stops...
Click to expand...
And to think I regularly fly into/out of a 1400' airstrip.

Oh, the horror of it all.
 
MultiMediaWill said:
This is dangerous because if you have an emergency where extra runway is needed then you will find yourself regretting the 'land long' decision as you plow right into the wall at the end of the runway.
Click to expand...

He's right... with a required distance of 300ft (though that's probably exaggerated), landing halfway down the 8000 foot runway would only give 13 times your required distance. And if someone cut my brakes and greased the wheels beforehand, and I subsequently forgot to reduce the throttle, I could run straight off the runway and into the retention wall they just built right on the runway threshold. I only land the 172 with at least 6K feet in case this ever happens.
 
Landing on the numbers at Castle (KMER) will have you taxiing forward to an exit for more time than if you land long. With 11,800' plus 500' of overrun, and 300' wide (striped down to 150'), you'd have to try pretty hard to run out of pavement in almost anything short of a B-52. Plus there is about 10 miles of fields beyond the overrun.
 
ebykowsky said:
He's right... with a required distance of 300ft (though that's probably exaggerated), landing halfway down the 8000 foot runway would only give 13 times your required distance. And if someone cut my brakes and greased the wheels beforehand, and I subsequently forgot to reduce the throttle, I could run straight off the runway and into the retention wall they just built right on the runway threshold. I only land the 172 with at least 6K feet in case this ever happens.
Click to expand...

Could that not also happen if you touched down with the full 8000' in front of you?
 
roncachamp said:
Could that not also happen if you touched down with the full 8000' in front of you?
Click to expand...

Yes, but by then I will have pulled the BRS on the Cirrus I'm flying. Or if I'm in a Cessna, I will have had time to think of a solution, MacGuyver my way out, or duck and roll.
 
timwinters said:
And to think I regularly fly into/out of a 1400' airstrip.

Oh, the horror of it all.
Click to expand...

Lol,

Yep, you are giving up safety margin landing long or going to a short strip.

Seems to me that they guy who gets to decide just how much runway margin I need in 91 ops is me, so if I only want an extra 3700 ft...
 
A little error on the landing distance. In no wind the POH states concrete/grass 479/364. In Texas, it always seems like there is a wind. The plane (PiperSport) stalls at 32 knots with full flaps.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top