PDA

View Full Version : ON TV now channel 5 worlds scariest landings


Stiletto 120
12th Jan 2012, 19:10
ON TV now channel5 , 8-9pm thursday 12th jan

Already made typical jounalism errors by incorrectly identifying an Airbus A320 as a Boeing 737

Most of the stuff is on youtube.. but quite good to watch on a big tv

enjoy

5711N0205W
12th Jan 2012, 19:22
A 2 engined Concorde, what a load of :mad:

djwebby
12th Jan 2012, 19:23
You would think they would at least get aircraft types correct. The programme seems to have the wrong title also; what was scary about the Concorde landing?

zetec2
12th Jan 2012, 19:24
Second error, Concorde at Leeds Bradford, quoted "the Captain opened up Concordes 2 engines whilst deciding if he could cope with the cross wind landing", perhaps the economy version ????? PH.

Flightmech
12th Jan 2012, 19:26
Should be renamed "Worlds Shi**est Programme". P-poor research. Corrie is on ITV. Probably a better watch

Stiletto 120
12th Jan 2012, 19:28
all crap journalism aside... it is nice to see some aviation stuff on terrestrial TV as normally you require paid for tv with Discovery etc


maybe watch with the sound off..

and I had never seen that AF concorde piece before so worth an hour of my life I'm thinking

right, back to the third segment apres commercials

yates
12th Jan 2012, 19:29
At least Despatches makes an effort to be reasonably factual and not over dramatise.

This is melodramatic :mad:, albeit mildly entertaining.

The Cessna 310 was forced to ditch 10 miles short of destination, fortunately it was being shadowed by a Charlie 130 Hercules Helicopter.
Fortunately, a proper SAR helicopter was also in the vicinity to fish the bedraggled pilot from the water.

djwebby
12th Jan 2012, 19:37
Always a joy to see those St Maarten Arrivals.

zetec2
12th Jan 2012, 19:39
Bird strike with an 800 thousand horse power engine WTF ??????? PH.

Doors to Automatic
12th Jan 2012, 19:40
Programme technicalities aside that LH A320 landing still scares the sh*t out of me everytime I see it!

Stiletto 120
12th Jan 2012, 19:57
not bad all in all

but no mention of BA 38

I guess there was no footage of the landing caught on video

those guys were heros like Sully too!

Piltdown Man
12th Jan 2012, 20:07
Channel 5, 20:00-21:00 12 January 2012

Would it be possible to make a TV programme worse than "World's Scariest Plan Landings"? Given 20/20 hindsight the producers of this rubbish have managed to ignore the facts, fail to listen to the experts (who really did know their stuff), fail to check and re-confirm technical information and in general, over sensationalise events which were in general well handled by the participants.

The events shown were: JetBlue 292, TNT 737 @ EGNX & EGBB, AF Concorde @ EGNM, LH A320 @ EDDH, C310 with fuel exhaustion ditching and some idiots in a twin @ St. Barts, LOT 767 @ EPWA, Lightning strike of A380 @ EGLL, Thomson 757 @ EGCC and finally Chesley's Hudson Glider.

Does anybody know of a worse TV programme? Is it possible to make one?

Mr @ Spotty M
12th Jan 2012, 20:10
What about saying the B737 can not dump fuel, when you are on-board the Jetblue A320. :ugh:

reynoldsno1
12th Jan 2012, 20:22
Generally speaking then, it would seem best to avoid landing in Europe ....

hobbit1983
12th Jan 2012, 20:25
Those "C-130 helicopters" in use by the Hawaii Coastguard must be a bitch to hover.

172driver
12th Jan 2012, 20:31
Look guys, no journo will ever let the facts get in the way of a good story :yuk:

Artie Fufkin
12th Jan 2012, 20:32
Early suspicions about this program started when they described the "Jet Blue B737" that landed at LAX with nose gear problems.

MATELO
12th Jan 2012, 20:33
The title was the "the 10 scariest landings caught on film".... and tbh, you have to agree, as a passenger (and aircrew) they would have be pretty damn scary.

(Unless landing wheels up and belly flopping in a 767 is an everyday occurrence to you of course)

HEATHROW DIRECTOR
12th Jan 2012, 20:37
Two types of garbage in this world - the stuff you throw in the trash can and the stuff that comes from journos...

Capetonian
12th Jan 2012, 20:38
Agreed, utter crap, very poor usage of some good footage.

On a happier note, have any of you been watching Earthflight on BBC1 - stunning?

towser
12th Jan 2012, 20:48
Full of complete rubbish! As mentioned jet blue aircraft being described as a 737! C310 being followed by a coastguard 'C130 Hercules helicopter'. Concorde going around at Leeds ' powering up his 2 rolls Royce engines. The Thompson 757 at Manchester with each engine producing 800,000hp! All for entertainment!

Cymmon
12th Jan 2012, 20:53
Yep, a large amount of schoolboy errors.

Landing a 757 on one engine and it can turn over..................:ugh:

I feel the Concorde landing was a little heavy, but then again the pilot was french.:\

Also if they had moved the beach a little further away from the end of the runway that little plane thingy wouldn't have delivered its pilot straight to his towel.....:ok:

JackRalston
12th Jan 2012, 21:10
I couldn't stop facepalming when I watched it.....I noted 14 major errors.

crewmeal
13th Jan 2012, 06:51
If you switched the sound off then it was a good programme:ugh:

On a happier note, have any of you been watching Earthflight on BBC1 - stunning?

Yes more scary landings there. What a brilliant programme. This is where the BBC excel.

Mike Tee
13th Jan 2012, 07:37
Ater watching last week's Earthflight which I agree was technically good I just couldn't bring myself to sit through another hour of animals ripping out the entrails of others still alive. Just how this can be classed as family entainment beggers belief. Orrible, nature's Porn. Oh, and the Scary Landings programe was crap, we turned off halfway through the first landing (the one with the wonky wheel).

dfdasein
13th Jan 2012, 09:45
Capie, how does one living in the shadow of Table Mountain watch BBC 1? On BBC World, or are they having you somewhere ex RSA?

Mike Tee, I agree about brute nature; and those bloody baboons in the shadow of Table Mountain!

Capetonian
14th Jan 2012, 09:30
Capie, how does one living in the shadow of Table Mountain watch BBC 1? On BBC World, or are they having you somewhere ex RSA?

Next time you go to Cape Town, look very carefully at the mountain and you will see my private 350 (now uprated to 650) metre satellite dish. It feeds a NT54WD 600 Gb network of frozen superconductors cooled by cryogenic generators, which run to my house in Constantia. Every 500 metres there is a 60,000 kv relay powered by a private power station next to Koeberg - not a lot of people know about this. The signal reaches my house with very little drop in attenuation where it is amplified by a battery of 24 General Electric CX67/B boosters and fed to the box. The image on some channels tends to pixellate at times when there is a black South Easter, but mostly it works pretty well.

Edit : New picture shows upgraded antenna farm and rather unsightly cables running down into City Bowl from where they go underground.

http://i1226.photobucket.com/albums/ee406/Helios340/TM-1.png

Otherwise, of course, the second part of your sentence is applicable!

dfdasein
14th Jan 2012, 12:40
I love it!

BBC World or ex RSA?

JEM60
14th Jan 2012, 15:33
My daughter never saw it when she was up the moumtain last week!!!

Stiletto 120
15th Jan 2012, 17:29
its on again tonight (sunday 15th) on C5 at 9pm

for any of you who missed it or for you others who want a second bite of the cherry!

trident3A
15th Jan 2012, 20:17
What a dog's dinner this is!

Cymmon
15th Jan 2012, 22:05
Noooooooooooooooooooooo!:mad:

togsdragracing
16th Jan 2012, 13:07
If the title of a TV programme starts with "World's..." it is highly likely to be sensationalist nonsense.

eastern wiseguy
16th Jan 2012, 13:56
Telling the Thomson that there was an airfield "full of urgency" The phrase is Full Emergency ! Worst rubbish I have ever seen.....Are any of the Pilots Ppruners? Did they see it before it went out? Do Channel 5 give a ****?

scotbill
16th Jan 2012, 16:37
Apart from the ludicrous commentary, it was worth watching for a perfect demonstration of why the "kick off drift" method of Xwind landing should never be used.

TurboTomato
17th Jan 2012, 10:22
I was told by a 747 pilot that if you didn't do that you'd risk losing the outboard engine.

Mungo Man
17th Jan 2012, 11:47
Apart from the ludicrous commentary, it was worth watching for a perfect demonstration of why the "kick off drift" method of Xwind landing should never be used.

Rubbish. Kicking off the drift works just fine if you time it right and use enough aileron.

scotbill
17th Jan 2012, 12:46
I was told by a 747 pilot that if you didn't do that you'd risk losing the outboard engine. So why does Mr Boeing design his autopilots to give such a polished demonstration of the professional way to land in a Xwind - viz by applying a modest amount of aileron and lifting the wing with opposite rudder - the controlled slip?
Rubbish. Kicking off the drift works just fine if you time it right and use enough aileron. A perfect demonstration of how not to take part in a discussion!
Two very big ifs there - as many pilots (and their passengers) have found to their cost. Try sitting in the back row of an aeroplane 200 feet long when someone applies an agricultural boot of rudder at the last moment.
As the video demonstrated so clearly, if you mistime the rudder input and fail to control the consequent wing lift on the upwind side you are left with a severe shortage of ideas about what to do next - other than thump it in nosewheel first -- which will almost certainly damage the aeroplane.
With controlled slip you can set up early and continue with a normal flare. Relying on a last minute intervention is a skill learnt at the cost of heart-stopping moments along the way.
Learn from the autopilot if from no-one else!

TurboTomato
18th Jan 2012, 09:33
So why does Mr Boeing design his autopilots to give such a polished demonstration of the professional way to land in a Xwind - viz by applying a modest amount of aileron and lifting the wing with opposite rudder - the controlled slip?

That I cannot answer, I was merely going by what he said. I'll dig out the quote and c&p it here as it was only a few days ago on another forum. He's a BA 744 driver as far as I know.

TurboTomato
18th Jan 2012, 11:07
On a 747 the wing down method isn't used as much more than 5 degrees roll and one has lost the outboard motor.

Any comments?

scotbill
18th Jan 2012, 16:48
Note that the expression "wing down" wasn't used by me. With controlled slip the bank angle should not be more than 2 degrees. Haven't flown the 747 but otherwise have found controlled slip works for everything between DH82 and B767.
Just feel sorry for all the poor sods who have had their morale shattered by being told that "kick off drift" is the way to go. Let's face it, the word "kick" should not figure in the vocabulary of a professional pilot in connection with aeroplanes.

FlyUK
22nd Jan 2012, 22:36
Agree with scotbill. No one ever "kicks" anything on the 747, or any big aeroplane for that matter. Apart from maybe the tyres on the walk round if you want to look like a complete spanner. :p

You 'squeeze' in the rudder progressivley in the flare to reduce the crab angle at touchdown controlling the natural tendency of the wing to lift with the aileron. The 747 is designed to land with the drift angle but it doesn't feel very nice and it can't be good for the undercarridge with such high side loads. The autopilot will actually apply a very small wing down input in a crosswind autoland, but you are taught not to drop a wing ever because as has been said before you will scrape the outboard pod with a very small bank angle. Infact, if you land F30 you will touch the flaps on the ground as well if you drop a wing.

Controlled slip works as well, but in very strong crosswinds you can't control the drift of the aeroplane across the runway with more wing down....like what I did on two engine jets. Else it will end in tears (and a 'tea no biscuits' interview with the chief).

Having said that, the 747 lands beautifully with a very small bank angle applied at touchdown. :ok: