Hard TAP A321 Landing at Madeira Airport
I had a bit of fun with this video.
The sun was almost exactly perpendicular to the runway at the time of the event. https://gyazo.com/dcbba4289e42f176e3e9e2c870fd62f3
So the airplane shadow shows us a very good indication of the airplane above the runway. And assuming the video is real speed, you can compute a ground speed.
I'm measuring 11s to fly around 930m, so a ground speed of 160-165kt.
The METAR was : METAR LPMA 261100Z 35016G29KT 300V030 9999 SCT015 17/05 Q1018=
It has a runway 05 so it had a bit of headwind component.Around 8-15kt. So that's an indicated airspeed around 170-175kt
Is that a normal speed for a 321 ? The mere sight of the pitch angle during flare tells you it isn't, even without any knowledge of this particular model.
The sun was almost exactly perpendicular to the runway at the time of the event. https://gyazo.com/dcbba4289e42f176e3e9e2c870fd62f3
So the airplane shadow shows us a very good indication of the airplane above the runway. And assuming the video is real speed, you can compute a ground speed.
I'm measuring 11s to fly around 930m, so a ground speed of 160-165kt.
The METAR was : METAR LPMA 261100Z 35016G29KT 300V030 9999 SCT015 17/05 Q1018=
It has a runway 05 so it had a bit of headwind component.Around 8-15kt. So that's an indicated airspeed around 170-175kt
Is that a normal speed for a 321 ? The mere sight of the pitch angle during flare tells you it isn't, even without any knowledge of this particular model.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Here, there, and everywhere
Posts: 1,123
Likes: 0
Received 12 Likes
on
7 Posts
Back to the TAP Airbus, it reminds me of this video:
Couldnt agree more, the 727 in particular was superb in strong gusty crosswinds, simply the best, came down the approach like it was on rails
OK, it’s a difficult airport, especially in strong winds but that doesn’t mean you can just ignore all the SAC; after all, these are the places where margins are slimmer and you really need to be on your A-game. These rules (not guidelines) are there to protect the aircraft and occupants from incidents and accidents. Our OM C has a lot to say about LPMA, mostly in capitals and red ink!
The real problem is that if you start busting gates and don’t do anything about it, how long are you going to carry on down that road? Have you psychologically committed yourself to a “landing”, no matter the result of it? In the video they were high and very fast, judging by the attitude, and the last fixed distance marker had disappeared from view before a nose wheel only touchdown. Even then a rejected landing was available and would have been a sensible choice.
Some of it might be training: in my outfit we practice G/As and rejected landings so much that I think I’ve got better at them than a normal approach and landing (wouldn’t take much). But it does put you in the mindset that you can throw it away any time up to reverser deployment and the manoeuvre itself won’t be an issue, therefore the workload and anticipation stress (of a G/A) is lower and you have more capacity to make the decision.
The real problem is that if you start busting gates and don’t do anything about it, how long are you going to carry on down that road? Have you psychologically committed yourself to a “landing”, no matter the result of it? In the video they were high and very fast, judging by the attitude, and the last fixed distance marker had disappeared from view before a nose wheel only touchdown. Even then a rejected landing was available and would have been a sensible choice.
Some of it might be training: in my outfit we practice G/As and rejected landings so much that I think I’ve got better at them than a normal approach and landing (wouldn’t take much). But it does put you in the mindset that you can throw it away any time up to reverser deployment and the manoeuvre itself won’t be an issue, therefore the workload and anticipation stress (of a G/A) is lower and you have more capacity to make the decision.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: LSZH
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They "drove* the plan down as you might often see from TAP in Madeira. In this case in a very extrem manner. They ended up very slow and had no other choice as a touch down. To start a G/A in this situation might end in a balked landing with complications. If G/A, the dicision had to me made much more earlier.
I'm told by a current Boeing pilot who is Funchal cleared (and current) that Air Portugal often ignore wind limits at Funchal. That does not say much for them, or for their supervising authority.
They "drove* the plan down as you might often see from TAP in Madeira. In this case in a very extrem manner. They ended up very slow and had no other choice as a touch down. To start a G/A in this situation might end in a balked landing with complications. If G/A, the dicision had to me made much more earlier.
Not true at all. You can go around safely at any point up to thrust reverser selection. There was plenty of runway left for a baulked landing even with their very late touchdown.
Interestingly wasn’t it also TAP that recently went around AFTER reverser selection in CPH and nearly lost control of the aircraft when a reverser failed to stow?
LD
(also Airbus FNC certified)
Join Date: Jul 2023
Location: United States
Age: 69
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Winds at Funchal
METAR LPMA 261100Z 35016G29KT 300V030 9999 SCT015 17/05 Q1018=
I have been in and out of that airport a few times. There was a restriction to even trying to land if the wind was above a relatively small value but from a specific direction. How was this landing even attempted?
I have been in and out of that airport a few times. There was a restriction to even trying to land if the wind was above a relatively small value but from a specific direction. How was this landing even attempted?
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not true at all. You can go around safely at any point up to thrust reverser selection. There was plenty of runway left for a baulked landing even with their very late touchdown.
Interestingly wasn’t it also TAP that recently went around AFTER reverser selection in CPH and nearly lost control of the aircraft when a reverser failed to stow?
LD
(also Airbus FNC certified)
Interestingly wasn’t it also TAP that recently went around AFTER reverser selection in CPH and nearly lost control of the aircraft when a reverser failed to stow?
LD
(also Airbus FNC certified)
Yes, it was - they had to shut down an engine, whilst climbing away, to get rid of all that nasty reverse thrust when one engine didn’t stow correctly. 😳
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: IRS NAV ONLY
Posts: 1,230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you're not comfortable with balked/rejected landings, ask for some practice next time you're in the sim, but don't be forcing aircraft onto the ground halfway down the runway because "it's too late to go around".
Never flown there (not that it matters).
Over 10 years on the 320 (all variants)(and another 15+ on another 4 types).
Consistently nose down attitude through most of the final approach.
Touched down in nose down attitude well beyond the right spot.
They should have gone around, quick circuit, and safe landing at the right speed & spot.
There is no way they were not at least 40 knots fast IMO.
Over 10 years on the 320 (all variants)(and another 15+ on another 4 types).
Consistently nose down attitude through most of the final approach.
Touched down in nose down attitude well beyond the right spot.
They should have gone around, quick circuit, and safe landing at the right speed & spot.
There is no way they were not at least 40 knots fast IMO.
I had a bit of fun with this video.
The sun was almost exactly perpendicular to the runway at the time of the event. https://gyazo.com/dcbba4289e42f176e3e9e2c870fd62f3
So the airplane shadow shows us a very good indication of the airplane above the runway. And assuming the video is real speed, you can compute a ground speed.
I'm measuring 11s to fly around 930m, so a ground speed of 160-165kt.
The METAR was : METAR LPMA 261100Z 35016G29KT 300V030 9999 SCT015 17/05 Q1018=
It has a runway 05 so it had a bit of headwind component.Around 8-15kt. So that's an indicated airspeed around 170-175kt
Is that a normal speed for a 321 ? The mere sight of the pitch angle during flare tells you it isn't, even without any knowledge of this particular model.
The sun was almost exactly perpendicular to the runway at the time of the event. https://gyazo.com/dcbba4289e42f176e3e9e2c870fd62f3
So the airplane shadow shows us a very good indication of the airplane above the runway. And assuming the video is real speed, you can compute a ground speed.
I'm measuring 11s to fly around 930m, so a ground speed of 160-165kt.
The METAR was : METAR LPMA 261100Z 35016G29KT 300V030 9999 SCT015 17/05 Q1018=
It has a runway 05 so it had a bit of headwind component.Around 8-15kt. So that's an indicated airspeed around 170-175kt
Is that a normal speed for a 321 ? The mere sight of the pitch angle during flare tells you it isn't, even without any knowledge of this particular model.
They "drove* the plan down as you might often see from TAP in Madeira. In this case in a very extrem manner. They ended up very slow and had no other choice as a touch down. To start a G/A in this situation might end in a balked landing with complications. If G/A, the dicision had to me made much more earlier.
Only half a speed-brake
OK, it’s a difficult airport, especially in strong winds but that doesn’t mean you can just ignore all the SAC; after all, these are the places where margins are slimmer and you really need to be on your A-game. These rules (not guidelines) are there to protect the aircraft and occupants from incidents and accidents. Our OM C has a lot to say about LPMA, mostly in capitals and red ink!
The real problem is that if you start busting gates and don’t do anything about it, how long are you going to carry on down that road? Have you psychologically committed yourself to a “landing”, no matter the result of it? In the video they were high and very fast, judging by the attitude, and the last fixed distance marker had disappeared from view before a nose wheel only touchdown. Even then a rejected landing was available and would have been a sensible choice.
Some of it might be training: in my outfit we practice G/As and rejected landings so much that I think I’ve got better at them than a normal approach and landing (wouldn’t take much). But it does put you in the mindset that you can throw it away any time up to reverser deployment and the manoeuvre itself won’t be an issue, therefore the workload and anticipation stress (of a G/A) is lower and you have more capacity to make the decision.
The real problem is that if you start busting gates and don’t do anything about it, how long are you going to carry on down that road? Have you psychologically committed yourself to a “landing”, no matter the result of it? In the video they were high and very fast, judging by the attitude, and the last fixed distance marker had disappeared from view before a nose wheel only touchdown. Even then a rejected landing was available and would have been a sensible choice.
Some of it might be training: in my outfit we practice G/As and rejected landings so much that I think I’ve got better at them than a normal approach and landing (wouldn’t take much). But it does put you in the mindset that you can throw it away any time up to reverser deployment and the manoeuvre itself won’t be an issue, therefore the workload and anticipation stress (of a G/A) is lower and you have more capacity to make the decision.
The A/C on the tape breaks the first seal by losing the aiming point. All the rest is admittedly quite specific yet not at all surprising.
bravolima553 Uninformed take on both accounts then, no ruffled feathers tho'.
If you look at the attitude of the aircraft in the video as it flies over the TDZ, it was noticeably nose-low but the wing was still producing enough lift to keep it in the air. Not type-rated but I guess on a normal approach it should be 2 to 3degs NU? This shows the speed was excessive, and also as the main wheels were still in the air with the nose wheels on the ground it was the same during the first part of the rollout.
I think the landing roll looked shorter than it actually was due to the perspective from where the shot was taken as the aircraft moved further down the runway towards the vanishing point. Having a headwind component and what is alleged to be an empty aeroplane would have helped reduce the stopping distance, once the main gear was firmly on the ground, as they don’t fit brakes to the nose gear!
As they were at Vref++ even after touchdown, a G/A shouldn’t have taken much effort as they were already at flying speed? In a non-FBW type, just relaxing the forward pressure would have done it...
I think the landing roll looked shorter than it actually was due to the perspective from where the shot was taken as the aircraft moved further down the runway towards the vanishing point. Having a headwind component and what is alleged to be an empty aeroplane would have helped reduce the stopping distance, once the main gear was firmly on the ground, as they don’t fit brakes to the nose gear!
As they were at Vref++ even after touchdown, a G/A shouldn’t have taken much effort as they were already at flying speed? In a non-FBW type, just relaxing the forward pressure would have done it...
Only half a speed-brake
Expected prevailing pitch 2 deg NU and 5 for touchdown.
Vref MLW = 140 kt
Vref (empty) around 125 kt
ATHR+wind+pilot probably Vref+15. Up to +25 and no more (my best, Funchal non-qualified gues).
To GA on this type, pushing TLs to the firewall is needed - activate the GA flight directors. And she will go up so badly there had been (before a certain FBW modification) limit on aft CG to curtail overpitching NU.
Vref MLW = 140 kt
Vref (empty) around 125 kt
ATHR+wind+pilot probably Vref+15. Up to +25 and no more (my best, Funchal non-qualified gues).
To GA on this type, pushing TLs to the firewall is needed - activate the GA flight directors. And she will go up so badly there had been (before a certain FBW modification) limit on aft CG to curtail overpitching NU.