Hello
HN39;
Agree with you...for reasons stated,
gently on the nose-down elevator during the landing rollout is absolutely required for a number of reasons. In fact, any forward-stick would be more to avoid any potential slight nose-up input...and as
MrWooby indicates, he was cognizant of this and recalled that no nose-up stick had been applied, so he was thinking of this.
EDIT: If you're using full reverse and not using brakes, then of course it won't matter. But is it generally good practice to delay braking until you need it? Perhaps early use of brakes will pitch the airplane nose-down naturally without having to apply nose-down stick? Does autobrakes play a role in this?
In the case of the A330, use of the autobrake is an SOP. Usually the setting used is the lowest, (LOW), vice higher settings (MED) which would be used for contaminated runways or when landing distance is a factor. The "MAX" setting is used
only at takeoff, for the rejected takeoff. Although the setting will work on landing, it is not recommended.
Re delaying use of brakes; - on LOW, the autobrakes are applied one second after the ground spoiler deploy signal; at MED the brakes are applied when the signal is sent. The nosedown tendency upon autobrake application can be benign or significant depending upon those factors mentioned. I have had experience with both.
At touchdown and de-rotation, the AOM specifies caution if the brakes are applied while the pitch is still high (flare attitude), meaning that the pilot should be ready with as much as full back-stick to prevent the nosewheel from slamming down on the runway. Again, weight, CG, wind and pilot technique are all components in such an event. There is no AOM statement regarding a slightly-forward stick after touchdown and one certainly does NOT want to apply down-stick before the nosewheel is on the ground - the AOM specifies that back-pressure on the stick is "relaxed" and the nosewheel descends "naturally" in flare law.
Sidebar comment: Increasingly throughout airline operations, the use of IDLE Reverse and reliance on brakes is becoming normal. This isn't the thread to debate that decision, but the AOM states that reverse can be used up to the maximum any time the pilot deems necessary, right down to full stop.
shortfuel;
Did you have your MLG on ground when that happened or just the rear bogies?
Neither reverse, nor ground spoilers (and therefore autobrake), are available before the main-gear bogies are on the ground. So pitch-up could not occur as a result of high reverse thrust at this point in the landing.
The "unlocking" (hydraulic leveling) of the bogie can result in a very hard landing or something less than satisfactory and it is beyond the direct control of the pilot, resulting in much discussion and different touchdown techniques..."trying to beat the forward wheels to the ground" has resulted in some pretty hard nosewheel touchdowns, the alternative being really firm "second touchdown" when the bogies unlock. They are designed to work this way to increase the distance between the tail and the runway surface - on the takeoff rotation, the bogies also rotate to lift the aircraft about 4ft or so. They are hydraulically leveled during the retraction sequence.
(For those interested in why this is so, I was informed that the space available in the inner-wing/body structure for the main gear oleo and bogie was not large enough to provide for the length required to provide good clearance for the tail during rotation/landing flare. Rotating the bogie for height resolved the problem for both the A340 and A330).
PJ2