Hard TAP A321 Landing at Madeira Airport

[bravolima553]

To leave no doubt, for me this landing was not particularly "pretty" but still very professional under the circumstances. They were surprised by a pitch-down movement in the ground effect and mastered it as well as
avoided a go-around with a balked landing. In my opinion a wise decision in these weather conditions.

[Speed_Trim_Fail]

Originally Posted by bravolima553

To leave no doubt, for me this landing was not particularly "pretty" but still very professional under the circumstances. They were surprised by a pitch-down movement in the ground effect and mastered it as well as
avoided a go-around with a balked landing. In my opinion a wise decision in these weather conditions.

“Avoiding a Go-Around” isn’t really the aim for us as pilots though is it? The aim is to if we are to accept the landing/decide to stop we must touch down in the touchdown zone, on speed and on profile…. if that isn’t assured surely a Go Around/baulked landing is the default decision.

[FlightDetent]

Originally Posted by bravolima553

To leave no doubt,

I assure you, good sir, the objective has been achieved.

[FullWings]

Originally Posted by bravolima553

To leave no doubt, for me this landing was not particularly "pretty" but still very professional under the circumstances. They were surprised by a pitch-down movement in the ground effect and mastered it as well as avoided a go-around with a balked landing. In my opinion a wise decision in these weather conditions.

I’m sorry but the word professional does not fit well in the description of this approach and landing. As others have said, the way to avoid a G/A is to put the aircraft down at the right speed in the right place. If that becomes too difficult for whatever reason, including environmental conditions, then you discontinue the attempt and regroup for another go, or give up and fly somewhere else. What you don’t do is hope you’re going to get lucky and stop before the end, because the assumptions you made for IFLD are now invalid.

My company is in the process of fully implementing Evidence Based Training (EBT) and, surprise, surprise, the big topics at the moment are approach (in-)stability, go-arounds and rejected landings, because they happen a lot out there in the real world. The focus is on doing enough practice in these areas that discontinuing an approach at any stage becomes second nature, and reinforcing the fact that it is absolutely the right thing to do. To truly master an aeroplane, you have to know its limitations as well as your own - this is not a flying circus with feats of derring-do, this is a commercial operation with safety at the forefront.

Everything we do in aviation has risks attached to it but we can accept that as long as they are quantifiable and reasonable. A G/A carries a level of risk but a lot less than touching down in a high energy state, with the wrong part of the landing gear at an unknown/unbriefed point somewhere along the runway. Which is why we throw that approach and/or landing away, and also why we train to competence so we can respond better in scenarios like this.

[Bksmithca]

Originally Posted by bravolima553

To leave no doubt, for me this landing was not particularly "pretty" but still very professional under the circumstances. They were surprised by a pitch-down movement in the ground effect and mastered it as well as
avoided a go-around with a balked landing. In my opinion a wise decision in these weather conditions.

Bravolima, your version of professional is very different than mine. I would have rated the pilot as just out of flight school. That landing wasn't close to be stabilized.

[Locked door]

Originally Posted by bravolima553

To leave no doubt, for me this landing was not particularly "pretty" but still very professional under the circumstances. They were surprised by a pitch-down movement in the ground effect and mastered it as well as
avoided a go-around with a balked landing. In my opinion a wise decision in these weather conditions.

Just no. So deep, so nose down. That approach should never have reached the ground and they bent the aircraft as a result. A go around / baulked landing is the safe continuation of the flight, not something to be avoided as a sign of failure.

They became so task focused on achieving a landing they failed to initiate the far safer option. No one has ever collided with the sky.

The question above about TAP’s go around policy is a fair one. Why didn’t they go around? Pilot culture? Management culture? Task saturation? Fuel state?

LD

[hans brinker]

Originally Posted by bravolima553

It seemed to me it was a very short roll out after T/D without exzessiv much braking action.

Strong headwind equals short roll out. AND attitude during approach and on touchdown equals excessive speed.

Originally Posted by bravolima553

To leave no doubt, for me this landing was not particularly "pretty" but still very professional under the circumstances. They were surprised by a pitch-down movement in the ground effect and mastered it as well as
avoided a go-around with a balked landing. In my opinion a wise decision in these weather conditions.

Like all the replies above: NO. They weren't surprised by a nose down movement, they made that movement, and they were consistently way above the speed they should have been. And continued to land far beyond the point were a GA is the only correct choice. Not a wise decision. Even after the first touchdown on the nosewheel a wave off would have been more professional than what the crew did.

[CVividasku]

Originally Posted by bravolima553

It seemed to me it was a very short roll out after T/D without exzessiv much braking action.

The average computation that I did does not cater for possible deceleration over the studied time period.
So if the average speed was approx. 170 KIAS, and the plane slowed down, it means that it went over the threshold at a significantly higher speed, possibly higher than VFE if you assume a constant deceleration, an average of 170, and an "insufficient speed" at touchdown.

So there is nothing consistent to be found on this approach and landing.