Airbus (and Other Transport Category Jet) Landing Technique

[Pilot Flying]

Hello all,

I'm relatively new to transport category jet aircraft (2 years), having spent many prior years on medium to large turboprops and other smaller aircraft. Currently I fly the Airbus 319/320/321 family.

My question is directed to the 'seasoned' jet drivers out there, and is regarding your landing technique. So far I've been utilizing a 'conventional' flare technique; in other words, gently pitching the nose up to arrest the descent rate resulting in a (hopefully) smooth touchdown - although the smoothness being a far lesser concern to me than promptness and accuracy of touch down in order to utilize maximum runway for braking. My results using this technique have been generally OK; you all know how it goes - you win some, you lose some.

Recently, a more seasoned colleague introduced me to a slightly different technique, which involves a similar flare to the point of flying almost level just above the runway, and then lowering the nose to take advantage of ground effect to achieve a soft and prompt touchdown. He used the term "Boeing bubble" in describing this technique, and referred to it as the 'proper' technique in which to land a transport category jet. Also, he suggested that the unloading of the horizontal stabilizer that comes with the downward pitching movement together with the slight raising of the main landing gear due to the couple aft of the C of G are credited with the often 'smoother' results of this technique.

I'm curious which technique is in fact more commonly used by my colleagues out there, and if anyone can give me anymore insight into the latter technique.

Thanks in advance for sharing your wisdom!

Regards,

:cool:

[TimeOnTarget]

I have been shown this technique by a couple of captains, and it seems to work well. I fly 747s, and I have used this "trick" a few times. I don't know if I would say that it is the right way to land under all conditions, but it really helps if you are empty and the big bird wants to float.

I have also been warned about flaring too late because in a long airplane you can create quite a downward force on the landing gear and drive them into the runway.

I went from helicopters and turbo-props to the 744, so it has been a baptism by fire for me.

[411A]

The 'Boeing push' has been in use for many years, and was first perfected (if that is the proper word) on the B707.
Useful on other types as well, especially the longer body types.
However, this will absolutely not work on one large wide-body type...the Lockheed L1011.
IF it is tried, the rising spoilers (due to DLC action) will provide a rather firm touchdown....good thing Lockheed bolted the wings on really tight, at Palmdale.:}

[Pilot Flying]

Thanks for the two great posts. After digging a little deeper in this forum than I initially did, I also found some past discussions on the subject. It sounds like this certainly is a commonly used technique, and can be quite successful if executed properly.

I haven't had much luck the past several attempts, but I think I've been a bit too eager with the 'push' part, before letting the airplane fully settle in ground effect. I'll give it some more work my next time out ;)

Regards,

:cool:

P.S. More comments on this still appreciated!

[Metro man]

If you find you have flared too late, a gentle foward push on the side stick should slow the rate of descent of the main gear and give a softer touch down. Light aircraft instincts of checking back will only drive the main wheels on harder. Applying power to smooth things out won't work due to engine spool up times and may delay spoiler extension and autobrake, making things a lot worse. If you get the engines spooled up and then go straight into reverse, that can get quite interesting

Obviously if you have made a complete balls of things, and are in a position to go around, do it.

Try and stay "in sequence" with the autothrust as well. Avoid getting above the glide path and having to push the nose down to recover, which will reduce the power. Then as you descend into the glide path and check back to maintain it power is fed in, putting you back at stage one.

Keeping a stabilised approach will do wonders for your landings. :ok:

[Pilot Flying]

Metro man, it appears you refer to this technique solely as a recovery method. Have you had much success in using it in normal practice also?

Cheers,

:cool:

[Metro man]

Yes, I use it in normal practice and have had some super smooth touchdowns with it. Rather a gentle relaxation of back pressure than a deliberate push foward most of the time. The benefit is really felt if the nose has got slightly high. Be careful not to wheelbarrow if the touchdown is in a flat attitude.

Best results come from a stabilised approach which makes things alot easier. Take into account the landing weight as well, any tail wind, flaps 3 or full and glide path angle. Landing off a 3.25 degree glide slope the other day at max landing weight and 3000' amsl, I had to flare quite a bit higher and quicker than I've been doing normally.

Don't worry, practice makes acceptable. ;)

[guiones]

Don't listen to your "more seasoned colleague" what you were doing is correct, along with timely thrust reduction BEFORE retard, retard is a reminder that you shoud be at idle, not an order to do it.

G

[haughtney1]

The "Boeing Push" worked a treat on the 757 and 767.....it also works a treat on the Falcon I now fly, I've actually taught a guy I work with (who has about 5000hrs in them) to touch down smoothly.....hes an ex fast jet jockey who has no concept at all of a pax friendly landing :}

[ClimbSequence]

"Recently, a more seasoned colleague introduced me to a slightly different technique, which involves a similar flare to the point of flying almost level just above the runway, and then lowering the nose to take advantage of ground effect to achieve a soft and prompt touchdown"

What about thrust management during this kind of flare?

[PantLoad]

The best technique I've ever heard is to fly the aircraft down to the
runway....to a point where the main gear are maybe, say, 1/64 inch
off the runway....then hold the aircraft right there....try to fly it down
the runway with the main gear 1/64 inch above the runway.

Smooth touchdown every time.....


Of course, this post is a joke....I'm kidding!!!!


Fly safe,


PantLoad

[TyroPicard]

although the smoothness being a far lesser concern to me than promptness and accuracy of touch down in order to utilize maximum runway for braking.So what has made you change your mind? You were doing it right before.

I haven't had much luck the past several attempts, but I think I've been a bit too eager with the 'push' part, before letting the airplane fully settle in ground effect. I'll give it some more work my next time out1. It's called the Boeing push for a reason.
2. You are wasting runway. Right speed, right place, and right technique - you won't find the push in the Airbus FCTM.

[Zippy Monster]

Remember, the Airbus is consciously and automatically pitching down during the flare, so that despite the FBW controls you have a more 'conventional' feel during the flare (i.e. you have to counter it with back pressure on the stick.)

If the flare is a little high or too much, then relaxing back pressure on the stick is the way to counter it... but I'd hesitate to be consciously nudging the stick forward while the aircraft is doing its auto pitch-down. If I found myself in the situation where I was having to consciously push forward, to get the aircraft down, then it'd be time for a TOGA-10...

As TyroPicard said, there's no such thing as an "Airbus push"!

[poina]

I've tried both on AB, B, and MD aircraft and have found the only consistent method for me is steady increase in angle of attack. However, the flare altitude has to be correct or you will float, especially when light, hot, or high pressure altitude airports due to higher than normal tas. To make consistent good landings start well before the flare point by having stabilized approaches paying particular attention to maintaining a constant pitch attitude. Futhermore, a professional knows a greaser is more luck than anything else and prides himself on how well the approach was flown, on gs, on speed, on centerline, in the tdze, with correct xwind application, full reverse if practable as soon as main wheel touchdown, otherwise you're just making noise.

[Pilot Flying]

This is all great information; thanks for the replies, everyone. I'm starting to get the idea that the Boeing push is A technique, but not necessarily THE technique. I'm reassured to know that the more conventional technique I originally adopted and have been using is in fact also used my many others out there. I can certainly see the merits in using the 'push' in recovering from a miscalculated flare and, if done properly, in a routine fashion as well.

In response to some of your comments:

Don't listen to your "more seasoned colleague" what you were doing is correct, along with timely thrust reduction BEFORE retard, retard is a reminder that you shoud be at idle, not an order to do it.

Again, I'm glad to hear I haven't been led astray with my existing technique. In regards to retarding the thrust levers, I too have seen people misled by the 'retard' call; our SOPs have us retard the thrust levers at 30' AGL (under normal conditions), which usually inhibits the reminder at 20' AGL.

What about thrust management during this kind of flare?

The way I was shown, the push technique has you retard the thrust levers as you begin the initial portion of the flare, just as in the conventional method; otherwise, you'd have the A/THR increasing power to maintain Vapp and you'd really have a mess to fix.

So what has made you change your mind? You were doing it right before.

I haven't changed my mind. I was recently shown this different technique by a colleague and, not being completely convinced 'my' method was wrong, I came here looking to see which technique is commonly used by other experienced drivers out there. Judging by the responses so far, it seems it is more of a personal preference. I'll experiment a bit more with the 'push' before coming to any personal conclusions, but for the time being I still favour the conventional method.

...a professional knows a greaser is more luck than anything else and prides himself on how well the approach was flown, on gs, on speed, on centerline, in the tdze, with correct xwind application, full reverse if practable as soon as main wheel touchdown, otherwise you're just making noise.

AMEN!!!!

Thanks again to all for sharing your knowledge. This is great information, and is exactly what I was looking for.

Regards,

:cool:

[john_tullamarine]

I'm starting to get the idea that the Boeing push is A technique, but not necessarily THE technique.

When I started out on the 727-200, I had not the slightest idea of how the land it. I had been brainwashed with the push technique and it, and I, just didn't click. After coming close to destroying a great many aircraft, I tried landing it like a C150 and that proved to be much more reliable.

Stable approach sets you up for a reasonable landing.

.. and, every once in a long while, the aircraft does an absolute greaser .. all smoke and mirrors but a wonderful ego booster, albeit a bit unnerving until you observe the ASI reading decreasing below flying speed and can conclude that you are, really, on the ground.