PDA

View Full Version : Sporty Landing In Narita


Farrell
20th Nov 2013, 11:05
The bigger they are....

LiveLeak.com - Thai Airways A-380 dodgy landing at Narita

PLovett
20th Nov 2013, 11:36
Appeared to be going well until what looked like right aileron was applied somewhat adventurously towards the end. I have seen other film clips from Narita. It seems they get some fairly savage crosswinds there.

cattletruck
20th Nov 2013, 11:39
Must have gotten quite exciting upstairs on the first floor. :E

DX Wombat
20th Nov 2013, 12:48
Having landed a C152 in that sort of crosswind, I can assure you that it does require quite a marked degree of concentration. :uhoh:

cattletruck
20th Nov 2013, 12:54
I can do it with my eyes closed, and usually do just before impact :}.

MagnusP
20th Nov 2013, 13:01
just before impact

"Landing", cattletruck, you have to call it "landing". :p

screwballburling
20th Nov 2013, 13:34
Wombat

"Having landed a C152 in that sort of crosswind, I can assure you that it does require quite a marked degree of concentration."

I would like to add, with a degree a basic flying skills. They are dying out quickly.

Limeygal
20th Nov 2013, 14:06
Got caught in a crosswind coming into LGW. Looked out of window and terminal was no longer vertical. We bounced around quite a bit. Only time I upchucked on a flight. Glad of a handy coffee pot!! Don't they say-Every landing you walk away from is good one? :eek:

Lightning Mate
20th Nov 2013, 14:08
I don't understand the problem.

I've landed in a forty knot crosswind (yes 40) and it wasn't a problem.

Eau de Boeing
20th Nov 2013, 14:10
Having landed an A380 and a C152 in strong crosswinds, I know which one I would rather do it in.

The technique used on both was the same, needless to say what you saw there wasn't the correct approved Airbus one.:ugh:

Mac the Knife
20th Nov 2013, 14:10
How do you guys 'n gals ever get used to coming in sideways!?!

!!!!????

Mac

:uhoh:

Lightning Mate
20th Nov 2013, 14:12
I'm quite used to it.

Limeygal
20th Nov 2013, 14:12
BAC 1-11 :eek:

Lightning Mate
20th Nov 2013, 14:15
What about the 1-11 ?

er340790
20th Nov 2013, 14:22
Nasty case of crabs. :E And if I'm not mistaken, the 747 is capable of touching down at 45 deg off centre (while retaining its undercarriage) in order to avoid a ground-strike of the outer engines. :eek:

Lightning Mate
20th Nov 2013, 14:25
I don't believe that - 45 degrees ??????

The 747 crosswind limit (manual landing) is 30 knots.

Go and work out what wind component would give 45 degrees of drift !!

Limeygal
20th Nov 2013, 14:28
LM-sorry incomplete thought there. I hit something before I had finished my comment. That was the a/c type that did my wobbly landing.

er340790
20th Nov 2013, 15:13
"The 747 is built to withstand landings where the actual touchdown occurs at as much as a 45 degree crab angle. This is because the wing mounted engines only allow a very small amount of bank angle at touchdown to prevent an engine strike. So, 747 pilots must us the "crab method" of crosswind correction all the way through touchdown, instead of the more landing gear friendly "wing low method." Boeing has tested this theory in 45 knot direct crosswinds with no damage to the aircraft or its landing gear."

Lightning Mate
20th Nov 2013, 15:18
Are we confusing "crab angle" with 90 degree crosswind ?

lasernigel
20th Nov 2013, 15:32
Which somehow always brings up this video which I never tire of watching....

Crosswind Landing Testing - YouTube

TheChitterneFlyer
20th Nov 2013, 15:42
In crosswind conditions it's important that the crab angle is maintained to touchdown (wings level). Especially if the runway is wet. A wings level touchdown will ensure that all Auto Spoilers deploy fully (single bogey touchdown will result in only partial deployment of the ground spoilers).

VP959
20th Nov 2013, 16:07
Mac the Knife wrote:

How do you guys 'n gals ever get used to coming in sideways!?!


For me I always preferred it in small aeroplanes. Even with no crosswind I'd far rather fly a constant aspect approach (essentially a curved approach from an oval circuit). Looking out sideways for most of the approach seems to me to be more natural and certainly gives better judgement of the touchdown point right up until you level out just over the threshold.

I used to get a bit of flack from one or two airfields for doing it (and I'd have to add I'd only do it when there was no nearby circuit or direct approach traffic around), but nothing will convince me that either the big rectangular circuits that most civil light aircraft airfields use, or long straight in approaches at a shallow approach angle, are particularly safe or versatile in the case of needing to make a late correction in a crosswind or gust.

con-pilot
20th Nov 2013, 16:23
How do you guys 'n gals ever get used to coming in sideways!?!

You get used to it after while. I'll admit it was a bit unnerving at first, but it works. Looking through the co-pilot's windshield from the left seat on final was a bit challenging to me at first. But like I said, you get used to it.

I read somewhere that the 777 has no demonstrated crosswind limitation. That is a bit unbelievable. Do we have any 777 drivers around here to confirm or deny this?

On the 727 you didn't have any wing mounted engines to worry about, but if you screwed up, you could drag the outboard flap in a strong crosswind.

DX Wombat
20th Nov 2013, 16:59
Screwball, I had a great FI who took me out in those strong crosswinds with the aim of making certain I could land the aircraft safely. (I have since been told that at least one of my landings was with 35kts crosswind) The thinking behind it was that, heaven forbid, I should ever find myself forced to land under such conditions, then I would have the ability and confidence to cope. Another FI helped my confidence and skills by getting me to do a low approach go-around followed by making fly back to the home airfield without using my chart. There wasn't GPS in the little C152 and I was told later that the go-around was from the height of the aircraft above the ground. It stood me in good stead for the day I was caught in nasty turbulence at about 10'AGL and simply flew off. Neither thing is something I would plan to do but in an emergency I know it can be done. It may be old and unfashionable but the Cessna 152 is a great little aircraft. :ok:

lomapaseo
20th Nov 2013, 18:14
Nothing like test pilots and steady crosswind to make you look good.

Your mileage may varry

tony draper
20th Nov 2013, 18:52
Doesn't the B52 have a undercarriage can be dialed round so it is 45 degrees from fore and aft,they seem to be able to land near sideways no probs.
Rather travel by sea meself :rolleyes:
Here yer go
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94AcSHpcZbI

haughtney1
20th Nov 2013, 18:52
I read somewhere that the 777 has no demonstrated crosswind limitation. That is a bit unbelievable. Do we have any 777 drivers around here to confirm or deny this?

Con, the book that comes with the ones I fly says 45kts, but that's steady crosswind....landed recently within limits, but the gusts..oh the gusts...

BenThere
20th Nov 2013, 19:17
I've thought through the problem of crosswinds and gusts, low ceilings and visibility, and runway length, condition and contamination over my 37 year flying career.

You have three phases, planning, correction and reaction, to every approach to landing. My intent on every approach is to move each phase as far down, close to the runway, as I can.

In the flare though, from 50 feet AGL to the surface, it's always pure reaction. Your entire purpose at that point is to use your stick and rudder skills to keep wings level, on centerline, and control descent to land in the touchdown zone. If you do all that it's all going to work out, every time.

Interestingly, the best, softest landings I've had have been in the most challenging of crosswinds. You remember those. One time I came into Salt Lake City in a blizzard, low vis, quartering tailwind, icy runway, and when I brought the thrust levers into reverse, the other pilot hadn't yet realized we had touched down. That's when you want to get the cockpit door open and revel in the accolades the pax are going to give you.

screwballburling
20th Nov 2013, 19:33
DX Wombat

Then you had a good FI.

The aircraft manuals stipulate "drift to touch down", as an a:mad:e covering, legal exercise.

As mentioned previously, the Technique is the same, whether it be a C150 or a heavy 4 engined jet. I haven't flown the A380 and never will of course.

Any pilot who has the handling skills and co ordination, will have the drift eliminated at touch down and wings level/into wind wing down. Can you imagine touching down in a tail wheel/conventional U/G aircraft, with that much drift?? I can tell immediately on landing if a pilot flying with me has operated a tail wheel aircraft to any degree, anytime in their career.

con-pilot
20th Nov 2013, 20:00
haughtney1

Con, the book that comes with the ones I fly says 45kts, but that's steady crosswind...

Thanks, I always did suspect that 'no demo limit' was a bit of nonsense. Even still, 45 knots is pretty good.




Ben

the other pilot hadn't yet realized we had touched down

All of my landings were like that, all yours are not?

Oh, by the way, I've got a used bridge in the New York City area and some primo land in Florida for sale cheap. :E

BenThere
20th Nov 2013, 20:14
All of my landings were like that, all yours are not?


I try to be modest. Also I neglected to mention that after landing in those challenging conditions you make your way to the hotel bar hoping they'll have something to help make your hands stop shaking.

Nervous SLF
20th Nov 2013, 20:15
Con.. are you really saying that the reason the other pilot didn't know you had landed because he always kept his eyes shut ? :E

ruddman
20th Nov 2013, 20:48
I land like that in flight sim all the time. In smooth air too. :}

Of course I have the joystick in one hand, beer in another. And my wife telling me to do something constructive.


Now THAT'S pressure. :ok:

M.Mouse
20th Nov 2013, 21:22
(I have since been told that at least one of my landings was with 35kts crosswind)

If that was in a C152 I find it a little hard to believe. If I recall the demonstrated x-wind figure in the POH is 17 kts. and from my days instructing in the venerable C152 anything approaching that as quite hard work! With an approach speed of 65kts., well..................

On the wider subject the B777 in my company had a x-wind limit of 40kts. In my experience I found the B757 and the B777 relatively easy in a x-wind with little worry of touching a pod with quite significant wing down into wind if your flare timing was not spot on.

The B747 is a slightly different kettle of fish in that it doesn't take much bank at touchdown to touch a pod, a pal of mine had a trainee do just that and the damage amounted to a tidy sum. Having said that the aircraft was a delight to fly and x-winds were nothing a competent pilot couldn't comfortably deal with.

BenThere
20th Nov 2013, 21:35
I'm on the 10th airplane I've checked out on, and I found the 747 the easiest to land of all.

Crosswinds don't push it around much and you can land in a bit of a crab if they try. Also the 50-40-30 cadence along with the gear tilt helps ensure a nice landing.

Loose rivets
20th Nov 2013, 21:52
On the 727 you didn't have any wing mounted engines to worry about, but if you screwed up, you could drag the outboard flap in a strong crosswind.


I got to using less flap so that I could still touch on one wheel. So smooooth, and so little stress on the aircraft.

"you can't choose to use reduced flap!" I'd be told as aviation evolved out of the hands of pilots.

"Why not? We've got a major headwind component, I'm also getting the brakes on earlier. I'm using demonstrably less concrete, WTF not?"

"It's in the FCOM."

"Oh, okay." Askes new colleague WTF the FCOM is.

Spent a lot of time working out what the view was like at certain angles. Just how much space under the flaps/pods. How much flex, etc., etc. Still wasn't allowed to do it when I reverted to airline flying. These landings just seem to kick so much life out of the airframe. Loose rivets come to mind.:p

The Flying Pram
20th Nov 2013, 22:33
How do you guys 'n gals ever get used to coming in sideways!?!

Never had a choice in my 20 years of flexwing flying - no rudder to allow a wing down alternative...

screwballburling
20th Nov 2013, 22:42
Rivets

How dare you even contemplate thinking outside the box! Whatever next!

The B707 it was 13 + degrees wing down at touch down to scrape a pod IIRC., so plenty of room for a little into wind wing down, as it should be.

con-pilot
20th Nov 2013, 22:45
I got to using less flap so that I could still touch on one wheel. So smooooth, and so little stress on the aircraft.

LR

By the time I started flying 727s all landings were at flaps 30. I never landed with less than 30*. Because of the type of certain operations we managed to become involved with, we could remove the flaps 40 block and make flaps 40 landings.

Which were not that much different, flatter deck angle, more power on final after going to flaps 40 (a lot more power) and if on speed, when you cut the power, you landed right then, whether five inches or five feet above the rurway.


* Oops, have to take that back, had to a few times due to mechinal problems that required less than flaps 30 for landing. When that happened, the landing was usually a grease job, very smooth, but you sure burned up a bunch of run way.

con-pilot
20th Nov 2013, 23:02
SLF

because he always kept his eyes shut ?

Worked for me.

However, usually they had passed out from fright by the time we landed. Which was fine by me, got tired of hearing them scream "WE'RE GOING TO DIE, OH MY GOD. WE'RE GOING TO DIIIIIIIE!"


:p

G-CPTN
20th Nov 2013, 23:47
When I die, I want to go peacefully like my Grandfather did, in his sleep -- not screaming, like the passengers in his bus.

DX Wombat
20th Nov 2013, 23:52
Screwball, I certainly did and he now flies for a certain citrus coloured airline. :ok:
M Mouse - I was told that sometime later and I too find it very difficult to believe. The person who told me insists that he is right and my memory of 28kts is wrong. I am positive I am right, I was flying and as far as I remember he wasn't even at the airfield that day but he is not someone you can argue with. :( It was hard work, my FI was very reassuring and ready to take control immediately if I had asked. I value the experience but would only repeat it as a matter of dire necessity.
DCC for the C152 is 12kts and the C172 17kts.

RatherBeFlying
21st Nov 2013, 04:45
In gliders you don't want to drag the wingtip especially before the wheel touches; so, it's come down with crab and rudder straight in the last foot or so.

The nice thing with gliders, especially single seaters, is that the crosswind is a whole bunch less 18" off the ground.

The corollary is that once you lift off, you need a whole bunch of crab pronto 3' up until the towplane lifts off. That's behind a 180 Hp towplane at 3700'. It's a bunch quicker behind a Pawnee at 1000.

Landing a taildragger or high wing Cessna, you can just set up a wing down with rudder to point it down the runway and take it all the way down to the flare.

It gets more interesting when there's trees upwind and you suddenly discover below the trees that the xwind ain't no more:\

visibility3miles
21st Nov 2013, 05:54
I've landed a 152 in a 17 kt crosswind. After crabbing substantially, I moved the rudder all the way over, pointed the nose straight down the runway, and greased the landing.

The 17 kt headwind helped, and there were no gusts. Plan B was a nearby airport with runways aligned more closely to the wind.

I'd practiced a lot at an airport by the Pacific, where I could land with big steady crosswinds to my hearts content.

Gusts add challenge.

I landed a 172 in gusty weather with a large crosswind and pressed on the rudder so hard that my chair slipped back a notch. Immediate go-around as I relaxed the rudder pressure and loosened my hold on the yoke.

I am not a tall person. I had brought the seat all the way forward and didn't latch it properly. So, the slip I felt was it sliding back and latching into the next spot. Nothing had broken, and the seat didn't slide to the back of the tracks with me grasping the yoke.

On the third try, I landed.

Oddly, a low winged plane was waiting for me to land. He watched me make two missed approached and didn't move until I was safely on the ground, then he took off. I guess he used me as a crash test dummy to see if the winds were safe.

I wondered if he was wise, but he flew away safely.

haughtney1
21st Nov 2013, 12:19
Just to concur with M Mouse, the 757 was a joy in a crosswind, and like the 777 was quite happy to land at F25 if it were a wittle bitty bit guusty....
I've been into NRT at the back end of a windy afternoon, and the winds are a bit odd, lots of mechanical turbulence, mostly thanks to tree and buildings, but for the most part, manageable if you prepare in advance.
LPMA on the other hand...holy crap, there were some days on the 757 that the seat cushion almost disappeared...

Lightning Mate
21st Nov 2013, 14:54
Chuck 'em in hard and fast I say.

http://i636.photobucket.com/albums/uu82/Lightning_29/cat_zps0eee0007.jpg

Now I shall stand by for lots of Jaguar posts from people who don't have a clue and have never flown it!

Cacophonix
21st Nov 2013, 15:01
Now I shall stand by for lots of Jaguar posts from people who don't have a clue and have never flown it!

Look mom that bloke has just taken off with his drogue chute out.... (I am joking, I am joking)... ;)

Caco

Lightning Mate
21st Nov 2013, 15:03
...and 40 flap plus airbrakes !

Lightning Mate
21st Nov 2013, 15:04
Q - why are both ailerons deflected ?

Cacophonix
21st Nov 2013, 15:07
..and 40 flap plus airbrakes !


Must have been an immensely powerful aircraft to climb with all that draggy stuff hanging out... ;)

Caco

Lightning Mate
21st Nov 2013, 15:08
:).........

G-CPTN
21st Nov 2013, 15:10
So - no chance of a go around . . .

Lightning Mate
21st Nov 2013, 15:12
RAF pilots don't do that sort of thing.

Cacophonix
21st Nov 2013, 15:13
The talk of deflected ailerons reminded me of this tale of aileron woe...

(hopefully not you Lightning Mate)!

High speed ejection from a Lightning F6 XS921 (http://www.ejectorseats.co.uk/lightningf6_1.html)

Caco

Lightning Mate
21st Nov 2013, 15:15
No, not me.

I've only punched from a Jaguar.

haughtney1
21st Nov 2013, 15:16
Lightning.....was her majestys' flying club running short of funds even back then? look at the drag chute..its full of bloody moth bites...:E

Lightning Mate
21st Nov 2013, 15:17
:D......

If you want retardation, the hook is the business.

Cacophonix
21st Nov 2013, 15:21
Had the pleasure of seeing the Beachy Head Lightnings fly a number of times until the crash at Bredasdorp. You have my utmost respect Lightning Mate.

It must have been an incredible aircraft to fly!

http://www.caa.co.za/resource%20center/accidents%20&%20incid/reports/2009/8706.pdf

Caco

Lightning Mate
21st Nov 2013, 15:23
It must have been an incredible aircraft to fly!

It certainly was - benign handling too, unlike the Jaguar.

G-CPTN
21st Nov 2013, 15:27
The pilot opted to eject “bail-out” from the aircraft, but experienced an ejection seat failure.
Ain't that the worst way to die?

doubleu-anker
21st Nov 2013, 15:36
LM

"RAF pilots don't do that sort of thing."

What, sooner die than overshoot?! :}


G CPTN

or getting free of a/c, then discovering a blanket where you silk should have been. Not unheard of last century IIRC.

Lightning Mate
21st Nov 2013, 15:41
Ain't that the worst way to die?

It's quick though, but didn't happen very often.

G-CPTN
21st Nov 2013, 15:45
RAF pilots regularly practice approaches and overshoot at our local civilian airport (Newcastle). They do also use it as an emergency landing place when 'things happen' (such as an air-to-air over my house - one ejected safely and the other made it to EGNT and landed, albeit somewhat damaged), There have been several other cases of diversion due to mechanical failures, so practicing approaches makes sense of course, especially as there is rising ground on the approach.