easiest and hardest to land
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: channel islands
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
easiest and hardest to land
anyone have any views on which airliners are the hardest or easiest to land.
As a relatively inexperienced airline jock, I would say the Saab 340 is not exactly the easiest to land, but is there something out there that is harder???
As a relatively inexperienced airline jock, I would say the Saab 340 is not exactly the easiest to land, but is there something out there that is harder???
"Mildly" Eccentric Stardriver
Let's see: Chipmunk, Jet Provost, Varsity, Hercules, Trislander, Twin Otter, Shorts 3-60, F27, Bae 146, Fokker 100, B 737. Nope, I've had trouble landing all of them!
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: London, UK
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When I saw this thread my immediate thought was it has to be the Metro! and lo and behold, everyone else agrees! Great fun to fly, but on a crappy night doing a circling approach off an NDB with a howling crosswind and the windscreen all iced up !!!- well, it took a while after landing before I felt confident enough that my voice box would work to do the afterlanding checklist.
On the other hand, the Islander has to be the easiest to land no matter what the weather is doing; you could be going backwards over the ground into a force mega gale and still do a greaser.
On the other hand, the Islander has to be the easiest to land no matter what the weather is doing; you could be going backwards over the ground into a force mega gale and still do a greaser.
Out of work since Sep and I hate it Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Midlands.UK
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Saab is not difficult at all IMHO, yes it can be difficult to do a greaser consistently but in a x wind its not so bad. I have flown several types and I reckon the CRJ in a cross wind is by far the least stable and frightening, It is one aircraft I would not feel happy in at max x wind limit. Glad to be off it.
Guest
Posts: n/a
757 - lovely. Never mucked it up. 767 - bit harder, especially once you get used to the flare height on the 757. Everyone I know thinks the 757 is easier than the 76.
727-100 - a bitch. Crappy autopilot, very fidgety.
Tristar - aaaah what a machine! Without wishing to sound like the Guv I really do miss that bird. Goes like it's on rails, especially the -500.
[ 02 November 2001: Message edited by: below_the_line_please ]
727-100 - a bitch. Crappy autopilot, very fidgety.
Tristar - aaaah what a machine! Without wishing to sound like the Guv I really do miss that bird. Goes like it's on rails, especially the -500.
[ 02 November 2001: Message edited by: below_the_line_please ]
Person Of Interest
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Keystone Heights, Florida
Age: 68
Posts: 842
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have to disagree that the 727 is the worst to land.
It can be a handful in gusty crosswinds when light, but at med to max lndg weights I think it lands just like a 172 if you set it up right. The 100 is easier than the 200.
You want hard, try the TU-134B...(especially with the other pilot "helping" you, as is the old Aeroflot style.)
[ 02 November 2001: Message edited by: DownIn3Green ]
It can be a handful in gusty crosswinds when light, but at med to max lndg weights I think it lands just like a 172 if you set it up right. The 100 is easier than the 200.
You want hard, try the TU-134B...(especially with the other pilot "helping" you, as is the old Aeroflot style.)
[ 02 November 2001: Message edited by: DownIn3Green ]
Pilot Officer PPRuNe
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 396
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
VC10, great to land though it could be fun at max cross wind. The Grob Tutor on the other hand, even when you stop trying to flare at VC10 heights is a b*tch in a cross wind. Its great teaching in those conditions 
.
Tonks
.Tonks
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Pleiades
Posts: 232
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've flown B737, C500/550, DA900, Do328 TP, & Do328 Jet.
Out of these aircraft the trickiest is definetely the Do328 Jet. Why? Well, a high wing, narrow landing gear, no reverse thrust cause the plane to keep flying after you've landed. In a x-wind once landed you must keep flying it on the ground otherwise it flips. The turboprop version is fine because it has beta range, which acts as a reverse thrust once on ground. I found the Do328 Jet excellent handling experience especially into airports like Amsterdam, Bilbao, Madrid and Hannover where you get tricky winds.
Out of these aircraft the trickiest is definetely the Do328 Jet. Why? Well, a high wing, narrow landing gear, no reverse thrust cause the plane to keep flying after you've landed. In a x-wind once landed you must keep flying it on the ground otherwise it flips. The turboprop version is fine because it has beta range, which acts as a reverse thrust once on ground. I found the Do328 Jet excellent handling experience especially into airports like Amsterdam, Bilbao, Madrid and Hannover where you get tricky winds.
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 1998
Location: err, *******, we have a problem
Age: 58
Posts: 1,335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Easiest by far of wot I've flown has to be the 777... massive wing, beautifully harmonised controls, more ground effect than you'd ever think possible and somewhere in the region of 5 seconds worth of momentum-gifted grace on runway alignment in a strong crosswind.
As to the worst..... well, they can all bite if you get it wrong. For example, as I recall the 757 it HAD to be powered round the corner in the flare, otherwise embarassment ensued all round.... also if the drift wasn't completely removed it would shake its tail like a wet dog..... however it wasn't bad to land...... no, I wouldn't go so far as to say it was hard to land, it just has quirks.
I think they can all embarass you on the day.... I have heard the Tristar as being particularly unforgiving, and currently I consider the Airbus small family in big crosswinds the most bizarre creations imaginable; the latter will change with experience, and almost none of the former are flying and I won't be flying one soon so don't really care!.
Yeah, they all take A B C to land. Only some days it's A C B. Then on others it A F G B . I think I'll have it sussed the day after I retire, ask me then.
£6
[ 04 November 2001: Message edited by: Sick Squid ]
As to the worst..... well, they can all bite if you get it wrong. For example, as I recall the 757 it HAD to be powered round the corner in the flare, otherwise embarassment ensued all round.... also if the drift wasn't completely removed it would shake its tail like a wet dog..... however it wasn't bad to land...... no, I wouldn't go so far as to say it was hard to land, it just has quirks.
I think they can all embarass you on the day.... I have heard the Tristar as being particularly unforgiving, and currently I consider the Airbus small family in big crosswinds the most bizarre creations imaginable; the latter will change with experience, and almost none of the former are flying and I won't be flying one soon so don't really care!
.Yeah, they all take A B C to land. Only some days it's A C B. Then on others it A F G B . I think I'll have it sussed the day after I retire, ask me then.
£6
[ 04 November 2001: Message edited by: Sick Squid ]
