Ryan Air poor landings at STN
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Basel
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sir John, now you can tell him what is a hard landing officially. 
An FO friend said me, that a "rule" issued by airlines (here Pegasus) tell that that landings should not exceed 1.65G, (1.65x the aircraft weight which acted on aircraft tyres at the instant of touchdown) or it can be considered as a hard landing (high sink rate generally) and the aircraft can be grounded for inspection.
And for Sir John who like to talk officially, Boeing say that the aircraft can safely handle up to 2.5G landings, but the limit due to rule is 1.65. (Called VAC).
An FO friend said me, that a "rule" issued by airlines (here Pegasus) tell that that landings should not exceed 1.65G, (1.65x the aircraft weight which acted on aircraft tyres at the instant of touchdown) or it can be considered as a hard landing (high sink rate generally) and the aircraft can be grounded for inspection.
And for Sir John who like to talk officially, Boeing say that the aircraft can safely handle up to 2.5G landings, but the limit due to rule is 1.65. (Called VAC).
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Sandy lane
Posts: 209
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Personally I don't think that you have a clue what you're talking about.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Sandy lane
Posts: 209
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Regardless of limitations if conditions do not dictate an early touch down, we should all IMO be trying to make as smooth a landing as possible, do you guys not take great pleasure in a smooth touch down? Or have I missed something over the last 10 years?
A smooth landing goes a long way with your pax & crew, trust me...
In 737 or A320 etc there is no excuses for a bad landing if conditions are good
In a TP like an F50 you should not even feel the wheels hit the ground!
Given in bigger stuff like the 74 it takes a bit more skill to make for a smooth landing & you certainly most always feel it...
A smooth landing goes a long way with your pax & crew, trust me...
In 737 or A320 etc there is no excuses for a bad landing if conditions are good
In a TP like an F50 you should not even feel the wheels hit the ground!
Given in bigger stuff like the 74 it takes a bit more skill to make for a smooth landing & you certainly most always feel it...
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Wor Yerm
Age: 68
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think a proper landing is on the centre-line, in the touchdown zone, upwind main gear first (or both together), wings level or banked into wind, appropriate pitch, idle thrust and speed reducing to VRef. I haven't mentioned smooth, because that's just a bonus. We don't want "heavy" (and I question the validity of TC-DCAs numbers); "gentle" and "firm" are the adjectives I like to describe my landings and if I bounce a little bit, then so be it.
But returning to the OP, there could be a reason for EasyJet's style of landing. I'm thinking of their FDM programme and their tea & biscuit sessions when they cause an event. I bet one of their FDM traps is a decceleration rate. Brake too hard and the next call you receive on your mobile is the office.
But returning to the OP, there could be a reason for EasyJet's style of landing. I'm thinking of their FDM programme and their tea & biscuit sessions when they cause an event. I bet one of their FDM traps is a decceleration rate. Brake too hard and the next call you receive on your mobile is the office.
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: glendale
Posts: 819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BOYS, now think about it.
IF TOO_MUCH had taken video and posted it of the landings we might agree with him.
He says he has a type rating on the 737 and I believe him.
so, he saw some plunkers. I've seen a 737 bounce from cockpit and when the copilot didn't do something about the bounce, I did. I mean it was a BOUNCE.
I've seen the word MORONIC used a bit too much here on pprune.
So, a bunch of planes made puffs of smoke. Maybe the airbus guy just got lucky (I've seen plenty of bus landings that should have sent the tower guys running to punch the crash button).
Maybe that day, every weight and balance was wrong enough to throw off Vref by 5 knots due to some computer problem at the airline in question.
I know of one case that the weights were off so much as to change vref on a certain plane by 20 knots. OOOPS, gear punched through the wings on landing.
I've never been to this airfield. Wondering if there are visual miscues like a runway that goes up hill, or down hill or what the slope is.
As far as ducking the glideslope. Well, most places you shouldn't do it. BUT then there are places like midway and adjusting your aim point to a safe, but different than ILS GS touchdown point may make sense.
In fact, Boston has a nice long runway. But at one time (before 14/32) you were allowed to land on the displaced threshold or prior to it IF THERE WERE NO TALL SHIPS IN THE HARBOR and it was well prior to the ILS GS Touchdown point. It was printed right on the apch plate. JUDGEMENT
So, lets stop the MORONIC use and just say something like: I've been around but have yet to learn that.
Smile boys, all the planes that day could be used again without major overhaul! ;-)
IF TOO_MUCH had taken video and posted it of the landings we might agree with him.
He says he has a type rating on the 737 and I believe him.
so, he saw some plunkers. I've seen a 737 bounce from cockpit and when the copilot didn't do something about the bounce, I did. I mean it was a BOUNCE.
I've seen the word MORONIC used a bit too much here on pprune.
So, a bunch of planes made puffs of smoke. Maybe the airbus guy just got lucky (I've seen plenty of bus landings that should have sent the tower guys running to punch the crash button).
Maybe that day, every weight and balance was wrong enough to throw off Vref by 5 knots due to some computer problem at the airline in question.
I know of one case that the weights were off so much as to change vref on a certain plane by 20 knots. OOOPS, gear punched through the wings on landing.
I've never been to this airfield. Wondering if there are visual miscues like a runway that goes up hill, or down hill or what the slope is.
As far as ducking the glideslope. Well, most places you shouldn't do it. BUT then there are places like midway and adjusting your aim point to a safe, but different than ILS GS touchdown point may make sense.
In fact, Boston has a nice long runway. But at one time (before 14/32) you were allowed to land on the displaced threshold or prior to it IF THERE WERE NO TALL SHIPS IN THE HARBOR and it was well prior to the ILS GS Touchdown point. It was printed right on the apch plate. JUDGEMENT
So, lets stop the MORONIC use and just say something like: I've been around but have yet to learn that.
Smile boys, all the planes that day could be used again without major overhaul! ;-)
I remember a flight I did once, where the only turn off was sort of in the middle of the runway, most of the guys would have to go to the end and back track, but I undershot safely and put it down harder than normal to save A- time & B- fuel .
Ha ha that's classic. Either you're a pretender or you let your ego slide right on into the flight deck beside you and probably shouldn;t be flying 737's with paying pax onboard.
Do you honestly believe that you're better than "most of the guys" with your whopping 4500 hours? Wait til you've got that much time in the bunk and then revisit your post. (hint....you'll be embarrassed)
Ha ha that's classic. Either you're a pretender or you let your ego slide right on into the flight deck beside you and probably shouldn;t be flying 737's with paying pax onboard.
Do you honestly believe that you're better than "most of the guys" with your whopping 4500 hours? Wait til you've got that much time in the bunk and then revisit your post. (hint....you'll be embarrassed)
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: glendale
Posts: 819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
4500 hours in the bunk? ha
how about 4500 hours in the flare? ;-)
think about it. fly 1000 hours a year in transoceanic flying. 2 minutes on takeoff , 3 minutes on landing you might hand fly. Cut everything in half as you have to share the total year with your copilot , so maybe the typical transoceanic pilot has 250 hand flying minutes a year.
4 hours plus 10mins.
yeah. I think most pilots should just log: interested observer time.
how about 4500 hours in the flare? ;-)
think about it. fly 1000 hours a year in transoceanic flying. 2 minutes on takeoff , 3 minutes on landing you might hand fly. Cut everything in half as you have to share the total year with your copilot , so maybe the typical transoceanic pilot has 250 hand flying minutes a year.
4 hours plus 10mins.
yeah. I think most pilots should just log: interested observer time.
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Tree
Posts: 222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is a well known fact that flying skills have been eroded to an alarming degree over recent times. Pilots going through the sausage factory these days are not a lot more than system operators (God give me strength). What flying skills that remain, are well down the list of priorities for an "airline". In my day if anyone had any finesse whatsoever, they would be able to put a kite down where they wanted it with low g landing to boot.
