Delta A330-300 Lands Short in Amsterdam
 

Interesting report coming from EHAM. Link

The first questions that come to my mind are : Why use a short 22 runway when you ahave the main runway 24 with 3000 m and a wind 240 Gusting 40 Kts ? Or was 24 closed ? Or did ATC sent an A330 to Runway 22 due to noise abatment?

Not unusual to have 22 as landing and RWY 24 as main TO rwy in these conditions. Very rare that you get 24 even in extreme winds. Approach for RWY 22 lets you fly over downtown Amsterdam so not a noise abatement reason.

( And 240/40 on a rwy 22 is not that bad actually, 15 kts crosswind...)

I don't think 24 is available as a landing runway for heavies. Back in the day I remember watching commuters make an approach on 27 and swing visually to 24 (shorter taxi time to their gates). I personally have never seen a heavy use 24 for landing. In fact, I don't think 24 even has an ILS.

Rwy 24 has no ILS to my knowledge. But I have done an ILS27 with a break off to runway 24 with a 747

They all have RNP approaches with LPV minima.

Also if you use R24 for arrivals, what runway are you going to use for the departures? R24’s 3000m runway is better utilised to get the long haul guys away

Landed on 22 in an A320, no big deal in a 330. Given that it has an ILS the real issue is how come they touched down so early. No glideslope GPWS?

They missed the threshold by a few yards.
 

https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....2a13d63d18.jpg
https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....a445bc8112.jpg

Just a ploy by Delta legal to avoid paying landing fees.

Looks from those pictures just one set of wheels hit the ground.

I think you'll find that the two pics each show one of the MLG tracks. Looks like the aircraft was slightly left of the centreline.

That looks like an extremely high precision touch-down, almost exactly where the threshold starts. But wrong technique fella !

Or maybe they were on the glide but a gust pushed them or dropped them down onto the threshold ?

What's called brick one landing but ended being brick zero landing.

Flying into AMS prior to 2014, when 22 was in use, we used to circle to runway 24 in the 330.

Given the waterlogged state of the undershoot area, they we’re lucky the gear didn’t dig in any deeper and end up being torn off when it met the tarmac. Obvious heavy rain that day so the weather conditions during the approach come into question, ie wind shear or misjudging the last few seconds with visibility lost in battering rain.

lucky indeed ...

Given that the main landing gear on the 330 is tilted upwards when the aircraft is airborne, I would hazard a guess that what contacted the soft ground, just before the runway, were the wheels of the rear axle.
When the wheels of the rear axle came in contact with the runway edge, this would have caused a bit of a violent untilting of main gear, slamming the wheels of the front axle on the runway.

Potential to damage the gear interface unit, which can cause the system to think that the aircraft is in the air, making brakes and reverse unavailable, leaving the crew with nothing available to stop the aircraft after the touchdown. Iberia in Quito comes to mind.

From an on-line AIP, runway 22 appears to have a single PAPI (3deg, 62ft), but no specific installation for long body aircraft.
This appears to to be the situation for all runways at EHAM; is this correct?

Runway 22 appears to have the lowest threshold crossing height of all of the runways - 62ft, agin is this correct?
Assuming this value to be eye height, then what would the wheel height over threshold be for an A330 (+/- wheel bogie tilt)?

Also, that runways 18 C and 22 have no hard-surface prior the the threshold markings;- deduced from online photo maps; is this correct?

https://eaip.lvnl.nl/2023-01-12-AIRA...dex-en-GB.html

Search EHAM, index of airports, EHAM AD 2

The area in front of 22 used to be concrete,back in the olden days. Rumour has it the current grassy area is just a few cm's thick with the old concrete just below it.

Yes, there was concrete before the threshold as recently as 2008 (removed sometime between 2008 and 2012), as it's visible on google earth historical imagery. It doesn't provide any indication as to the depth of soil, however.