Unbelievable A380 landing
... which should be off for a X-wind landing.
That was a simply terrible landing...
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Behind you
Age: 76
Posts: 311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On finals it looks a little like pilot induced dutch roll. The aileron & rudder inputs were not too coordinated. The lack of finesse with rudder was further demo'd during the flair. I've not flown FBW or side-sticks. From those with hands on knowledge is this common or difficult in your early days? Having said that would EK put AB newbies directly onto A380? Surely not. OTOH we all have bad days occasionally.
Surely you must know the systems very well...
SkyGod
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Palm Coast, Florida, USA
Age: 67
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 10 Likes
on
1 Post
. What a stupid and an unnecessary remark!
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: I wouldn't know.
Posts: 4,497
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not in any commercial airline jet i have flown. Might be in some tiny planes without integrated systems, but that is not the case in the bigger ones. Not to mention, there is no yaw damper system apart from other systems in the airbus, it is an integral part of the FBW architecture.
Lot of people on here know little or nothing about modern FCS and the 380 in particular. The aircraft is very stable and needs no rudder on approach (although the system may put some in but not as radically and rapidly as the video). Turning off yaw dampers? Welcome to the 1970s. Not even possible.
Standard stuff. Get it on the centreline, at the appropriate height select the landing attitude and smoothly kick off the drift. No adverse roll to worry about.
Standard stuff. Get it on the centreline, at the appropriate height select the landing attitude and smoothly kick off the drift. No adverse roll to worry about.
YD off? Heh.
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Bremen
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
www.airbusdriver.net/airbus_crosswind.htm has a few different unofficial viewpoints of how to achieve crosswind landings -- to many to quote, alas, and I wouldn't know which to select, some featuring rudder and some not so much.
Watching the video, I can see the nose weaving about on the approach, not sure how stable that was in the first place. The bounce probably contributed to the swerve, because the undercarriage would have provided directional stability had it remained in contact with the ground. Is the FBW rudder attenuation different on the ground than in the air, and could the automation have been in the wrong mode?
Watching the video, I can see the nose weaving about on the approach, not sure how stable that was in the first place. The bounce probably contributed to the swerve, because the undercarriage would have provided directional stability had it remained in contact with the ground. Is the FBW rudder attenuation different on the ground than in the air, and could the automation have been in the wrong mode?
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: The middle east
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am afraid EK does frequently take new joiners (with minimum experience) and puts them on the A380. It is cheaper (from the company's perspective) to pay for one transition course for the new joiner than to pay for two transition courses to move a route experienced FO from the B777 to the A380 and for the new joiner to replace him
Bless ‘The Sun’...well informed journalism.......
“Reports claim vigorous winds were swept across the airport at around 22 mph yesterday.
Eventually the pilot brings the huge plane under control after completing a crash crosswind landing.”
“Reports claim vigorous winds were swept across the airport at around 22 mph yesterday.
Eventually the pilot brings the huge plane under control after completing a crash crosswind landing.”
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: EC
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Over controlling or aggressive use of the rudder is a big no no, and that's clearly a mighty big and effective rudder.
Remember the 2001 loss of American Airlines AA587 Airbus A300 due tail structure failure due to aggressive use of rudder?
Remember the 2001 loss of American Airlines AA587 Airbus A300 due tail structure failure due to aggressive use of rudder?
SkyGod
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Palm Coast, Florida, USA
Age: 67
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 10 Likes
on
1 Post
Yeah but the AA tail was damaged in production, then “repaired” before delivery.
Air Transat and FedEx also had tail and rudder problems on their Airbuses, structural failure and delamination if memory serves me right.
Air Transat and FedEx also had tail and rudder problems on their Airbuses, structural failure and delamination if memory serves me right.
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Bremen
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeas, but the NTSB tested the materials and found they were still exceeding design strength. The National Transportation Safety Board determines that the probable cause of this accident was the in-flight separation of the vertical stabilizer as a result of the loads beyond ultimate design that were created by the first officer’s unnecessary and excessive rudder pedal inputs. --- NASA-Langley’s and Airbus’ FEA models showed that the stress and strain profiles of the right rear lug at the time of vertical stabilizer separation were equivalent to those of the full-scale certification test at failure, and NASA’s PFA results showed that the failure load, failure mode, and location of failure initiation for the accident condition were equivalent to those of the full-scale certification test. --- The stresses developed exceeded the strength values for the CFRP material used in the manufacturing of the lugs; thus, the accident lug and the tested lugs fractured because of a tensile static overload. The accident reports has the full details on that in sections 1.16.3 and 1.16.4.
Which played no role in the accident. Any transport category jet would have lost the fin in those same circumstances.
Gender Faculty Specialist
