Enter Air landing Salzburg
Join Date: May 2010
Location: UK
Age: 79
Posts: 1,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wind reported by the tower is a 10 minute average. In bad weather the problem is gusts and windshear which can vary from moment to moment. The guys who landed most likely got lucky in variable wind conditions and made perfectly good landings within crosswind limits.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Ormond Beach
Age: 49
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Wherever someone will pay me to do fun stuff
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wind reported by the tower is a 10 minute average.
Although I don't think it makes a great difference to the events in the videos.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Nanaimo, B.C.
Age: 66
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The video shows fairly steady hands by the flying pilot. He's not chasing every slight roll that occurred due to turbulence.
From the exterior video it was hard to tell if any of the wing drop was caused by the pilot. Interior video shows that it was all from nature and not pilot induced.
Wing flexing, and cabin interior creaking, shows that it's a fairly rough arrival.
The video shows fairly steady hands by the flying pilot. He's not chasing every slight roll that orrcurred due to turbulence.
From the exterior video it was hard to tell if any of the wing drop was caused by the pilot. Interior video shows that it was all from nature and not pilot induced.
Nice job.
From the exterior video it was hard to tell if any of the wing drop was caused by the pilot. Interior video shows that it was all from nature and not pilot induced.
Wing flexing, and cabin interior creaking, shows that it's a fairly rough arrival.
The video shows fairly steady hands by the flying pilot. He's not chasing every slight roll that orrcurred due to turbulence.
From the exterior video it was hard to tell if any of the wing drop was caused by the pilot. Interior video shows that it was all from nature and not pilot induced.
Nice job.
If the into-wind wing is held down, a gust will result in translation across the runway, not roll.
Can't see the de-crab rudder input very well on the exterior video, but maybe someone who drives these things can comment?
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Brasil
Age: 42
Posts: 145
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I guess that this was the flight from the outside...
Plane tries to land in Austria storm... takes off again - BBC News
Plane tries to land in Austria storm... takes off again - BBC News
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Look at the smoke stack on the right of the video. Look at the angle of the smoke; from the left. From experience assess the strength of the crosswind. Was it that wild? Look at the behaviour of the a/c; left wing down, right wing down. R&R. PIO? An attempt at 100' of left wing down, not very positive, then at 30' a huge right bank - not good with wind from left - then a huge lunge to the left to correct, just touched left wheel first and an immediate GA. This could suggest a large rudder input in the flare without counter aileron to keep wings level. If the pilot was 'having difficulty' due to experience, I wonder if the captain took over and made the GA. It was immediate; there was no attempt to rock & roll the a/c onto the ground. It was boom & go. To me it could be a change of hands on the controls. If so, then a huge well done to the skipper.
Without a longitudinal picture it is difficult to assess accurately what the lateral flight path & crab angle was and the control inputs; but IMHO it was not a 'stable controlled' arrival. We also need the ATC wind information on finals to help our opinions. However, to dismiss this with the disdain some have done IMHO is not valid. The crew made the correct decision, no doubt, but to dismiss the event so lightly is debatable. No doubt this happens very often every day around the world; it's how we learn, but give credit where it is due to the pilot who made the GA. However, do not dismiss the possible mis-handling of the last 500' as trivia without us knowing the true Wx conditions. If this was mere X-wind then someone needs more practice.
Without a longitudinal picture it is difficult to assess accurately what the lateral flight path & crab angle was and the control inputs; but IMHO it was not a 'stable controlled' arrival. We also need the ATC wind information on finals to help our opinions. However, to dismiss this with the disdain some have done IMHO is not valid. The crew made the correct decision, no doubt, but to dismiss the event so lightly is debatable. No doubt this happens very often every day around the world; it's how we learn, but give credit where it is due to the pilot who made the GA. However, do not dismiss the possible mis-handling of the last 500' as trivia without us knowing the true Wx conditions. If this was mere X-wind then someone needs more practice.
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: world
Posts: 3,424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmm RAT 5, all plausible but a lot of guesswork and speculation, especially the change of hands on the touchdown. My feeling is that, regardless who was PF, they simply decided to have a go hoping that they may arrive over the threshold in between gusts, (remember that some others did get in) but equally decided that if things went pear shaped they would without hesitation execute an immediate G/A.
Psychophysiological entity
I've read in, but haven't seen a word about ground speed.
Without knowing how much concrete he'd got left, or the exact surface wind time-line, I'd be making wild guesses, but me, I'd have had my hand on the taps and been thinking the tell-tale reporting system could go and
itself.
The aircraft seems for a moment bizarrely slow over the ground. This leaves it at the mercy of a surface wind dropping off just about the time this aircraft fell out of the very limited sky, right wing first.
Without knowing how much concrete he'd got left, or the exact surface wind time-line, I'd be making wild guesses, but me, I'd have had my hand on the taps and been thinking the tell-tale reporting system could go and
itself. The aircraft seems for a moment bizarrely slow over the ground. This leaves it at the mercy of a surface wind dropping off just about the time this aircraft fell out of the very limited sky, right wing first.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 241
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Most likely a lower FL...
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Runway 33, Wind 270/26G46. Can be wild at times due to the surrounding terrain.
Last edited by tractorpuller; 31st Oct 2017 at 11:58.
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Not lost, but slightly uncertain of position.
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: EU
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flap Setting for Landing
For normal landings, use flaps 15, 30, or flaps 40. Flaps 15 is normally limited to airports where approach climb performance is a factor. Flaps 30 provides better noise abatement and reduced flap wear/loads. When performance criteria are met, use flaps 40 to minimize landing speed, and landing distance.
Note: Normal landings using flaps 15 are permitted for authorized operators with appropriate performance data available.
and Limitations chapter (tailored for my company, might be different for EnterAir):
Flaps 15 normal landings are prohibited. A Flaps 15 landing may be performed when required by a non-normal procedure.
Not familiar with liners like the 737, but are there any procedures like landing with less then full flaps during heavy wind/crosswind/gusts, to have better control response?
Don't confuse that technique published for example in the Cessna 172 POH that states: Crosswind Landings - When landing in a strong crosswind, use the minimum flap setting required for the field length. If flap settings greater than 20 degrees are used in side-slips with full rudder deflection, some elevator oscillation may be felt at normal approach speeds. However, this does affect control of the airplane.
Reduced flap settings with concomitant extra speed, run the risk of a longer float which is undesirable during any landing - cross-wind included.
Normally not necessary in jet transports.
Don't confuse that technique published for example in the Cessna 172 POH that states: Crosswind Landings - When landing in a strong crosswind, use the minimum flap setting required for the field length. If flap settings greater than 20 degrees are used in side-slips with full rudder deflection, some elevator oscillation may be felt at normal approach speeds. However, this does affect control of the airplane.
Reduced flap settings with concomitant extra speed, run the risk of a longer float which is undesirable during any landing - cross-wind included.
Don't confuse that technique published for example in the Cessna 172 POH that states: Crosswind Landings - When landing in a strong crosswind, use the minimum flap setting required for the field length. If flap settings greater than 20 degrees are used in side-slips with full rudder deflection, some elevator oscillation may be felt at normal approach speeds. However, this does affect control of the airplane.
Reduced flap settings with concomitant extra speed, run the risk of a longer float which is undesirable during any landing - cross-wind included.
Speaking obviously as a passenger but one who has flown a lot-including being based in Bermuda for 12 yearss (land of horizontal rain, massive storms and gusts from the South West where the runway is 31/13 due to topography) I think pilots today have a tough job in these circumstances where there is a lot of pressure to keep to schedule and soem critical decsions have to be made very quickly close to the ground..
To me it seemd this flight was certainly a bit rocky as it came down the approach but under control. Just over the threshold things go from bad to worse really really quickly, the crew decide to go around and thanks to the awesome power available on a light weight twin airliner they can power away from all kinds of trouble but in this case they were so close to ground when things went really wild that the aircraft did touch down, just unavoidable.
i thought it was great video to watch being glad I wasnt in 33A but the crew did as good a job as could be expected in extremely tricky conditions. These shouldn't be portrayed -as they almost always are as nearly a crash. Unless the crew were busting limits on the approach it looks like a well done if not everyday piece of work in chalelnging conditions.
To me it seemd this flight was certainly a bit rocky as it came down the approach but under control. Just over the threshold things go from bad to worse really really quickly, the crew decide to go around and thanks to the awesome power available on a light weight twin airliner they can power away from all kinds of trouble but in this case they were so close to ground when things went really wild that the aircraft did touch down, just unavoidable.
i thought it was great video to watch being glad I wasnt in 33A but the crew did as good a job as could be expected in extremely tricky conditions. These shouldn't be portrayed -as they almost always are as nearly a crash. Unless the crew were busting limits on the approach it looks like a well done if not everyday piece of work in chalelnging conditions.
