A380 Hard Landing at Oshkosh
 

How wide and long is runway 36, looks like the I/B engines are over the grass, not a lot of room to maneuver that's for sure.

Looks like its 6300' long and 50' wide; with that cross wind...they did a great job.

A 'rough' landing by Terry Lutz in a lightly loaded A380.

Runway 36 is 8000' X 150'

Didn't look like much of a flare to me. Could've ruddered out the crab before touchdown too. Of course I've never made a poor landing ;).

hard
 

it would be hard landing if the engines touched the grass!they did a good job.

Was on the field at LAX for the first landing there......had less xwind but the landing is what it is, the 380 just seems to go through a lot of gyrations the last fifty feet and during rollout. Same shifting around and large rudder deflections at LAX.......normal nice landing for this bird apparently......

According to AvWeb, the A380 had to land within the first 5500 feet or else it would miss the only taxiway wide enough to get off the runway. Don't know if that qualifies as a short field landing or not.

I didn't care much for the tone of the commentator so I don't know if it really was that bad, or just another Boeing driver criticising an Airbus. I'm curious to see what the knowledgeable people here think.

Weather was

KOSH 281953Z VRB06G14KT 10SM FEW060
KOSH 282053Z 26007G17KT

That make you cringe just watching it! Never mind checking the 'g' meter, that would have registered on the Richter scale! :eek: What's the bet he had the autothrust in and it pulled off the thrust at an inopportune moment!

Having said that, the X wind looks like a solid 25 kts if not more, which would not have helped. No doubt he briefed a 'firm' arrival due to the limited runway length available, just not quite that firm! :ooh:

Perhaps a covert hard landing inspection at OSH tonight!

I've never screwed one up either :ok:

With every landing I've seen of big bird, the tail does seem to be doing an inordinate amount of waggling. More so than other craft on the same approach with the same x-wind. Not sure why this is.

Have a look at where the photographers are. Just a bit of showing off for them so they could get a head on shot of the touchdown!

Boeing versus Airbus
 

Having flown most Boeings (707,727,737, 747-200,300,400) and Airbus (A300, A340- 200,300 &600 and A319) give me a max cross wind landing any time in a Boeing before an Airbus. Note how many Airbus's have runway excursions versus other types!

This is a slow speed landing in a big jet. That is going to result in a firm landing as there isn't the energy available for an effective flare.

A high nose attitude on landing could also result in a tail strike.

A firm landing is safer on a short runway as it enables a short landing roll because energy is dissipated in the landing.

Where's the damage? What fell off? Plenty of insinuations from Boeing trained pilots. Look at the Avweb video and the 777 pilot comments. Did anything come undone inside? Was anyone videoing from the flight deck on that approach? Would love to see/hear that footage........


AVwebFlash Complete Issue

The video comments are ridiculous.
It was a firm landing to keep it short and to make that special taxiway for parking. And a landing with stiff crosswinds on a narrow runway. I wanna see those same two "experts" doing it.

Many more like that and there'll be lot's of energy dissipated elsewhere too :ooh:

He could probably have landed just as short if he had flared and used rudder.
150 feet is plenty wide if ya land on the centerline. :sad:

Well I'm a lifelong Boeing pilot and it looked good to me. I would say 'firm', not hard, and exactly like it should be given the crosswind and roll-out considerations. Once again a drama being made out of nothing. 747 wings flex given firm landings like that. When you have a really 'hard' landing, the winglets fly off when the wing flexes violently. That was a good one.

Rainboe is on the money. What this 777-pilot does not mention is that a wing with two engines on it will flex a lot more under the same circumstances than one with only one. The fact that the crew didn't decrab might have to do with the lack of ground clearance of the upwind outer engine when such a maneuver would be performed, and with this in mind the crew elected to perform a touchdown with crab on, but wings level instead.

Good job I would say!

The aeroplane is authorised for landing with crab on anyway. No problemo! I didn't even notice any nodding of the engines which is a must for a really hard arrival.

Spotters on a website such as this with a high proportion of real pilots must try and not sensationalise each and every thing they see that could possibly construed, on even a dull day with nothing else happening, to create 'incidents', 'hard landings', 'almost crashes' out of nothing, please! Particularly here. You will get eaten. No 'youtube'-style sensationalism- it does not go down well.

For a short landing in a heavy crosswind, that was quite excellent. Why does everybody have it in for this aeroplane? Any possible 'incident'- they're out in force bleating about the 380!

Whats with the negative vibes?

It looks to me like he kept the nose towards the people with cameras for as long as he possible could to give them the best photo opportunities, it does look good with the big wings etc...pulled of a rather natty landing on a short runway, maybe a bit too much panache, but hey, then probably, and here's the real speculation... took his sports car (red/flashy/one of) from the hold, as he was lightly loaded, drove off with his Biggles-esk scarf streaming into the wind, sunglasses glinting in the sun while on his way to the most trendy bar in town, the one that has the really hot women.

Think positive about a fellow aviator and keep the mystery, that wasn't a heavy landing it was style!