Flare/airbus
 

I cant believe the pilot who filmed his landing has the :mad: to post this online,really no clue..
Pilot's-eye View - Landing in Stormy Weather - YouTube

Elaborate ?

By Newfoundland standards thats a VFR day!

The final approach to Changi was reasonably interesting, but could have done without the preceding 6 minutes of nothing but cloud. :O

Elaborate?
Is a landing flare of 12 secs normal to you?they touched down past 4000 feet..
Is that normal??if it ever happened to me,i'd want to hide for a month and hope i forget it....let alone post it on the web:ugh:

He broke out at 700', and it was perfectly clear underneath. What am I missing?

Jesus christ guys....im talking about the flare not the approach...:uhoh:
12 secs flare ok for you guys?

Not that unusual or bad. Yes they touch down a bit long but are you mistaking when the nosewheel touches down for the point the mains touch. Hard to tell but the mains touch down before the end of the touch down zone. They were quite possible carrying some extra speed given the weather which can cause a bit of a float.

Ive looked at it again,the nose starts to drop from the horizon just as they pass the 3000 feet marker and the nose touches 12 secs after passing the threshold.
It may not be bad for you but i find this quite poor.
Tailwind or excess speed,either one does not make this flare good enough..
Is it standard in Airbus to give nose down inputs after the nose is on the ground,?
How about the hand on the tiller after nose is down?

The flare may have been a bit floaty, but it touches down towards the end of the touch down zone, then he puts a bit up backstick in to stop the nosewheel slamming down. As soon as the nosewheel is down, his hand is off the stick. I don't see any nose down inputs.

I tend to put my hand on the tiller after touchdown as well, just in case I need to put in a greater input than the limits of the rudder pedal based steering.

Not a bad Airbus landing by any stretch of the imagination IMHO.

Why does he handfly it from such an altitude? Surely s.o.p. is to take over when you hear 'retard, retard'. That's the way it was demonstrated to me when I did an ATC Familiarisation Flight.

Well as someone whose job this is I can tell you it is not a bad landing, not good but not bad. The runway is HUGE, maybe he lost some speed in the flare due to wind shifting so left the thrust on to avoid a hard landing, maybe he was carrying extra speed due to the conditions and floated a bit, maybe there was a gust in the flare that caused a float, maybe he just flared a bit too much and floated, why are you continuing to try to justify this as a terrible landing? It is not.

Chevvron:

It is not sop in any airline to take over only when it says retard. That is what you would do if conducting an autoland with the trust levers but it does not indicate the point to disconnect the autopilot. Usually pilots hand fly it for some or all of the approach. There is nothing in our sops thats says you cannot hand fly it from top of descent. The wording which I expect is similar to most airlines is along the lines of to use an appropriate level of automation for the prevailing situation.

Sloppy landing all i can say:p

Wouldn't call that sloppy myself. Took some time to get the nosegear down, but apart from that it was quite normal. And not different to most 737 landings i saw ;)

Absolutely nothing wrong with that landing.

On an absolutely perfect flare, you want your main wheels to touch down on the 1000' markers just by the PAPIs, This guy flares maybe a little bit high but he flies the plane all the way down to a touchdown just after the 1000' markers.

The aircraft touches down roughly at the 8:10 mark. After that, all he's doing is keeping the nosewheel off the ground. I personally don't like doing that but some people do to bleed off energy aerodynamically.

Good landing imho.

Source: 320 pilot.

Better review your markings..:zzz::hmm: