Two 747 questions...

[EDML]

I am pretty sure it is quite abrupt on a 747 as well. Seeing videos of such landings I always thought it would rip the tires of the wheel.

[RVF750]

As to abrupt. It's not rocket science...my 10p worth.

You have an approach speed and power, and a body angle to achieve the correct rate of descent. Just at the point you want to reduce R.O.D. with a flare, you apply significant sideslip to align, and wonder why the extra drag from this reduces your energy enough to make it plant on rather than kiss the tarmac? Pretty standard for all swept wing jet transports. By aligning a bit earlier you can ease up the power and reestablish an equilibrium. then when you flare and reduce power it bleeds energy more normally. Hence those that decrab earlier or after landing tend to suffer less "firm" arrival than the last minute swingers.....

[A Squared]

Originally Posted by Intruder

That DE who said "Autobrakes 4 is cooler" needs to get his head examined. The harder the brakes are applied, the more power (i.e., energy dissipation/time) used and the less influence of other factors like air drag, reverse thrust, and mechanical friction. Therefore, Autobrakes 2 and max reverse thrust will cause the least wear.

Not a 747 pilot, but this is my thought as well. You're going to bring the airplane to a compete stop before the end of the runway (hopefully) so the less braking you use the more of the planes kinetic energy is dissipated with drag and reverse. Dialing up your autobrake factor just means you use more brake, sooner, therefore less time for kinetic to be dissipated by drag and reverse, and more kinetic energy that is transformed into brake heat. At the extreme end of this is the runway long enough to stop using no brake and no energy is turned into brake heat.

[Local Variation]

Question.....I was down at LHR yesterday working and whilst walking down the Bath Rd noticed a 747 take off very close by on the northern runway westbound.

T’was a windy day like today and from my position on pretty much directly behind, could see the nose cranked into wind (to the left) on the initial climb out to maintain track.

The aircraft commenced a turn to right and I noticed the nose “appeared” to lag in the turn. Wondered whether the rudder would had been applied in the same aileron sense to kick the nose into the turn?

[mustangsally]

Suggest searching for Boeing Crosswind landing tests. They will demonstrate landing with at least 25Knts crosswind. Both from the flight deck and runway edge. Intruder has already said it all. I have landed with at least a 25 knot crosswind bit uncomfortable, but very controllable. The 74 all models are great.