Antonov Landing Technique

[Check Airman]

Hi all,

I saw this youtube video (at 1:10) where the pilot makes a pronounced nose down control column movement right before touchdown. I've noticed that a lot of the Russian built planes tend to land pretty flat, as opposed to the more pronounced nose high attitude seen on western designs. Can anyone with experience on Russian planes give some insight into why this is so?

You Tube

[B2N2]

Im thinking he’s compensating for a gust of wind.

[Vessbot]

I wouldn't interpret a single video where the plane touches down nosewheel-first, then bounces the mains, then rolls on the nosewheel for a few seconds with the mains in the air, as representative for consistent technique across a whole manufacturer's line and in need of an explanation.

[Thrust Augmentation]

Is it not because it's a high wing transport aircraft with plenty of high lift devices rather than because it's an An? All the other aircraft are low wing passenger aircraft.

Plenty of large, high wing heavy aircraft land pretty level without much, if any flare - C-17, B-52 are others. They also have pretty robust landing gear & no paying passengers to compain about a hard landing. Can't recollect the exact details, but saw / read something about a flat landing being preferred in the An124 / An 225 due to the multi axle landing gear

[Check Airman]

Originally Posted by Vessbot

I wouldn't interpret a single video where the plane touches down nosewheel-first, then bounces the mains, then rolls on the nosewheel for a few seconds with the mains in the air, as representative for consistent technique across a whole manufacturer's line and in need of an explanation.

Not just a single video. Here’s 12 minutes worth of videos. The takeoffs are pretty flat too.

You Tube

[Atlas Shrugged]

Here's another head scratcher............"The Vodka Burner is Rolling"

You Tube

[Chu Chu]

Seems like multiple pairs of main gear would put the aft one pretty far aft of the CG. That would require quite a nose-up moment for rotation (and presumably cause a pretty violent derotation if landed nose-high).

[tdracer]

Originally Posted by Atlas Shrugged

Here's another head scratcher............"The Vodka Burner is Rolling"

Atlas, for a long time I worked across the street from Boeing Field and we had a good view of the airport operations. We'd sometimes get AN-124s coming in, bringing in 777 engines when one of the engine manufactures got a bit behind on their deliveries (at the time they did all the engine build-up there at Boeing Field, before trucking the engines to Everett or Renton to hang on a new aircraft right before rollout).
Anyway, watching the AN-124's takeoff, that video isn't too far from the norm that we witnessed. It was quite common, when taking off to the north (towards Seattle)(which was the direction our windows faced so we had a good view), they'd barely get off the ground by the end of the runway, barely climb, and still be at maybe 1000 feet when they went out over Elliott Bay off the Seattle waterfront (it honestly looked as if they were too low to clear some of the taller buildings if they'd flown over downtown). Note that they were usually empty aside from fuel when they departed.
I can only assume that the engines were so fragile that they'd do the maximum possible derate for takeoff, with a hand close to the throttles to give it more thrust if absolutely necessary.

[Atlas Shrugged]

And there I was thinking it was more a case of exuberance overwhelming common sense!

If I had to do it, takeoffs and landings would rapidly cease being fun......... about day two.