Airbus A/C flaring on landing
 

I've generally noticed that Airbus aircraft tend to flare with a high AoA compared to other makes, sometimes to the point of near tailstrike. I've even seen a few A330s bounce upon landing due to this "phenomena" . This is irregardless of operator. My question is: Is this steep flare a component of the autolanding software or a Airbus FCOM stipulated thing that they should flare with high AoA ?:)

no its not... I fly A321 and we have maximum pitch of 7,5 degrees but I almost never go above 5 degrees when I flare. I dont know if that's high considering other aircraft but I wouldn't think so...

The autoland pitches about 4,5 - 6° depending on conditions...

Yes,but you probably add some app speed to reduce pitch increasing landing distance.

do you make this addition in autoland ? i do.

Never seen increased speed used for that purpose on an A320 autoland in my company, nor were there ever pitch attitudes routinely in excess of 5 degrees.

Perhaps they landing with flap 3 instead of full to save fuel/noise which gives a higher nose attitude on approach/flare?

Some operators specify on A321 (due to long body to avoid tailstrike?) checking that Vapp is at least 5 knots above Vls and if not to adjust it to that

If the nose is being held that high, whether landing flap 3 or flap full, the flare is being held off too long, i.e. improper landing technique. The best landing technique is one which closely emulates the autoland technique.

Another common problem (from my perspective) is leaving the thrust up too long in the flare. More than two or three "Retard" calls is a clue that the thrust was left up too long. Personally, it's very rare that I don't close the thrust levers passing 20 ft on the autocallout, again just like the autoland.

On a normal day in the A320 Airbus recommend you should close the T/L promptly at 30' and there should be no "RETARD" reminder. If you leave it too late the thrust starts to increase to maintain target speed in the flare, increasing the landing distance. On an autoland the RETARD call is an instruction and not a reminder - the A/THR will already have reduced thrust.

The 330 & 340 have a natural tendency to flare with a high AoA. You wont notice this in a 320 series. If you have a bit of a tail wind you will hear the RETARD call out about 6-8 times.

So, is this a result of the autoland software or pilot input ?

All aircraft land with a high AoA - do you mean pitch attitude?

1-There is no difference between Autoland and manually flown landing attitude.

2-There is no significant difference between Airbus and any other swept wing large jet in terms of it's landing attitude.

No.. the airbus 330-340 land with a higher AoA than other planes. Manual or auto doesnt matter.

YouTube - A-330 Landing

Observe this video. I fly both 330 and 320.

How do you know the AoA? Do you mean pitch attitude?

My bad. Got confused. I meant the pitch attitude.:ooh:

Mourgo:

The landing on both the A320 series, A330 series and all Airbus FBW(including the A380) should be a change in pitch and let the aircraft settle down, not a prolonged flare like the video you posted. Proper pitch change and thrust reduction will reward you with a smooth landing on the landing zone and not a prolonged flare looking for the ilusive greaser. Do this and you will have constant smooth safe landings, just watch the auto pilot do it and emulate it.

G

You can see the AoA in the ACMS, if it's of any interest....

My company encourages Config 3 approaches/landings where possible. Sitting at the hold watching company aircraft land, I very often think "that's quite a high pitch!", but apparently that's a competely normal perception if you're watching an A319 landing in Config 3!.

landing parameters
 

First the background: Airbus gives 3 landing distance tables, "manual/manual", "manual/autobrake" (FCOM 2.03) and "autoland/autobrake".
"Manual/manual" is the minimum landing distance based on certification flight tests. You arrive over the "screen" (50´) with Vref (Vls), retard the thrust and rotate the aircraft along a constant flight path resulting in a touchdown speed of Vls minus 7-8 kts and a relatively high pitch attitude. Derotation is positive and max brakes are applied without reverse.
"Autoland" includes the addition of the A/THR +5kts and that is why there is a difference between the FCOM 2 and QRH values.
Assuming that all systems work as per design the only variables affecting landing distance are landing GS and residual thrust (+ some wind effects during ground roll).
This is why Airbus recommends retarding thrust at 30´/40´and before the retard reminder, but....

Line pilots are reluctant to do this :confused:. Many prefer to keep the (auto)thrust in , sometimes even to touchdown, with a baloon, a 3-pointer, a prolonged flare or firm touchdown and excessive landing roll as the result. And this is not only a French problem; the West Coast jocks are even worse, if anything.

During countless base-flight landings with pilots having between 100 and 20.000 hrs total stick time I see a clear tendency: The thrust is retarded too late for an easy landing (old hands and Boing/MD to Airbus converts are most pronounced).
Once they retard as per FCOM and make a smooth rotation the whole thing falls into place and the landing becomes simple. The exception is if you have a lot of ballast concentrated in the rear of an empty aircraft (which is often the case during base flights), then the bird becomes more responsive and does not require a positive flare, but this configuration is rare during normal ops.

There are a few Airbus diff´s: Early A320s require a more positive flare, A321 - having a different flap slot - require less rotation and 330/340 settles nicely with 40´ retardation and a smooth rotation.

But is late retard a No-no? If the actual headwind is stronger than the FMS entered value GS mini may give too small an addition. If the wind is gusting greatly or downdraft is present. Then is may be prudent to delay the retardation at the expense of longer landing, but dont do it as a routine. And not in tailwind....and not with Conf 3 or less.

An operator had a serious problem with hard landings on a particular (non-airbus) type. I made a FDR study of the hard landings and all had a touchdown attitude of 4 dg or less. It turned out that the pilots had been taught a "power-on/no flare" technique ever since the CFI converted from straight wing props to jet some generations ago.:ugh:
You may have heard that "this new aircraft require a totally different landig technique"....Bullocks! I have flown supersonic deltas to LSAs and a lot in between and the fundamentals are the same (except those with boundary layer suction and blown flaps).

Remember: An aircraft is an aircraft is an aircraft! Chop the thrust at FCOM value, rotate a few degrees (typically from 3 dg ANU to 5-6 dg ANU depending on CoG) and wait for the kiss. Even if the flare is a bit longer than you are used to, the stopping distance is not affected much, if you got rid of the thrust passing the threshold.:ok:

Next time in the sim, ask your friendly TRE if you can practise a few landings (yes...I know..but anyway..).

Happy landings!

Capt T.

could this be to do with the fact Airbus fly 1.15 Vs (guess) on app due to having FBW where as Boeings fly 1.3 Vs? This would imply both high pitch attitude and AoA in the flare for Airbus.