|
stilton
The a380 is the easiest aeroplane to land, and land well. Great for the ego :} |
Originally Posted by casablanca
(Post 10057564)
I wish we had some real data/ numbers.....everyone says it is the best but from my limited perspective it struggles to carry any payload past 13 hours.....If I see more than 150 passengers on ULR flight I avoid it as a staff traveler because you will be offloaded! But then again I don't know what type of cargo loads they are carrying.
But in fairness every plane in the world will have start to have payload restrictions when max fuel required( except 77LR) |
Originally Posted by TurningFinalRWY36
(Post 10057588)
casablanca
Definitely no the case, had almost a full pax load on a 15hr flight not long ago. Burn of 90T over that time,total fuel ~100T, MTOW 277T, OEW ~138T gives us a rough usable payload of 39T 39 tons is a good payload....Our 350s seem quite a bit heavier, 275 take off weight and DOW of around 142 tons. I believe the earliest models were 146 tons so that’s a big difference |
Originally Posted by OK4Wire
(Post 10056496)
KayPam: it's really nice!
Much more responsive than the 330. However the actuators are not as fast as you'd want them to be.
Originally Posted by Sidestick_n_Rudder
(Post 10056847)
@Maggot,
I think you got me wrong - the 330 is the sweetest plane to land I know of. I wondered how the 350 was, as I heard some rumors it’s not as easy and my previous mob had a couple of hard ldgs on the 350. Never heard of one on the 330 :) This is partly due to the problems below
Originally Posted by BuzzBox
(Post 10056961)
Airbus published an OEB last year that required the HUD to be selected off by 1,000 ft AGL for manual landings. The OEB was published after several operators experienced hard landings that were attributed to high sidestick activity during the flare, caused by an over sensitive HUD FPV. I suspect the pilots involved were distracted by the FPV bouncing around and missed the cues they would normally use during the flare. I believe the problem was worse at night-time, because the display is quite bright, even at the dimmest setting. A new HUD standard is now available that cancels the OEB and manual landings can once again be flown using the HUD.
The A350 isn't difficult to land, but it is different to the A330; if you flare it like an A330 you generally end up floating a long way down the runway. The A350 is also much more sensitive in pitch and roll. But in facts, any large pitch input during final (the lowest, the worst, because you have less time to recognize the situation and go around), would lead to pilot induced oscillations. Airbus will never use this word because it would be a defect of the product they're selling us. Obviously they're working on a solution. Maybe they certified it since I left ? Pilot induced oscillations, on this airplane = the airplane overreacts but late, because the elevators are slow, then the pilots overreacts as well in the opposite direction. So at a given moment, the elevators will be full up, the stick full down and it reverses again and a again until either touchdown or go around.
Originally Posted by misd-agin
(Post 10057053)
“The OEB was published after several operators experienced hard landings that were attributed to high sidestick activity during the flare, caused by an over sensitive HUD FPV. I suspect the pilots involved were distracted by the FPV bouncing around and missed the cues they would normally use during the flare.”
If you’re chasing ‘the magic’, and the big ball disagrees, I’d recommend trusting the big ball. For those wondering, I work flight data analytics for an airline. I used to work for a a350 operator. But no longer. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 15:08. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.