Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
70s Era Widebody With The Slowest Landing Speed?  
User currently offline747400sp From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4252 posts, RR: 2
Posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 12517 times:

Yesterday, I was looking at a video of an A380 landing at LAX on youtube. People was talking about how an A380 has a slower landing speed than a 747 or A340, and that got me to thinking. What 1970s era widebody has the slowest landing speed? If you can please list all four the 747, DC10, L1011 and A300 landing speed that would be nice? Thank you.

4 replies: All unread, jump to last
User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17668 posts, RR: 65
Reply 1, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 12441 times:

747 I think. At least it was well known for low landing speeds.

"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineHAL From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 2636 posts, RR: 52
Reply 2, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 12436 times:

It's really too variable to answer definitively, because landing speed depends so much on the weight of the aircraft. The DC-10 or L1011 probably had the lower landing speed, depending on which one had the lowest possible 'legal inflight weight', meaning whichever one of those two could be emptied out the most and still be legal to fly. For instance (according to my somewhat-old DC-10 manual) Ref speed for landing at maximum landing weight and max flaps is about 137 knots, while at extremely light weights (no pax or cargo, minimum fuel) it could be as low as 115 knots. For comparison the 767 ranges from 145 knots at max landing weight to 119 knots for an empty aircraft. Those low-weight speed are somewhat unrealistic though, because nobody ever flew the planes regularly in that condition. I wasn't working at Hawaiian when we had the L1011's, so I don't have access to the numbers for that plane. Sorry.


One smooth landing is skill. Two in a row is luck. Three in a row and someone is lying.
User currently offlineZeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 10844 posts, RR: 76
Reply 3, posted (8 years 8 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 12289 times:

Approach speeds at max landing weights...

DC10-10 140 kt
747-100 141 kt
747-200 141 kt
L1011 - 143 kt
DC10-30 147 kt

We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently onlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 29505 posts, RR: 24
Reply 4, posted (8 years 8 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 12216 times:

Quoting Zeke (Reply 3):
Approach speeds at max landing weights...

DC10-10 140 kt
747-100 141 kt
747-200 141 kt
L1011 - 143 kt
DC10-30 147 kt

This 2-page Boeing summary document includes approach speeds (3rd column from the left) for Boeing and earlier Douglas/McDonnell-Douglas types.

Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic 70s Era Widebody With The Slowest Landing Speed?
No username? Sign up now!

Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Do You "feel" The Landing Speed? posted Fri Jul 15 2005 10:04:14 by Oli
What Is Special With The Red Squares? posted Fri Sep 14 2007 20:02:34 by B777Neuss
Why Always With The Dinging? posted Mon Aug 27 2007 12:43:39 by Glom
What's Up With The Double Yoke On The Il-62 posted Fri Aug 24 2007 02:10:15 by Starlionblue
Does The F 404 Share It Core With The F 101? posted Sun Feb 11 2007 04:39:20 by 747400sp
8 Pax With The Air Greenland A332 posted Tue Jan 23 2007 00:02:27 by AbleToFly
Study With The Job posted Mon Dec 4 2006 06:12:25 by HAWK21M
What Was Wrong With The Plane I Just Flew? posted Sat Sep 30 2006 00:56:30 by OyKIE
Flying 737 With The Wet Compass Extended. posted Sat Jul 29 2006 19:45:36 by SlamClick
Was The P&W 2000 Meant To Compete With The CFM-56? posted Mon May 29 2006 19:31:12 by 747400sp
If Boeing Stayed With The 727 Original Design? posted Wed Apr 7 2010 15:01:20 by 747400sp
Engine Start With The 747/200 posted Sat Jan 9 2010 14:46:50 by Oli
Aircraft Parts With The Most $ Value posted Sun Jul 26 2009 11:07:11 by An225

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format