Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Questions About A380 Landings.  
User currently offlineKU747 From Kuwait, joined Mar 2008, 377 posts, RR: 0
Posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 16479 times:

I flew on A380 more than 10 times, and not even once I experienced a smooth landing.
All 10 flights were very hard landings!!!
It got me to a point that I don't look forward to enjoy flying on A380.

My questions are the following:

- Anyone experienced a smooth landing on A380 ??
- Doesn't the frequent hard landings cause a frame and metal fatigue which will shorten the life of the aircraft??
- I understand that it is a giant aircraft but is it possible to land it smoothly or it is designed for the hard landings only??

Regards,

[Edited 2012-09-01 17:09:16]


707,727,73all,741,742,743,744,752,753,762,763,77all,300,310,319,320,321,332,333,343,346, L10,L15,DC10,MD11,SSC,VC10
47 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31123 posts, RR: 85
Reply 1, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 16439 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Were they all on the same airline?

My A380 experience has been with SQ and they seem to be able to put her down without knocking luggage out of the bins.  


User currently offlinecol From Malaysia, joined Nov 2003, 2122 posts, RR: 22
Reply 2, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 16411 times:

I guess we have not had a 380 bash for about a week, so one was due.

Sometimes hard landings are carried out due to conditions, but I find it hard to believe you would not look forward to flying on a 380 because of a bad landing or two.

Quoting KU747 (Thread starter):
My questions are the following:

- Anyone experienced a smooth landing on A380 ??
- Doesn't the frequent hard landings cause a frame and metal fatigue which will shorten the life of the aircraft??
- I understand that it is a giant aircraft but is it possible to land it smoothly or it is designed for the hard landings only ??

- SQ and EK have been great flights with great landings for me, many times now.
- I would think that your hard landings must have led to the airframe being taken out of service and inspected if you question frame/metal fatigue!!!
- I do not believe that you are asking this question. All aircraft are the same, they flare and land at similar rates, except when conditions dictate a firmer hit with the tarmac.

This is a strange topic!


User currently offlineEPA001 From Netherlands, joined Sep 2006, 4805 posts, RR: 40
Reply 3, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 16335 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Stitch (Reply 1):
Were they all on the same airline?

Good question.  
Quoting Stitch (Reply 1):
My A380 experience has been with SQ and they seem to be able to put her down without knocking luggage out of the bins.

I only flew the A380 4 times. Three landings were extremely smooth, one was a normal landing. Overall a very good score imho.  


User currently offlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2858 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 16333 times:

My A380 landings, with LH and SQ, have been totally normal.


AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently offlineKU747 From Kuwait, joined Mar 2008, 377 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 16318 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 1):
Were they all on the same airline?

All on EK DXB-LHR-DXB

Quoting Stitch (Reply 1):
- SQ and EK have been great flights with great landings for me, many times now.
- I would think that your hard landings must have led to the airframe being taken out of service and inspected if you question frame/metal fatigue!!!
- I do not believe that you are asking this question. All aircraft are the same, they flare and land at similar rates, except when conditions dictate a firmer hit with the tarmac.

I'm telling you 10 flights with 10 very hard landings with a big bang, at LHR and DXB, and most of the time the weather was nice.
I totally understand landing procedure and the flaring but it is very strange for me not to experience a smooth landing an A380 with 10 flights???

Quoting col (Reply 2):
- I would think that your hard landings must have led to the airframe being taken out of service and inspected if you question frame/metal fatigue!!!

No, I'm not saying that. What I'm saying that if the A380 always lands very hard, it will eventually leads to frame and body fatigue.



707,727,73all,741,742,743,744,752,753,762,763,77all,300,310,319,320,321,332,333,343,346, L10,L15,DC10,MD11,SSC,VC10
User currently offlineJohnClipper From Hong Kong, joined Aug 2005, 851 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 16305 times:

same - I have had 6 A380 landings. My description would not be so much "HARD" as "FIRM". It does not land like a 747.

User currently offlineKU747 From Kuwait, joined Mar 2008, 377 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 16299 times:

I guess all my 10 flights on A380 are flown by junior pilots!!!


707,727,73all,741,742,743,744,752,753,762,763,77all,300,310,319,320,321,332,333,343,346, L10,L15,DC10,MD11,SSC,VC10
User currently offlineulfinator From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 316 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 16266 times:

I can't find the thread now but there was a discussion about a hard landing that damaged a plane (767 I think) and part of it was about how the main gear articulates. The gist of the discussion was that the main gear angles forward on the 767 and A380 and backwards on other aircraft and people thought that it might be harder to get a smooth landing with that configuration.

User currently offlinemichaeljp From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 181 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 16225 times:

Quoting ulfinator (Reply 8):
I can't find the thread now but there was a discussion about a hard landing that damaged a plane (767 I think) and part of it was about how the main gear articulates

I believe your talking about the ANA B767 that landed back into Japan (Osaka) IIRC which due the the landing buckled the fuselage.
I'm not sure exactly what happened to the a/c afterwards.

If it was a Boeing I'd say that its a textbook landing as Boeing "recommends" a FIRM landing. Usually it also depends where your sat, if you are sat right above the bogey's for example your impression of the landing will differ to someone who sits on the upper deck at the front of the a/c or at the back.
Unless you or I were flying the plane its purely speculation, however....wind plays a part in it. It may be a nice day but their may be a crosswind, there although rare may be tailwind (this is unlikely though!).
Although I cannot speak from a crew POV with the A380 I have always tended to find the cushioning on the Airbus's to be somewhat less that smooth in general down the general gear structure.

All the best  


User currently offlineKU747 From Kuwait, joined Mar 2008, 377 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 16164 times:

Quoting michaeljp (Reply 9):
Usually it also depends where your sat, if you are sat right above the bogey's for example your impression of the landing will differ to someone who sits on the upper deck at the front of the a/c or at the back.

I was on the upper deck in the front. I also felt the rebound, sort of a bounce but not a complete bounce!!



707,727,73all,741,742,743,744,752,753,762,763,77all,300,310,319,320,321,332,333,343,346, L10,L15,DC10,MD11,SSC,VC10
User currently offlinektachiya From Japan, joined Sep 2004, 1794 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 16149 times:

ANA B767 that landed back into Japan (Osaka) IIRC which due the the landing buckled the fuselage

I think you meant to say NRT?



Flown on: DC-10-30, B747-200B, B747-300, B747-300SR, B747-400, B747-400D, B767-300, B777-200, B777-200ER, B777-300
User currently offlinetdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 12, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 16105 times:

Quoting KU747 (Thread starter):
Doesn't the frequent hard landings cause a frame and metal fatigue which will shorten the life of the aircraft??

Not really. "Hard landing" in the context you're talking about is "normal landing" the realm of fatigue analysis. "Hard landing" by the maintenance definition does require inspection but that's far more for static damage than fatigue damage.

Quoting KU747 (Reply 5):
What I'm saying that if the A380 always lands very hard, it will eventually leads to frame and body fatigue.

All aircraft experience frame and body fatigue, all the time. In the scheme of the complete array of loads they're subjected to, landing isn't a particularly big problem for fatigue (it can be a big problem for static loading). Infrequent overloads can actually improve fatigue life (a process called autofrettage).

Tom.


User currently offlineyvphx From United States of America, joined Jul 2009, 258 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 16095 times:

Could this be possible because the A380 is still a relatively new aircraft, with only a comparable handful of pilots flying on, that pilots are still getting used to it?

I understand many of the pilots transitioned from the A340, I think? Perhaps the OP has experienced cross-winds which dictate a firmer landing than othertimes.

I havn't been on an A380 yet (darn) but regardless of what kind of landing I would get when I fly on one, any landing you walk away fom is a good landing!


User currently offlineKU747 From Kuwait, joined Mar 2008, 377 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 16059 times:

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 12):

Thanks for the clarification. I read an article a while back about Southwest Airlines aircrafts can get frame and body fatigue sooner that other US carriers due to the frequent landings per day.



707,727,73all,741,742,743,744,752,753,762,763,77all,300,310,319,320,321,332,333,343,346, L10,L15,DC10,MD11,SSC,VC10
User currently offlinecol From Malaysia, joined Nov 2003, 2122 posts, RR: 22
Reply 15, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 16020 times:

Quoting KU747 (Reply 14):
Thanks for the clarification. I read an article a while back about Southwest Airlines aircrafts can get frame and body fatigue sooner that other US carriers due to the frequent landings per day.

That is cycles per day, with being pressurized. Landings are OK. Holes in roof and cracks found because of the cycles they do.


User currently offlineXT6Wagon From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 3417 posts, RR: 4
Reply 16, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 15940 times:

Quoting col (Reply 15):
That is cycles per day, with being pressurized. Landings are OK. Holes in roof and cracks found because of the cycles they do.

I'd assume that more frequent inspections and MX would still occur if you did high numbers of takeoffs and landings without pressuraztion cycles. Not likely to be a concern on a typical airliner, but we all know somewhere out there is the exception that proves the rule.


User currently offlineAngMoh From Singapore, joined Nov 2011, 492 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 15870 times:

Quoting michaeljp (Reply 9):
If it was a Boeing I'd say that its a textbook landing as Boeing "recommends" a FIRM landing. Usually it also depends where your sat, if you are sat right above the bogey's for example your impression of the landing will differ to someone who sits on the upper deck at the front of the a/c or at the back.

I think for the A380 it depends a lot where you sit. I had one flight where I sat on the upper deck and a colleague sat on the lower deck. I experienced a smooth landing while my colleague complained about a very hard and uncomfortable landing.

The only time I experienced a "firm" landing on the A380 was when I was seated on the lower deck straight above the main landing gear. The sound of extending and retracting was also quite loud.


User currently offlinetdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 18, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 15800 times:

Quoting yvphx (Reply 13):

Could this be possible because the A380 is still a relatively new aircraft, with only a comparable handful of pilots flying on, that pilots are still getting used to it?

That shouldn't be the case; any pilot that's flying paying passengers has already been thoroughly trained and evaluated, including a lot of simulator time. And, unless the A380 is the one exception, landing in the sim is almost universally harder than landing in the real world because the visual and tactile cues (though good) aren't perfect.

Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 16):
I'd assume that more frequent inspections and MX would still occur if you did high numbers of takeoffs and landings without pressuraztion cycles.

A cycle for maintenance purposes is a takeoff+landing. It doesn't matter if you pressurize or not, so it will not drive more frequent inspections. However, if you're not pressurizing then you'd expect to find less issues at the scheduled inspections.

Tom.


User currently offlinegr09 From Czech Republic, joined Jul 2008, 115 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 15671 times:

Quoting KU747 (Thread starter):
Anyone experienced a smooth landing on A380 ??

I flew on A380 four times (2xLH, 2xSQ) and all landings were perfectly smooth.


User currently offlineCXfirst From Norway, joined Jan 2007, 3075 posts, RR: 1
Reply 20, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 15549 times:

I've flown the A380 3 times (2x SQ, 1x QF). I have had two really smooth landings, and one hard, but the hard one was it bad weather, so expected (although it wasn't very hard).

-CXfirst



From Norway, live in Australia
User currently offlineTWA772LR From United States of America, joined Nov 2011, 2192 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 15514 times:

Quoting KU747 (Reply 7):

I guess all my 10 flights on A380 are flown by junior pilots!!!

It usually all boils down to the pilots. I have flown on the rare Colgan Q400 flights where the landing couldnt even wake a sleeping baby, then I've been on one a couple weeks ago when I was actually in a little bit of fear for my life. Granted, most regional airlines have younger, less experienced pilots so it's understandable.

Every time I fly Colgan with my dad, he always jokes that the pilots must have been ex-Navy pilots. 



Go coogs! \n//
User currently offlineCaptainstefan From United States of America, joined May 2007, 431 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day ago) and read 14501 times:

Quoting KU747 (Reply 10):
I was on the upper deck in the front.
Quoting AngMoh (Reply 17):
I think for the A380 it depends a lot where you sit.



Agreed. Though I'm not sure which thought process to follow. Is it:

a) The further you are from the landing gear/point of impact, the smoother your perceived touchdown will be because the fuselage dissipates the energy from the touchdown

OR

b) The further you are from the landing gear, the rougher the landing will seem due to flex in the fuselage and the moment/arm from the 'fulcrum' or MLG?



Long Live the Tulip!
User currently offlinemy235 From United States of America, joined Mar 2009, 92 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day ago) and read 14499 times:

Quoting ulfinator (Reply 8):
I can't find the thread now but there was a discussion about a hard landing that damaged a plane (767 I think) and part of it was about how the main gear articulates. The gist of the discussion was that the main gear angles forward on the 767 and A380 and backwards on other aircraft and people thought that it might be harder to get a smooth landing with that configuration.
Effect Of Bogie Tilt On Landing (by WingedMigrator Aug 25 2012 in Tech Ops)

And yes I truly believe aircraft with back tilting bogies are *much* smoother on touch down. http://youtu.be/lowrM-780tg A330/340, 747, 757, 777, The 747 and A330/340 have the most tilt in the MLG.


User currently offlinelhrnue From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2010, 174 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day ago) and read 14365 times:

Quoting KU747 (Reply 5):
I'm telling you 10 flights with 10 very hard landings with a big bang, at LHR and DXB, and most of the time the weather was nice.
I totally understand landing procedure and the flaring but it is very strange for me not to experience a smooth landing an A380 with 10 flights???

I had normal landings with the A380 in Sydney and Auckland. The landing in DXB was a hard one, but it was during a sand storm, so nothing to do with the aircraft.

I maybe want to ask the question about LHR little bit different. I am a frequent flyer into LHR with different airlines ... and my FEELING is that the average landing into Heathrow is harder than elsewhere. My theory is, that pilots (I am not one) are under some time pressure at LHR (the next aircraft is sitting right in their neck) and nobody wants to loose the slot and go around. I am not saying anything is outside of normal procedures or not safe, just the pressure to get the aircraft down is higher. ... now you can shot me.


User currently offlineMax Q From United States of America, joined May 2001, 4660 posts, RR: 19
Reply 25, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day ago) and read 14600 times:

Well I think it has a lot to do with the forward tilt on the main landing gear, whether it's a 767 or an A380 it is just an unforgiving design.


When you look at the superb design of the landing gear on the B747 you don't have to be an engineer to figure out how that configuration is very forgiving on landing for the Aircraft and it's passengers.


I know it sounds corny but there was a good reason why, since the Queen of the skies first flew the expression was 'you can't make a bad landing on a 747'


The landing gear has to take credit for part of that statement.



The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.
User currently offlinestrangr From Australia, joined Apr 2012, 110 posts, RR: 0
Reply 26, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 13739 times:

Quoting KU747 (Reply 7):
I guess all my 10 flights on A380 are flown by junior pilots!!!

I guess almost all flights in an A380 would be by junior pilots. After all the 747 has been around for 20+ years and the a380 has been around for what 4.


User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17068 posts, RR: 66
Reply 27, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 13118 times:

Quoting KU747 (Thread starter):

I flew on A380 more than 10 times, and not even once I experienced a smooth landing.
All 10 flights were very hard landings!!!

10 landings is not a big enough sample. The airlines you've flown with have already performed thousands of landings with the aircraft. How can you know they have all been firm?

Quoting KU747 (Reply 7):
I guess all my 10 flights on A380 are flown by junior pilots!!!

Hardly. Experienced captains are perfectly capable of making less than smooth landings, intentionally or not.


Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 12):
Not really. "Hard landing" in the context you're talking about is "normal landing" the realm of fatigue analysis. "Hard landing" by the maintenance definition does require inspection but that's far more for static damage than fatigue damage.

This is the core of the poodle. You might call them hard but most likely all those landings were well within acceptable parameters.

Pilots may choose to plonk the aircraft down firmly if the runway is wet or not too long. You don't want to float and try to grease it if it might make you run out of runway or miss your turnoff. Comfort is important but safety is much more important.

The quality of the pilot can not be deduced from the softness of the landings.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 1):
I guess we have not had a 380 bash for about a week, so one was due.

              



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlinemandala499 From Indonesia, joined Aug 2001, 6927 posts, RR: 76
Reply 28, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 13006 times:

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 27):
The quality of the pilot can not be deduced from the softness of the landings.

But the quality of the passenger can be deduced from their reaction to the landing impact acceleration.
      



When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
User currently offlineBA777 From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2001, 2179 posts, RR: 7
Reply 29, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 12820 times:

Quoting KU747 (Reply 7):
I guess all my 10 flights on A380 are flown by junior pilots!!!

Just because you had firm landings does not mean they were flown by junior pilots! Captains also make firm landings.


User currently offlinebond007 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 5428 posts, RR: 8
Reply 30, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 12756 times:

Quoting TWA772LR (Reply 21):
It usually all boils down to the pilots.

Making a good, safe landing comes down to pilot training and experience ...almost all landings, for all airlines, for all aircraft types, are good landings. Now on the other hand, making a touchdown that you can hardly feel, as opposed to one that is a little firm, is more a matter of luck, rather than judgement.


Jimbo



I'd rather be on the ground wishing I was in the air, than in the air wishing I was on the ground!
User currently offlineCamiloA380 From Sweden, joined Feb 2008, 486 posts, RR: 25
Reply 31, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 12756 times:

Quoting KU747 (Thread starter):
- Anyone experienced a smooth landing on A380 ??



I would rate my A380 landing in SIN, smooth- , so firm it was (and we aborted the first approach due to some unexpected showers, and came in for a second approach to land on a wet runway). My landing in FRA, was firm too. But whats the huge deal about it if its not a really bad landing? If it doesn't exceed a certain g value then it doesn't visit maintenance. (Was it 2.5gs?)

Quoting KU747 (Thread starter):
I understand that it is a giant aircraft but is it possible to land it smoothly or it is designed for the hard landings only??



You seriously can't be that simplistic. Everything is not either black or white. 
Quoting KU747 (Reply 5):
No, I'm not saying that. What I'm saying that if the A380 always lands very hard, it will eventually leads to frame and body fatigue.



Any landing/take off or flight in general leads to long term frame and body fatigue (then it reaches a certain cycle, and things are checked). Correct me if I'm wrong.

Quoting KU747 (Reply 7):
I guess all my 10 flights on A380 are flown by junior pilots!!!



So let's say that's the case. So what? 
Quoting mandala499 (Reply 28):



  



Flying4Ever!
User currently offlinetdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 32, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 12734 times:

Quoting CamiloA380 (Reply 31):
If it doesn't exceed a certain g value then it doesn't visit maintenance. (Was it 2.5gs?)

2.5g would certainly warrant an inspection. 2.5g is the in-air limit load.

Landing sink rate inspection triggers usually come off sink rate...anything over ~10 fps at touchdown typically drives an inspection.

Tom.


User currently offlinebueb0g From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2010, 648 posts, RR: 0
Reply 33, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 12040 times:

Quoting TWA772LR (Reply 21):
I have flown on the rare Colgan Q400 flights where the landing couldnt even wake a sleeping baby, then I've been on one a couple weeks ago when I was actually in a little bit of fear for my life. Granted, most regional airlines have younger, less experienced pilots so it's understandable.

To be fair, the Q400 is a bitch to land 'nicely'

Quoting strangr (Reply 26):
I guess almost all flights in an A380 would be by junior pilots. After all the 747 has been around for 20+ years and the a380 has been around for what 4.

This isn't relevant... inexperienced on type =/= junior... Most A380 flight crew are at the more experienced end of the spectrum for their roles. Plus new pilots can manage some beautiful landings, and experienced pilots can sure as hell execute firm ones.

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 27):
The quality of the pilot can not be deduced from the softness of the landings.


  



Roger roger, what's our vector, victor?
User currently onlineDaleaholic From UK - England, joined Oct 2005, 3208 posts, RR: 13
Reply 34, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 12026 times:

Let's be frank here... You're putting roughly three hundred and eighty six tons (MLW) onto a combined surface area (the tyres) about the size of a car... 22 wheels (think of how much actually comes into contact with the runway, not much). I'd say rough or smooth landing, that's a marvellous feat of engineering.

For those who are interested, a sum at max landing weight... 386k divided by 22 =17545.4545455
So that's 17.5 tons being supported on each wheel. Just think about that...



Religion is an illusion of childhood... Outgrown under proper education.
User currently offlineCPDC10-30 From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2000, 4791 posts, RR: 23
Reply 35, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 11741 times:

Not a scientific observation in any way. But the firmest landing I've ever experienced was on a SQ A388 JFK-FRA. I was on the upper deck at the rear, and other pax looked around in surprise at how hard the landing was.

I could tell it would be firm as the flare seemed too late. Conditions were very calm. Maybe just a coincidence.


User currently offlinefrancoflier From France, joined Oct 2001, 3790 posts, RR: 11
Reply 36, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 11561 times:

Quoting Daleaholic (Reply 34):
So that's 17.5 tons being supported on each wheel. Just think about that...

And that's just at 1g. The vertical speed when touching down is still several feet per second. So the tires also absorb the energy needed to decelerate those 386 Tons from that vertical speed to 0.



Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit posting...
User currently offlinetdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 37, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 11560 times:

Quoting francoflier (Reply 36):
And that's just at 1g. The vertical speed when touching down is still several feet per second. So the tires also absorb the energy needed to decelerate those 386 Tons from that vertical speed to 0.

The tires are just force-transmission devices; they absorb relatively little of the total energy for that. Most of it ends up in the strut (as heat and compressed nitrogen).

Tom.


User currently offlinechuchoteur From France, joined Sep 2006, 771 posts, RR: 0
Reply 38, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 11172 times:

Quoting michaeljp (Reply 9):
If it was a Boeing I'd say that its a textbook landing as Boeing "recommends" a FIRM landing.

Same on airbus... positive contact required to achieve predictable/shortest landing distances. Back in the old days japanese pilots flying the A300 had to be retrained as they worked hard to grease their landings, then couldn't figure out why they were consistently exceeding advertised landing distances.

Maybe it's company policy... if there's an EK pilot out there...


User currently offlinekazim786 From UK - England, joined Apr 2011, 44 posts, RR: 0
Reply 39, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 8804 times:

Ive flown on the A380 many times too. All in all i would say out of 13 flights- 3 were hard landings. And these were once with:
Emirates- landing at EGLL.
Qantas- landing at KLAX
Lufthana- landing at EDDF

Albeit the landings were due to rough and windy conditions on approach. Other than that the rest of the flights resulted in a smooth landing. So from experience, I'd say the A380 can without a doubt conduct a smooth touchdown.


User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17068 posts, RR: 66
Reply 40, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 8731 times:

Quoting kazim786 (Reply 39):

Ive flown on the A380 many times too. All in all i would say out of 13 flights- 3 were hard landings. And these were once with:
Emirates- landing at EGLL.
Qantas- landing at KLAX
Lufthana- landing at EDDF

Albeit the landings were due to rough and windy conditions on approach. Other than that the rest of the flights resulted in a smooth landing. So from experience, I'd say the A380 can without a doubt conduct a smooth touchdown.

13 flights is not a very big sample. If you've landed 80-100 times you can start making good statistics. And then you'd have to do the same on a lot of other types to compare. 

Any plane can be landed smoothly. Some are harder than others. Rough and windy means you are more concerned with staying on centerline and in the touchdown zone than gently kissing the ground. Floating to a greaser means more time where the plane can drift to the side or be caught in windshear. Besides, as mentioned above greasers lead to longer landing distances.

And what do you mean by "hard landing"? Did the overhead bins open? Did people bite their tongues? Did anyone get whiplash? Positive contact with the ground is not a "hard landing". An actual hard landing (maintenance definition) might well lead to injuries. Serious G forces.



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineGlobalMoose From United States of America, joined Aug 2012, 31 posts, RR: 0
Reply 41, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 8552 times:

I'd take a firm touchdown in the landing zone over a soft touchdown outside the zone anyday.

Without knowing too much about the TOLD considerations/assumptions of the A380, maybe the pilots had opted to put it down with 'authority' in order to meet computed landing distances (as stated in an earlier post).

A bit off topic but I was also told that a firm landing is always preferred in wet weather to help 'break through' any standing water on the runway and help get the gear on the pavement and all spun up. True or not, whenever I have a bit of a firm landing on clear days I can always claim that I'm practicing my wet wx landings  



When it absolutely positively has to be there ... at some point.
User currently offlinem1m2 From Canada, joined Dec 2011, 94 posts, RR: 0
Reply 42, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 8471 times:

I've only been on one A380 flight. That landing I thought was rough. I figured it was just the massive size of the gear and all of those tires spinning up that sent the shudder through the plane. If you think about it, a fair amount of energy is needed to spin those main wheels up to the speed the airplane is traveling at when it touches down.

Having said that, I did enjoy the flight. It was EK from AKL to SYD.


User currently offlineRussianJet From Belgium, joined Jul 2007, 7714 posts, RR: 21
Reply 43, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 8437 times:

Been on the A380 just once - landing was fine. Not a greaser but not noticeably hard either.


✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
User currently offlineDavid L From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 9524 posts, RR: 42
Reply 44, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 8322 times:

Quoting m1m2 (Reply 42):
I figured it was just the massive size of the gear and all of those tires spinning up that sent the shudder through the plane. If you think about it, a fair amount of energy is needed to spin those main wheels up to the speed the airplane is traveling at when it touches down.

But countering that is a whole load of inertia on an aircraft with the mass of a 380. I wouldn't have thought the wheel spin-up issue would be much worse for a 380 than it is for a 747.


User currently offlineHAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31684 posts, RR: 56
Reply 45, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 8016 times:

Was the seat location the same.......or similiar each time....


Think of the brighter side!
User currently offlinegigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 46, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 3 hours ago) and read 7772 times:

I would think that given the huge size of the airplane and the monsterously large for its size wings, ground effect would require you to fly into the ground, as opposed to simply lose altitude onto the runway.

I have been under the impression the 747 was similar... am I mistaken?

NS


User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17068 posts, RR: 66
Reply 47, posted (1 year 9 months 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 7717 times:

Quoting gigneil (Reply 46):
I would think that given the huge size of the airplane and the monsterously large for its size wings, ground effect would require you to fly into the ground, as opposed to simply lose altitude onto the runway.

I have been under the impression the 747 was similar... am I mistaken?

It's a matter of proportion. A 767 or an MD-80 have much smaller wings, but on the other hand they weigh proportionately less. I think wing loading, planform and wing position along the fuselage have a big effect.

[Edited 2013-01-20 03:23:14]


"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Questions About A380 Landings.
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


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!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

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


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Questions About TSA / Airport Exit Lanes posted Thu Apr 19 2012 23:13:53 by AlnessW
Questions About Charter Ops posted Tue Mar 27 2012 09:53:42 by redzeppelin
Questions About Tug Vehicles posted Fri Jan 27 2012 23:11:11 by vaus77w
Some Questions About EK17..... posted Mon Oct 3 2011 13:42:52 by emalad
Questions about the work on DCA RWY 1..... posted Tue Jul 19 2011 11:03:23 by batboy
Questions About Gate Check posted Sat Jul 16 2011 20:24:32 by AlnessW
Questions About Chelsea Food Services posted Thu May 5 2011 15:23:16 by 1337Delta764
Questions About PDX Operations posted Fri Apr 15 2011 18:12:15 by AlnessW
Some Questions About Wing Strikes posted Sat Mar 26 2011 08:28:53 by bristolflyer
Questions About The A321 Vs 757-200? posted Mon Feb 21 2011 13:32:15 by 9LFlyGuy

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format