FokkerVII
Topic Author
Posts: 47
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2005 4:54 am

Different Airlines - Different Landing Procedures?

Thu Mar 03, 2005 8:17 am

I am curious if different airlines have different SOPs regarding how they land their aircraft? If conditions are similar, of course.

I ask because in the last few months I have flown various flights on A320/321 with two UK airlines. One airline seems to make the best landings I have ever experienced. The other makes sure the plane has landed my smacking them into the ground -HARD!

Any comments?

PS: I am fairly new here and am not sure if this is the correct forum for this question. Feel free to move it if it is not...
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 17092
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: Different Airlines - Different Landing Procedures?

Thu Mar 03, 2005 8:37 am

Different procedures: In general no. In detail yes.

Landing quality: Depends more on conditions for that landing than on the airline procedures. While you can have different phraseology, a landing is a landing and is done in the same way on the same type regardless of operator.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
411A
Posts: 1788
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2001 10:34 am

RE: Different Airlines - Different Landing Procedures?

Thu Mar 03, 2005 9:23 am

It depends.
Some operators used a monitored approach technique wherein, the First Officer flies the instrument approach (using autopilot or manually flown), and the Captain takes over at DA to make the actual landing maneuver.
This technique was developed by British European Airways (BEA), now British Airways, for the HS.121 Trident series of aircraft, and it has, on some fleets, been carried over.
It works very well for those operators that have used this idea.
Another variation of this idea was used by another airline on their Lockheed TriStar fleet.
Most approaches were flown, provided the runway was served by an ILS approach, using the automatic approach/land mode of the autopilot(s), with either manual or, if it was serviceable, auto-thrust.
If however, the approach was a non-precision approach, the flying pilot flew the aeroplane, and the non-flying pilot handled the throttles...or, if desired, auto-thrust was used.

Many ways to operate, these are but a few examples.

As you can see...one size fits all, does not apply in many circumstances.
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 17092
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: Different Airlines - Different Landing Procedures?

Thu Mar 03, 2005 9:58 am

a landing is a landing and is done in the same way on the same type regardless of operator.

I will amend this statement. I meant a landing under similar conditions in the same type is done in similar ways across operators.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
411A
Posts: 1788
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2001 10:34 am

RE: Different Airlines - Different Landing Procedures?

Thu Mar 03, 2005 4:01 pm

Ah well, it depends again, Starlionblue.
One operator where I flew 707's absolutely required flaps fifty landings, regardless of conditions.
However, when I was trained at PanAmerican on the 707, they recommended flaps forty landings in severe gusty crosswind conditions.
Vref was increased two knots at max landing weight.
I mentioned this to the 707 fleet manager one day, and he said...'let be check with Charlie Chan', the DFO.
Yes, his true name.
Anyway, they amended the ops manual accordingly...to my surprise.

Oh yes, this airline is now the largest in SE Asia (it had only 14 aircraft then), with a very good safety record, considering their many varied destinations.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests