A380 Hard Landing at Oshkosh

[PeanuckleCRJ]

Looks like the morning/early afternoon inbound push in MEM. WHAM!! bounce..WHAM!!...

next jet.. WHAM!!!...bounce...WHAM!!!.. And so on...


That was pretty bad one. They were obviously not trying to float for a fairly short runway, however it looks like they ran out of energy and landed in a crab (legal, yes- smart? you be the judge). Did anyone else catch him getting into a bit of a rudder PIO trying to correct while rolling down the runway?

I would love to see the shock marks on the wheels.

 

[SpiceWeasel]

Looks like the morning/early afternoon inbound push in MEM. WHAM!! bounce..WHAM!!...

next jet.. WHAM!!!...bounce...WHAM!!!.. And so on...


That was pretty bad one. They were obviously not trying to float for a fairly short runway, however it looks like they ran out of energy and landed in a crab (legal, yes- smart? you be the judge). Did anyone else catch him getting into a bit of a rudder PIO trying to correct while rolling down the runway?

I would love to see the shock marks on the wheels.

I always try to hit hard enough to stay down the first time.

 

[derg]

I agree as well. Doesn't even look like a hard landing at all, just a firm landing that was intentionally done to bleed off as much energy as possible. Overall, considering the runway size, I'd say it looked like a good job.

That's about what I saw as well.

Kind of like when greasing it on means you're screwing up in Orange County.

 

[PeanuckleCRJ]

That's about what I saw as well.

Kind of like when greasing it on means you're screwing up in Orange County.

I don't know if I quite agree with that- perhaps that is what they are aiming for, but 8000 feet (the one pictured) is not incredibly short for even a large widebody. The normal landing runways at ATL are 9000 feet long.

I would hardly consider that runway on par with SNA.

 

[youngflyer]

I don't know if I quite agree with that- perhaps that is what they are aiming for, but 8000 feet (the one pictured) is not incredibly short for even a large widebody. The normal landing runways at ATL are 9000 feet long.

I would hardly consider that runway on par with SNA.

They had to make a turnoff 4000ft down the runway or else they would have to be towed back to that taxiway....

 

[Douglas]

looked fine to me.

 

[PeanuckleCRJ]

They had to make a turnoff 4000ft down the runway or else they would have to be towed back to that taxiway....

There you have it- stick that mofo on!. Still doesnt explain the total lack rudder usage for the crosswind.

 

[Orange Anchor]

Understood. But it doesn't really answer my question. Was the plane designed to be landed in a crab?

I can't answer the question. I don't know about the design but with the exception of the -38 a LONG time ago I have never flown anything where it was okay to land in a crab. At least procedurally...

 

[trafficinsight]

That would be awesome, and use one of those pens to draw all over the footage.
Madden:"look at that rudder! (big arrow) thats going to push this way (another arrow) making this (two big arrows) hit the gap here (big circle) before heading down field."

OMG I would pay to see this!

 

[PeanuckleCRJ]

Stupid question from a guy who could give a rats ass about flying heavy jets: Are they designed to land in a crab like that or is that considered bad form?

They are designed to be able to land in a crab. It's not considered good technique, though. This video illustrates exactly why.

 

[Polar742]

Stupid question from a guy who could give a rats ass about flying heavy jets: Are they designed to land in a crab like that or is that considered bad form?

The whale can land in a crab, and the gear doesn't caster or anything prior to landing.

The body gear steers, but that's only for taxiing.

 

[sdfcvoh]

I thought the commentary was the only bad landing...

 

[mooneyguy]

Understood. But it doesn't really answer my question. Was the plane designed to be landed in a crab? Is it a normal and acceptable landing technique for that aircraft? IOW, we all know you can land a 172 in a crab and probably not break the plane. But its not designed to be landed that way and if you do it hard enough, you're going to break something.

I believe certain larger military stuff is designed to be landed in the crab rather than risk dragging a wingtip. But as airliners never really excited me in any way, I never bothered to learn every intimate detail about their design and operation like all the SJS kids seem to do. So is it normal to crab it to the pavement like that or is it something that's better off avoiding whenever possible?

Cannot speak for the 380, But I was told by 74 and 77 pilot that the plane is designed to land in a crab. They cannot land with a low wing. The 74 can land up to 45 deg crab is what I was told. It is the proper technique for crosswind. so yes it is normal to crab all the way to touchdown.
There was a video of the a 747 landing at the checkerboard and got a low wing and put his left side outboard engine into the runway.[YT]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/ljOxo0s33sI&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/ljOxo0s33sI&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/YT]

 

[ctab5060X]

You mean there was an Airbus in that video...

Oh, sorry... couldn't keep my eyes off the radial engines in the bottom of the frame!



Looked like a somewhat normal landing to make the taxiway they wanted to make. Got it down and got it stopped...

 

[Okie_Pilot]

"When this guy takes his glasses off, he can't see as well!"

Here's a guy, that when he runs, he goes faster!!

 

[TFaudree_ERAU]

I have never flown anything where it was okay to land in a crab. At least procedurally...

I've landed one of these puppies with a 20* crab angle :bandit:

 

[Orange Anchor]

I've landed one of these puppies with a 20* crab angle :bandit:

I stand corrected. And it must have been brain fog.. the -38 landed in a crab. And in the -135 we were cautioned that about 8deg of bank would catch a pod so cross control was done with caution.

But none of the airliners I flew. My error.

 

[Cessna414JJB]

Jeez! The comments by these two muppets could be considered an insult.
What a stupid, flat bunch of blabbering!

"From what it looks like the aircraft is still going to be useable"

 

[Polar742]

Cannot speak for the 380, But I was told by 74 and 77 pilot that the plane is designed to land in a crab. They cannot land with a low wing. The 74 can land up to 45 deg crab is what I was told. It is the proper technique for crosswind. so yes it is normal to crab all the way to touchdown.
There was a video of the a 747 landing at the checkerboard and got a low wing and put his left side outboard engine into the runway.

While that is correct, the 747 can land in a crab, few of us do it. Or if we must, we crab as little as possible.

So far, I've been able to accomplish landings with only a side slip (if there was a bit of a crab in there, it was unintentional) with gusts up to 25 knots.

And even more interesting, is the autoland lands in a sideslip, and the height it starts to set the slip correction depends on the wind strength. The higher the wind speed, the higher the slip starts so it can dial it in.

 

[derg]

You can land a 737-200 in a slip as well. The main gear trucks "caster" a few degrees.