Interesting 777 Event

Relaxing the controls a bit before touchdown is actually the preferred technique on all of the transports. You can get away with others, but for a variety of reasons, it tends to be the safer and more consistent method for landing.

Contrary to popular misconception, it has nothing to do with the CG being forward of the mains (a fact that is true on EVERY tricycle gear airplane, of course!), but rather that the horizontal stab is unloaded a bit, reducing the effective weight, but not enough for any forward rotation (and so acceleration toward the ground) to develop. Contributing is the relatively flat lift curve vs AoA on swept wing aircraft, hence why it works better on the more highly swept wings.

On the performance side, the -17s are a significant improvement over the -15s, and the -217s are several magnitudes better still.

I never flew a -200 with engines smaller than -15s, but I can imagine that the performance is remarkably pathetic in that configuration! Flown -100s like that, which aren't too bad, but not amazing either.
 
I recently moved to Mesa. I live 2-3 miles from final approach to PHX.
In late evening I notice alot of Fed-Ex MD-11/DC-10 on approach.
They are always flying at a very high nose up AoA and flying very slow.
Sometimes with gear extended other times not but always flying the approach in a similar fashion.
I can always compare and contrast because PHX typically has similtaneous approaches to any one of it's four runways.
Typically in the evening alot cargo planes are on arrival be it ABX 767's,Fed-Ex 727,A300,MD-11/10 and UPS 757/767's.
Yet I only see the high nose up AoA and slow approach speeds on the MD-11/10's.
At the distance the planes fly over my house their gear aren't yet extended and there flying almost level. Again except for the MD-11/10's. Seagul...anyone care to explain?

-Matthew
 
B767Driver said:
As far as takeoff and climb performance (-217 engines)...I've yet to fly another airplane that took as long from rotation to liftoff. I remember raising the nose...see if it wanted to fly...then it would shake, shudder, and finally lumber into the air...I bet you could count to six many times before the main gear would follow the nose gear in the air. The first 1500' of climb was anemic.
Click to expand...

No lie...I ALWAYS see 727's having longer then normal takeoff runs. In comparison to other airplanes. They always seem to get up just near the end of the runways almost before the numbers.
But I have also seen the 727 do great short field takeoffs. Like getting airbourne on a 10,000+ well before mid-field.

-Matthew
 
If your takeoff weight is runway limited...the only thing that you know is that the airplane will be at an altitude of 35' over the departure end of the runway. This is not much...it sure makes for a quiet cockpit for awhile...followed by some comments at cruize.
 
The MD11/10s have a nose high attitude with slats extended an no flaps. Level flight in that config requires about 10 degrees nose up. Just due to the configuration. Normal approach attitude is about 3 degrees nose up coming down the g/s once configured. Actually, 2.5 with flaps 50 and 3.5 with flaps 50.
 
The times I remember being really runway limited would be Zurich on a heavy DC-8 and Haneda with a heavy 747-100.
 
Maximillian_Jenius said:
What do you mean 9,7,15 & 217 powered?

-Matthew
Click to expand...


They are the derivatives of the Pratt and Whitney JT8D powerplant on the 727s , 737s and MD series. The later numbers were more powerful etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top