Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'The Okie Corral' started by HalfHazzard, Sep 25, 2015.
Classic "crab and jerk".
I have read that while not initially especially intuitive it has some certain charm in cross wind conditions despite not being exactly state of the art technology.
Id I understand it correctly it allows the landing gear to be turned such that the plane is at an angle while the gear tracks straight along the runway.
That's not a crosswind; this is a crosswind.
I miss the days of the elephant walks...
THAT .... is a crosswind ! ...
The B-52's enjoy that capability:
"The crosswind crab system of a B-52 provides a means of turning all four main gear to align with the runway while the aircraft is flown in a wings-level attitude compensating for drift. This system uses the steering actuators on the front main gear and a similar set on the rear main gear. The landing gear can be preset and turned up to 20° left or right of center during the approach. The maximum of 20° crab will accommodate landings in crosswinds up to and including 43 knots blowing 90° to the runway at a landing weight of 270,000 pounds."
That A380 looks like it is hovering. That did not look that bad. I have seen video of some where they really snap back into line. I would rather have the crosswind than gusts.
Ahhh, the famous MITO. I've watched a few of them with shotgun starts. Holy Mother of God.
The British writer sure knew how to take a normal landing and turn it into something completely different.
Real 15-second-separation MITOs could be really hazardous... for #2, and especially for #3 on back. I thought we were buying the farm a few times as we violently rolled in the leaders' wakes... before passing the end of the runway.
12-seconds separation in wartime launches for survival were extreme measures for getting the fleet clear of the base for survivability! Sometimes enthusiasm had some pilots approaching those shorter intervals in peacetime launches!
Last guy off buys the drinks ? ...
"The trouble with starting up so many engines, is by the time you get the last one started, the first one's outta gas" ......
Ah... not with the BUFF's ability to hold over 200,000 pounds of fuel! War takeoff weight is about 488K pounds with an airframe weighing about 180K or so.
All in a day's work. Terrifying, yes, if you want everyone to read your article.
These guys need to get out of the Link trainer and back into the cockpit of a PA-140. Relearn how to fly instead of using the 'puter.
I gather the 'professionals', the guys who handle the big jets, never practice take-off stalls anymore.
When the hydrant system was down, it would take 5 R-5 refueling units ( 5,000 gal cap ) to load 'em up.
That's nothing. . .
Brian Williams and I were flying a A380 one day and the crosswinds were so bad we had to land the plane backwards. . . .
Don't they have thrust reversers?
.... Called a 'drag chute' ....
The way it was told to me, he landed it himself after being wounded by ISIS members...
Here's one from inside the cockpit. Looks like about 15 seconds or better. You can see the #2 rockin and rollin.
As a former BUFF (Big Ugly Fat Fellow for the uninitiated) Instructor Pilot, I've done my share of MITO's and crosswind landings.
First the MITO. Actually (while still a rough ride) a 12 second aircraft separation gives the smoothest ride. If you can call it smooth. From 25 to 35 seconds or so back, makes things get real interesting. So we tried to 'tuck it in there'. (ETA One major danger in being real close, would be if that big yellow stop sign came out from the tail of the aircraft in front of you. Never had it happen, but always a possibility.)
As for the crosswind crab system, it isn't as simple as it looks, especially in a D model (my primary aircraft). Crosswind landings at Kadena were memorable. The 186 foot wingspan, plus those big tip tanks on the D, combined with the puny tip gear, made dealing with the gust factor a major problem. You just couldn't do much wing low without bending something. So you took the towers wind report and set an average on the crosswind crab. Then you hoped you could get it safely on the ground.
I gather you've never flown a large airplane?
Yes, training is done in stalls in departure and landing configuration. Unlike flying your cherokee, stalls are not done to a stall break or aerodynamic stall. You may not understand the reasons why. It's also irrelevant to the subject of the thread, which is the crosswind landing in a 4 engine turbojet aircraft.
I haven't flown the A380, but I do have experience in the 747. The manufacturer recommends allowing the airplane to touchdown in a crab, wings level. It doesn't take much bank at all to have a pod strike; catching an engine nacelle. Otherwise, it's flown down final wings level crabbed into the wind.
The strongest wind I've landed an airplane that size in was 60+ at the surface, in Amsterdam. Winds aloft were considerably stronger. The landing was uneventful.
Never heard it THAT way before.
...They fall 10,000 feet ? ....
A crosswind landing in a Cherokee in gusts can be quite fun. Fly sideways towards the runway, maybe dip the wing down a little, then quickly straighten out, do a 1 point landing, quickly followed by 2 and 3.
Just like shooting a firearm, don't forget the basics!
Some do, and some aren't recoverable if taken far enough. Even in smaller turbojets such as the Lear, recovery from a deep stall can be 10,000 to 15,000, if it recovers at all. Stalls in swept wing turbojet aircraft are not the same thing as stalls in a piper cherokee. A recovery from a climbing upset isn't handled by pushing the nose over, either; do that in a piper and angle of attack is quickly decreased and the airplane flies again; not so in a large swept wing turbojet. In fact, before one can get the nose down, rolling into a steep bank to unload the wing is often necessary. Pushing forward won't cut it. Roll, let the nose fall through the horizon, roll to level and recover.
The private pilot in his cherokee may know little of ice-related stalls and tailplane stalls, and other aspects of flying large aircraft, all of which are further complicated by swept wing aerodynamics. The notion that those flying large airplanes aren't up to snuff, that large airplane pilots couldn't possibly understand flying the way the light airplane does, is arrogant and more than a little ignorant. How do you think most of us got to be large airplane pilots, other than thousands of hours in small airplanes? You don't know that most of us were flight instructors, and many of us still are? How might we possibly ever attain the skill of the weekend private pilot in his cherokee. After all, we've only been through hundreds of check rides, and annually must endure concentrated type training every six months, as well as simulator checks, line checks, etc. We have computer based training, written and computer tests, regular oral exams, hazardous materials training, upset training, security training, etc.
The private pilot must get an hour of flight training and an hour of ground training...every two years...and there's a good chance that one of us flying the "big" airplanes is giving that biennial review. Go figure. What a shame that we'll never rise to the standard of the private pilot. After all, we just turn on an autopilot and let it do the rest, right?
"we just turn on an autopilot and let it do the rest,"
Yup, that's pretty much it for a ATL rating. Heck, you even have weather radar, another pilot sitting next to you, and ..... a lavatory.
Okay, it takes a different technique to recover from a stall flying a heavy jet vs a Piper. BFD.
9/11 showed us it doesn't take much knowledge or experience to fly a heavy jet.
You guys are awfully sensitive.