Bit of a hairy landing

Moderator Message

If anyone really wants to discuss all that Moon Landings conspiracy theory nonsense they are welcome to start a thread on General Discussion where, I am sure, Moggy C will express his undying delight and gratitude in highly entertaining terms.

In the meantime, stick to the topic, please.

Thanks

GA

Woah… Hold up there.

You mean alleged moon landing.

Seriously, if anyone here feels the need to be a conspiracy theorist and bring up the BS that says we didnt land on the moon, I will destroy them.

We didn’t land on the moon.

Paul

What are you talking about?! This thread is about an A310 landing. Not the moon landing.

Which, btw I’m not entirely convinced happened!

Bit of a hairy landing

Woah… Hold up there.

You mean alleged moon landing.

Seriously, if anyone here feels the need to be a conspiracy theorist and bring up the BS that says we didnt land on the moon, I will destroy them.

Great shot 😮

U tube has lots of extraordinary landings!

Interesting. That’s a pretty good roll angle and it seems that this crew got darn close to it. 🙂

WD,
From memory, and it is not all that good at this time of night:eek: The critical angle of bank on the A-310/300-600 is 11° of bank. With landing flaps, (40) the outboard flap will take a serious bashing before the engine.

No rudder deflection either. Did they try correct for it?

It seems they landed crabbed into the wind so no rudder would be needed.

Does anyone know what the roll limits are for an A310 in landing. Too far and you’ll strike an engine. I’ve heard the B747 has a limitation which explains the number of dramatic pictures of them landing in a crab in strong winds.

No rudder deflection either. Did they try correct for it?

Well, I’ll accept that it’s genuine. I only asked the question because of the reasons I mentioned. I’m not an aircraft spotter/photographer and not jealous of the guy or his work, good luck to him. 🙂

We had a SATA A320 in this morning, the wind accross the runway meaning about 20kts with gust to 30KTS to 35KTS, when the aircraft touched down you would have thought no crosswind at all.
We have the EMB 195 operating in and out daily and there crosswind limit on a dry runway is 35kts? and that is a long thin aircraft.
I understand aircraft have a demonstrated limit by the manufactor and the company has there limits?.
Any crosswind above 25kts is a hand full, some aircraft handle better than others, looking at the picture the crew did very well, should they have thrown the landing away and diverted?? End result aircraft and crew did a good job but could have been a major disastor.

What exactly is a “freak gust”?

Like anything else that’s freak; something more severe than would normally be expected, like the freak weather that’s drowned large parts of Cumbria in recent weeks. A freak gust is a one of unexpected severity.

Paul

What exactly is a “freak gust”?

Is that definately for real?

I don’t see any control surface deflections, though of course they may not be easy to see from that perspective. I also don’t see anything being thrown up by the tyres, and the whole aircraft just looks way to far off centreline to have recovered.

I dunno maybe it’s just me.

If you look behind each engine you can see the high speed aileron deflecting down on the right wing but not on the left.

There are indeed dust spots – just above and to the left of the aircraft fuselage.

The photographer gives an explanation here.

http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/aviation_photography/read.main/347708/

Probably because there are none?! I can’t see any :confused:

You need to look closer. 😉

Paul

……….I’m just surprised the photographer didn’t get rid of those dust spots!
Paul

Probably because there are none?! I can’t see any :confused:

Is that definately for real?

I don’t see any control surface deflections, though of course they may not be easy to see from that perspective. I also don’t see anything being thrown up by the tyres, and the whole aircraft just looks way to far off centreline to have recovered.

I dunno maybe it’s just me.

You can see smoke behind the main landing gear that’s in contact with the runway and the twisting of the bogie due to the angle of the aircraft. It looks pretty real to me. I’m just surprised the photographer didn’t get rid of those dust spots!

Paul

Is that definately for real?

I don’t see any control surface deflections, though of course they may not be easy to see from that perspective. I also don’t see anything being thrown up by the tyres, and the whole aircraft just looks way to far off centreline to have recovered.

I dunno maybe it’s just me.

WD,
The maximum demonstrated crosswind for the A-310 is 28 kts. for both wet and dry runways.
Maximum CALCULATED crosswind for the A-310 is 37 kts for both wet and dry runways.

So if it is true that the wind was gusting to 44 kts, it is outside even the calculated max value for the aircraft.

Does Airbus or this operator count gusts towards the demonstrated/calculated crosswind? I know not all operators do so with their aircraft. Plus, how many degrees off centerline were the winds? 44 knots of wind = 0 crosswind if it’s down the runway. A 44 knot wind would have to be 57 degrees off centerline to equal your listed calculated crosswind value for the A310.