# Amazing (dangerous-looking) Airbus Touch-down



## imp (Sep 22, 2015)

As one who has maneuvered, levered, raised, and handled very heavy objects, I have to absolutely marvel at how routine the landing of a half-million pound object travelling at 160 miles per hour, has become. Looking closely, the wind causing the craft to essentially fly at an angle to the runway, until it's wheels have enough weight transferred to them to "straighten-out" the plane. The rudder is seen causing the final large correction by swinging outwards to the left. World-largest airliner, A-380.   imp


----------



## SifuPhil (Sep 22, 2015)

Whoa! If I were the pilot I would have wet myself!


----------



## Falcon (Sep 22, 2015)

Most cross-wind landings (& take-offs)  are routinely handled be experienced airplane pilots.

They "crab" into the cross wind and hold it there until the last few seconds and then line up with the runway.

A few Cessna light airplanes are equipped with special cross-wind landing gear.  They swivel; the plane sill crabs into the wind but the wheels
roll straight down the runway.


----------



## AZ Jim (Sep 22, 2015)

I used to park and eat lunch at the touch down end of Lindbergh field in San Diego and many many flights come in looking like that but the pilots put those babies right down the runway.


----------



## Linda (Sep 22, 2015)

That was fun to watch.  I haven't been on a plane in a few years.  So far this morning I want to go on a yacht for the first time and on a big airliner again.


----------



## Laurie (Sep 22, 2015)

Must say I didn't think it was that hairy, but I've spent a lifetime working on coastal airfields, so perhaps I'm a bit blasé!


----------



## Meanderer (Sep 22, 2015)

Nissan Frontier Truck saved Plane Landing Gear Failure


----------



## imp (Sep 22, 2015)

Incredible! The timing between the two had to be near-perfect.   imp


----------



## oldman (Sep 23, 2015)

Falcon said:


> Most cross-wind landings (& take-offs)  are routinely handled be experienced airplane pilots.
> 
> They "crab" into the cross wind and hold it there until the last few seconds and then line up with the runway.
> 
> ...




Falcon is exactly right. We were all taught how to perform a cross wind landing in the simulator. The main issue is to keep the plane lined up on the center-line of the runway on approach while keeping the wings level and the nose into the wind and also by using the ailerons and rudder, the pilot can crab the aircraft until just before touchdown and then de-crab while touching down. (That's the basics.) It's a maneuver that I never had to perform, except in the simulator. Going one step further, it can be a little more tricky for the pilot if the runway is wet from a bad storm that may have just passed through.

There are quite a few cross-wind landings you can watch on YouTube.


----------



## SifuPhil (Sep 23, 2015)

Doesn't the Airbus have a bad accident record, or am I thinking of another plane?


----------



## imp (Sep 23, 2015)

Not sure on that one, but DO know way back when, the Lockheed Electra, a big turbo-prop plane which just preceded the all-out jets, had many wing-associated failures due to a phenomenon known as "wing flutter". Like the suspension bridge which collapsed in Washington State in the early '40s.

Our fly-guys here will know!     imp


----------



## Linda (Sep 23, 2015)

SifuPhil said:


> Doesn't the Airbus have a bad accident record, or am I thinking of another plane?




Yes, there was something in the news a few years ago.  I think it had to do with bolts or something.  I could probably find it with google but I'm not going to as I don't want to think about anything wrong with a plane I might be on someday.


----------



## SifuPhil (Sep 23, 2015)

Linda said:


> Yes, there was something in the news a few years ago.  I think it had to do with bolts or something.  I could probably find it with google but I'm not going to as I don't want to think about anything wrong with a plane I might be on someday.



Okay - I'll look it up myself but I won't post it here.


----------



## oldman (Sep 23, 2015)

Actually, the Airbus has a very good safety record, along with Boeing. Lockheed ran into problems with some of their Constellations. The L-1011 built by Lockheed was another plane thought to be indestructible, but the Delta crash in the Everglades wiped out any thoughts about that. Lockheed also had a mess of problems with trying to defraud the gov't with billing costs. The Airbus A-380 is a huge plane and although I have never flown in it or flown it as a pilot, I would highly recommend it. (I have toured it on the ground.) It has a truckload of safety sensors that even the sensors have sensors and that's not a play on words, but truthful. Just like airplanes have a back-up system for every mechanical and electrical system, the Airbus A-380 has a back-up sensor for each sensor. It's amazing. 

I have always been a Boeing man. It's like Ford and Chevy. you either like one or the other. The Boeing 787 Dreamliner is a superb piece of machinery and is the competitor to the Airbus A-380. I have personally held ratings for the Boeing 737, 747, 757 and 767. The B-747 has the best safety record in the business as far as jumbo jets go. As for engines, between the Rolls Royce, GE and Pratt & Whitney, I prefer them just in that order. The RR engines seem to run cooler and give off fewer alarms, according to ALPA, which is the pilot's main go to reference on such things. A few years before I retired, I flew a B-767 with two brand new replacement Rolls Royce engines. I noticed how quiet they ran and how quick they were able to accelerate. Of course, price is always a concern to airlines, so most B-767's are equipped with P&W engines, but still are very safe.


----------



## SifuPhil (Sep 23, 2015)

Thanks, Oldman - I figured you'd know.

A quick glance at the Wiki entry for "Airbus Safety" gave a lot of results for the A-319, A-320 and A-321. AeroInside has a long list of A-380-800 incidents as well, so I'm a little confused here ...


----------



## imp (Sep 23, 2015)

oldman said:


> Actually, the Airbus has a very good safety record, along with Boeing. Lockheed ran into problems with some of their Constellations. The L-1011 built by Lockheed was another plane thought to be indestructible, but the Delta crash in the Everglades wiped out any thoughts about that. Lockheed also had a mess of problems with trying to defraud the gov't with billing costs. The Airbus A-380 is a huge plane and although I have never flown in it or flown it as a pilot, I would highly recommend it. (I have toured it on the ground.) It has a truckload of safety sensors that even the sensors have sensors and that's not a play on words, but truthful. Just like airplanes have a back-up system for every mechanical and electrical system, the Airbus A-380 has a back-up sensor for each sensor. It's amazing.
> 
> I have always been a Boeing man. It's like Ford and Chevy. you either like one or the other. The Boeing 787 Dreamliner is a superb piece of machinery and is the competitor to the Airbus A-380.* I have personally held ratings for the Boeing 737, 747, 757 and 767. *The B-747 has the best safety record in the business as far as jumbo jets go. As for engines, between the Rolls Royce, GE and Pratt & Whitney, I prefer them just in that order. The RR engines seem to run cooler and give off fewer alarms, according to ALPA, which is the pilot's main go to reference on such things. A few years before I retired, I flew a B-767 with two brand new replacement Rolls Royce engines. I noticed how quiet they ran and how quick they were able to accelerate. Of course, price is always a concern to airlines, so most B-767's are equipped with P&W engines, but still are very safe.



And I must say I personally respect someone who has likely held hundreds of folks' lives in his hands! Thank you for that!

I thought of a conversation I once had with a pilot ferrying home, we were in a B-727, likely Vegas to Chicago. He told me while at the controls, he could fell the shift of weight in 727 when someone walked the length of the aisle!  True?

AFAIK, 727 was about the only one having a drop-down rear exit, that having been used by D. B. Cooper to successfully escape extreme wind pressure turbulence. 

One last technical question, if I may: How much technical training must a person obtain to become a Captain of todays huge aircraft?    Thanks!    imp


----------

