A380 hard landing at OshKosh

[Condora]

For further reading on PIO:

Pilot-induced oscillation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Pilot Induced Oscillation

Interesting reading...

And it makes me think that some trouble while landing that I had years ago might have been PIO.
Very hard roll, I was looking out, and saw sky, runway, sky, runway... I thought they would abort and make another try, but the pilot managed to land.
At the time, I put the blame on... sorry, I know miss the correct designation in english - vertical drafts is not correct, but I think you get the meaning -, as during the flight we had some problems: I was on the aisle, getting something from my backpack, and suddenly I had my head almost ABOVE the backpack, almost hit the ceiling.

I think it kept tossing us up and down for 15 minutes. The worst part was that the lady behind me panicked, and I found out someone can scream non-stop all that time. She almost strangled her kids, she was holding to them so hard.

During landing she didn't scream, but I think she made the return trip by car.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

The aircraft's landing on runway 36, which is 8,000 ft long, was made significantly more challenging as there is only one taxiway able to accommodate the A380 5,500 ft down the runway. Adding to the difficulty of the landing was a perpendicular (270 degrees) 14-knot crosswind gusting to 23 knots at the time of touchdown.

The demonstrated cross wind component for the A380 is about 45 - 50 knots. This was attained in 2006 during testing in Iceland from what I understand. A 14 gusting to 27 crosswind component for this aircraft should have been pretty benign. Additionally the aircraft can land at distances under 6000 feet.


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m1dv_y_3EK0

I have nothing against this aircraft; I believe it's an engineering marvel. The crew flying the aircraft during that landing needs to find new jobs regardless if there was any damage to the aircraft or not. It made them and Airbus look VERY BAD!

 

[beaupower32]

Hmm, well, I got a question then. I totally respect everyones respons here and their views. But if this was a Boeing 747, 767, 777, or even a DC-10/MD-11 would u still have the same views as u do with the A380 crew and how they landed the plane. Should the crew really find new jobs because they landed the plane hard. Im sure hard landings are done by all makes of passenger planes, yet the crews are not fired. Now, I dont know the operating procedure for the Airbus company, and it might be a one hard landing and your out to find a new job, but that just seems really harsh to me. Again, my goal is not to so call "Rock the Boat", im just curious as to how yall are comming up with they should be fired for one bad landing. I know every pilot flying, no matter what aircraft, has done a bad landing.

Let the bashing begin

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Hmm, well, I got a question then. I totally respect everyones respons here and their views. But if this was a Boeing 747, 767, 777, or even a DC-10/MD-11 would u still have the same views as u do with the A380 crew and how they landed the plane.

YES!

Should the crew really find new jobs because they landed the plane hard. Im sure hard landings are done by all makes of passenger planes, yet the crews are not fired. Now, I dont know the operating procedure for the Airbus company, and it might be a one hard landing and your out to find a new job, but that just seems really harsh to me. Again, my goal is not to so call "Rock the Boat", im just curious as to how yall are comming up with they should be fired for one bad landing. I know every pilot flying, no matter what aircraft, has done a bad landing.

Let the bashing begin

No bashing here but there is a degree of error, forgiveness, and incompetence that must be measured. If there was no damage to the aircraft, I'd keep the crew employed but I would not have them doing public demonstrations. If there was any substantial damage I'd allow them to try to justify what happened. If it was a matter of pure pilot error that could blamed on incompetence, I'd fire them.

Again, this has nothing to do with the manufacturer or the origin of the aircraft or crew; it has everything to do with flying. Bu the time you find yourself working at Airbus flying a stae of the art aircraft, you need to operate at a level of skill and professionalism where you will avoid situations like this.

 

[Condora]

Nobody said the World is fair...

Sometime ago, a guy landing in Europe used the brakes so hard, he ruined the tires (and think some part of the landing gear too - not sure, cannot find the news). At the time, no explanation on WHY he did it was given, then it was forgotten, so, I think there where no consequences.
But he was not under the spotlights, as this one did.

 

[beaupower32]

Thanks for the response FLYBOYJ. That clears it up a little bit.

 

[river]

Hi,

Any landing you can walk away from is a good landing. The wings flexed like they should, no engines fell off and the under-cart didn't collapse.

Airbus should be proud to let the world see that despite a bit of a smack onto the tarmac, which all pilots and all airliners experience some time in their life, nothing broke and the aircraft is safe to fly again.

river

 

[Vassili Zaitzev]

From watching the video, and reading all the other posts. The fault looks to be on the pilots, and not the aircraft itself.

 

[Waynos]

I agree that the pilot made a pigs ear of the landing, but I also thought the commentators were incredibly smug over it. Example, "the airplane is probably still usable", probably?

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Hi,

Any landing you can walk away from is a good landing. The wings flexed like they should, no engines fell off and the under-cart didn't collapse.

But you don't allow and aircraft to be operated in that manner at a world showcase by company pilots - PERIOD! Those guys make a good salary for being professionals and that was not a landing by professionals.

As far as the old saying "Any landing you can walk away from is a good landing" is a bunch of crap. A good landing is one you walk away from with you, your passengers (if any) and the aircraft in tact.

Airbus should be proud to let the world see that despite a bit of a smack onto the tarmac, which all pilots and all airliners experience some time in their life, nothing broke and the aircraft is safe to fly again.

river

Err no - Airbus should be embarrassed by the unprofessionalism displayed by the flight crew, at at this time you don't know if nothing broke.

I agree that the pilot made a pigs ear of the landing, but I also thought the commentators were incredibly smug over it. Example, "the airplane is probably still usable", probably?

Yes, probably. Until a hard landing inspection is completed you don't know how badly damaged that aircraft could be. If worked on airlines that had hard landings and from the exterior looked fine until you examined landing gear, trunnions and spars and fund busted rivets and cracks.

 

[Waynos]

If that landing was bad enough to write off the aeroplane it would have been much more embarrassing to Airbus I reckon Even if damage had/has been incurred its hardly going to be irrepairable so yes, I do think they overstated things a little.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

If that landing was bad enough to write off the aeroplane it would have been much more embarrassing to Airbus I reckon Even if damage had/has been incurred its hardly going to be irrepairable so yes, I do think they overstated things a little.

Try being the one fixing the aircraft and I'll bet those guys would have said the statements were "understated."

I watched this clip again and there is nothing there overstated. The pilot totally screwed the pooch - if anything those commentators are a lot less critical than I've been or those pilots' bosses will be!

 

[GrauGeist]

One observation I might include, is that this wasn't a runway out on the end of a complex, it was in the direct proximity of an airshow where had something gone wrong, this machine (or it's wreckage) could have plowed into vintage/classic aircraft and, God forbid, spectators.

 

[evangilder]

I posted this to demonstrate the error of the crew, not the aircraft. I don't care what type it is. The fact that I have had pilot friends all tell me that the landing was "poor at best" says it all. I got this from a very experienced pilot (the one who is flying the airplane in my sig) and his statement was "CHOKE!".