A380 hard landing at OshKosh

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

evangilder said:
For further reading on PIO:

Pilot-induced oscillation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Pilot Induced Oscillation
Click to expand...

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.
 

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!
 
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
 
beaupower32 said:
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.
Click to expand...

YES!

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.
 
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.
 
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
 
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?
 
river said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
river said:
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
Click to expand...

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.

Waynos said:
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?
Click to expand...
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.
 
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.
 
Waynos said:
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.
Click to expand...
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!

 
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.
 
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!".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

A
Performance modifications done at Squadron level.
3 4 5
Replies
92
Views
4K
Steamed_Banana
S
K
Hard runways in WWII
2
Replies
33
Views
7K
yulzari
M
B-25 Hard to Fly?
Replies
15
Views
4K
Admiral Beez
A
T
Beechcraft C-45/AT-11 Kansan gunnery trainer question
Replies
9
Views
1K
MiTasol
S
Pilots aiming at cockpits?
9 10 11
Replies
207
Views
25K
Peter Gunn
Menu
Log in
Register