Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
For further reading on PIO:
Pilot-induced oscillation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Pilot Induced Oscillation
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.
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
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.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
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.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?
Try being the one fixing the aircraft and I'll bet those guys would have said the statements were "understated."If that landing was bad enough to write off the aeroplane it would have been much more embarrassing to Airbus I reckonEven if damage had/has been incurred its hardly going to be irrepairable so yes, I do think they overstated things a little.