Airplane guys, did you see this video from the other day?

[TruckDriver]

This is one reason I hate flying

Gotta get through the advertisement first    But this is the best coverage of this story I've seen yet.

javascript:void(window.open('http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/ynews?ch=4226714&cl=6763079&lang=en','playerWindow','width=793,height=608,scrollbars=no'));

[BB1]

 

Yeah... I would have needed to change my shorts 2 sec after that.

[694spdRT]

Did I hear that right? Were there 155mph crosswinds and they tried to land?

[bull]

It's pretty typical for the tail end of a jet to be off center during a cross wind landing but that wind was obviously too fast to be landing in that direction.

[400/6/PAC]

That was crazy.
I just saw this on the news this morning.
I can't believe he didn't crash.

[twenty mike mike]

It was just plain stupid to even make that approach and it got even more stupid the closer the airplane got to the runway.  I can't believe people are praising the pilot. Yeah, good save, but he shouldn't have had to in the first place.

I don't know about Germany, but if that had happened here, the FAA would be all over that airline and cockpit crew, since they obviously tried to land waaaayyyy beyond the aircraft's crosswind limits.

Bad weather is why you're supposed to have the fuel to fly to an alternate airport with better weather.

[Drache]

Check youtube for landing videos for the Tokyo airport! The planes LITERALLY have to land at a 45 degree angle due to wind!

[mikesbbody]

the wing actually touches the runway...thats some scarey s..t

[Troy]

Did I hear that right? Where there 155mph crosswinds and they tried to land?

It was just plain stupid to even make that approach and it got even more stupid the closer the airplane got to the runway.  I can't believe people are praising the pilot. Yeah, good save, but he shouldn't have had to in the first place.

I don't know about Germany, but if that had happened here, the FAA would be all over that airline and cockpit crew, since they obviously tried to land waaaayyyy beyond the aircraft's crosswind limits.

Bad weather is why you're supposed to have the fuel to fly to an alternate airport with better weather.

They've edited the story... the plane was traveling at 155 mph - not the crosswind. Thats 134 knots which is perfectly acceptable for the plane.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080303/ap_on_re_eu/germany_rough_landing

Just FYI... Flight parameters for the A320:
X wind: max demonstrated for takeoff 29 Kt
X wind: max demonstrated for landing 33 Kt
X wind: max demonstrated gust 38 Kt
max tail wind 10 Kt
http://e-flight.com/a320.htm

Wind shear and strong gusts are why flying near thunderstorms sucks. The most I've tried is 17 knots but I was in a Cessna 152 - big jets handle that routinely.

Troy

[694spdRT]

They've edited the story... the plane was traveling at 155 mph - not the crosswind. Thats 134 knots which is perfectly acceptable for the plane.
Troy

Well that makes a lot more sense.

[twenty mike mike]

Did I hear that right? Where there 155mph crosswinds and they tried to land?

It was just plain stupid to even make that approach and it got even more stupid the closer the airplane got to the runway.  I can't believe people are praising the pilot. Yeah, good save, but he shouldn't have had to in the first place.

I don't know about Germany, but if that had happened here, the FAA would be all over that airline and cockpit crew, since they obviously tried to land waaaayyyy beyond the aircraft's crosswind limits.

Bad weather is why you're supposed to have the fuel to fly to an alternate airport with better weather.

They've edited the story... the plane was traveling at 155 mph - not the crosswind. Thats 134 knots which is perfectly acceptable for the plane.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080303/ap_on_re_eu/germany_rough_landing

Just FYI... Flight parameters for the A320:
X wind: max demonstrated for takeoff 29 Kt
X wind: max demonstrated for landing 33 Kt
X wind: max demonstrated gust 38 Kt
max tail wind 10 Kt
http://e-flight.com/a320.htm

Wind shear and strong gusts are why flying near thunderstorms sucks. The most I've tried is 17 knots but I was in a Cessna 152 - big jets handle that routinely.

Troy

Of course...if the crosswind had been 155kts, the airplane would have been backing up. Note the edited story doesn't say what the crosswind component was, but it was obviously more than the plane could handle. As soon as the pilot raised the upwind wing to correct the drift, the wind caught the wing and pushed it up, thus the contact with the runway by the downwind wing.

I'll stand by my previous statements. The conditions were too extreme for the approach.

I've landed in a steady (and bumpy) direct 25 knot crosswind, which was within limits.  It wasn't much fun, but it was gratifying to have landed smoothly and stayed right on centerline.

Was that 17kts total or 17kts of component? That has to be right at the limit for a 152.

[Troy]

Did I hear that right? Where there 155mph crosswinds and they tried to land?

It was just plain stupid to even make that approach and it got even more stupid the closer the airplane got to the runway.  I can't believe people are praising the pilot. Yeah, good save, but he shouldn't have had to in the first place.

I don't know about Germany, but if that had happened here, the FAA would be all over that airline and cockpit crew, since they obviously tried to land waaaayyyy beyond the aircraft's crosswind limits.

Bad weather is why you're supposed to have the fuel to fly to an alternate airport with better weather.

They've edited the story... the plane was traveling at 155 mph - not the crosswind. Thats 134 knots which is perfectly acceptable for the plane.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080303/ap_on_re_eu/germany_rough_landing

Just FYI... Flight parameters for the A320:
X wind: max demonstrated for takeoff 29 Kt
X wind: max demonstrated for landing 33 Kt
X wind: max demonstrated gust 38 Kt
max tail wind 10 Kt
http://e-flight.com/a320.htm

Wind shear and strong gusts are why flying near thunderstorms sucks. The most I've tried is 17 knots but I was in a Cessna 152 - big jets handle that routinely.

Troy

Of course...if the crosswind had been 155kts, the airplane would have been backing up. Note the edited story doesn't say what the crosswind component was, but it was obviously more than the plane could handle. As soon as the pilot raised the upwind wing to correct the drift, the wind caught the wing and pushed it up, thus the contact with the runway by the downwind wing.

I'll stand by my previous statements. The conditions were too extreme for the approach.

I've landed in a steady (and bumpy) direct 25 knot crosswind, which was within limits.  It wasn't much fun, but it was gratifying to have landed smoothly and stayed right on centerline.

Was that 17kts total or 17kts of component? That has to be right at the limit for a 152.

I'm guessing the reporters have no idea what the difference is between air speed, stall speed, or crosswind component and if they had to print all of the corrections they'd look incompetent.

Max crosswind component for a 152 is 12 kts so, no, I was not above that.

Troy

[sunfire69]

These guys need to talk to the pilots for "Reeves Aleution Air Lines....Landing out there was that way all the time...I've flown in and looked out the side window of a 727 and be looking straight down the runway..... ...Never give a bush pilot a big airplane.....LOL
jerry

[DodgeByDave]

No one has mentioned the grandaddy of all white knuckle ILS landings......

the ONE...........

the ONLY.........

and sadly not there any more...............

KAI TAK

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTl1nQ9bO1Y

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzvLOLJghgg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OtnL4KYVtDE

[twenty mike mike]

No one has mentioned the grandaddy of all white knuckle ILS landings......

the ONE...........

the ONLY.........

and sadly not there any more...............

KAI TAK

That's the Instrument Guidance System (IGS) Checkerboard approach. To avoid obstructions, the ILS takes you to a big checkboard sign on a hill, then you have to make a sharp right turn, soon followed by a sharp left turn at fairly low altitude to line up with the runway. A lot of videos that purport to show horrible crosswinds are really just showing the two turns. I saw one vid that showed a late steep turn to final in a 747 and the left outboard engine cowling contacted the runway. That was operator technique rather than the wind, as I recall.

A very sporting approach, made even sportier with a right crosswind. I'll bet pilots landing at the new HK airport aren't sad to see Kai Tak go away, except for bragging rights at the bar.

[DodgeByDave]

I was just reading that on another forum today (about Kai Tak being an IGS rather than an ILS approach) according to the old plates it's a mandatory go around if you can't see the lights from the checker board.

Perhaps you are referring to the NCA 747







I don't think thats a normal type of "exhaust emissions" from #1 in photo 3

Another interesting still from Kai Tak



Where else could you do this with a 747 and not get cards and letters from the FAA



If you screwed the pooch you ended up in the bay