A320 with gear problem over LA

Happy Dog wrote:

"George Patterson"

Brakes are used during a soft field landing where the point is to put as
little weight as possible on the nose gear.

Not the way I was taught. You stay off the brakes to keep the nose light.


Keeping it light is good. Keeping it in the air (as it will be after TD
with full up elevator) is pointless and increases the landing roll. Use the
brakes after TD until the speed gets to the point where elevator authority
is insufficient to hold the nose up or keep it light enough for the
conditions. How much you use then depends on the length of the strip.

I'm guessing now that you aren't a pilot. You want to keep the nose in
the air as long as possible on a soft field. This may well be
impossible even with full elevator as the drag on the mains can be
substantial depending on how soft the field is. I've landed in fairly
deep snow before and it was hard to keep the nosewheel in the air below
about 40 MPH in my 182.

If the nosewheel touches a soft field at too high a speed, you may well
lose the nosegear and make a much more sudden stop than you desire.


Matt

Happy Dog wrote:

"George Patterson"

Keeping it light is good. Keeping it in the air (as it will be after TD
with full up elevator) is pointless and increases the landing roll. Use
the brakes after TD until the speed gets to the point where elevator
authority is insufficient to hold the nose up or keep it light enough for
the conditions. How much you use then depends on the length of the
strip.

Have you ever actually put one down in a plowed or muddy field? You'd
better pray that you actually *can* keep the nose wheel in the air or, at
least, keep it from digging in. Seen the ad in AOPA Pilot for renter's
insurance? That's a guy who didn't do that. NO BRAKES. The ground will do
a perfectly good job of that.


The vast majority of soft fields are short turf strips. You need brakes to
stop before the end in most GA planes, right? I say use the brakes until
you have full up elevator and the nose starts to get heavy. There is no
reason to avoid using brakes when doing a soft field landing on firm ground
(as most of them are). And that's what it looks like the A320 pilot was
doing. You will know, within a second of TD, whether the ground is soft
enough to cause braking-like friction on the mains and you will brake
accordingly. 2000' of firm turf says you do.

A turf field isn't always a soft field. A soft field is a description
of the condition of the runway at a particular time, not a description
as to whether it is a turf runway or something else. Most turn runways
are only soft fields after a very lengthy rain or during the spring when
the spring thaw is occurring in areas where the frost goes more than a
couple inches deep. You don't use the brakes when landing on a soft
field. You can use them on a turf field, but you may or may not need to.

Matt

Matt Whiting wrote:

I've landed in fairly
deep snow before and it was hard to keep the nosewheel in the air below
about 40 MPH in my 182.

Having lots of landings in deep snow in a 182, with deep being 3" or
more, there's no keeping the nosewheel in the air once the mains hit.
It's like landing on a carrier.

Newps wrote:


Matt Whiting wrote:

I've landed in fairly

deep snow before and it was hard to keep the nosewheel in the air
below about 40 MPH in my 182.


Having lots of landings in deep snow in a 182, with deep being 3" or
more, there's no keeping the nosewheel in the air once the mains hit.
It's like landing on a carrier.

Depends on the snow. Heavy, wet snow, yep. Light, fluffy snow, not too
hard to keep the nosewheel aloft for a while.


Matt

Happy Dog wrote:

The vast majority of soft fields are short turf strips. You need brakes to
stop before the end in most GA planes, right?

That doesn't make using the brakes a soft field technique. It is a short field
technique.

George Patterson
Give a person a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a person to
use the Internet and he won't bother you for weeks.

wrote in message
Brakes are used during a soft field landing where the point is to put as
little weight as possible on the nose gear. Try again.

Dude - your original assertion (above) was ridiculous. ANY braking will
put more weight on the nose wheel. That's what I was responding to.
Hell, even George P. is backing me up here : )

Both are irrelevant. You use brakes during a soft field landing unless
conditions, rare conditions, prohibit them.

you don't use short field technique because you want to TD as lightly as
possible

Short field technique doesn't necessarily mean a carrier landing-type
touchdown IMHO

Huh?

You really don't touch the brakes doing this on a 1500' grass strip?

Now you're being more specific. On a familiar grass field, of course.
(I'd never fly into one that short (personal minimums) I fly a T-tail
Lance, definitely not a short/soft field plane. Maybe in a taildragger,
but then I'd never use the brakes (or even need them for that matter)

in case you forgot or are too dense

Are you this obnoxious in person?

Yes. But you wouldn't see it that way. Welcome to Usenet.

moo

"Matt Whiting"
Happy Dog wrote:

wrote in

Happy Dog wrote:

Brakes are used during a soft field landing where the point is to put
as little weight as possible on the nose gear. Try again.

You have that completely backwards my friend. In a soft field landing
you don't touch the brakes


No brakes, huh? What kind of plane are you talking about? Have you done
any on short fields? (As most turf strips are.) If it's swampy enough
to create enough drag to quickly slow you down well, that's the same as
braking, right? *Think.*

Have you had this reading comprehension problem long? He said soft field,
not short field. And he didn't touch the brakes, he didn't say the plane
wouldn't slow down due to drag from the soft field.

And I didn't say "short field landing". I pointed out that most soft field
landing are made on short fields. (And short field technique isn't
appropriate.) If you interpreted my post some other way, then you have the
comprehension problem.

moo

"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
The vast majority of soft fields are short turf strips. You need brakes
to stop before the end in most GA planes, right? I say use the brakes
until you have full up elevator and the nose starts to get heavy. There
is no reason to avoid using brakes when doing a soft field landing on
firm ground (as most of them are). And that's what it looks like the
A320 pilot was doing. You will know, within a second of TD, whether the
ground is soft enough to cause braking-like friction on the mains and you
will brake accordingly. 2000' of firm turf says you do.

A turf field isn't always a soft field. A soft field is a description of
the condition of the runway at a particular time, not a description as to
whether it is a turf runway or something else. Most turn runways are only
soft fields after a very lengthy rain or during the spring when the spring
thaw is occurring in areas where the frost goes more than a couple inches
deep. You don't use the brakes when landing on a soft field. You can use
them on a turf field, but you may or may not need to.

Turf field landings are soft field landings. Don't forget about gopher
holes. You were taught that a turf field landing is not a soft field
landing?

moo

"George Patterson" wrote in message
news:FJ2Ze.2242$lW3.467@trndny09...
Happy Dog wrote:

The vast majority of soft fields are short turf strips. You need brakes
to stop before the end in most GA planes, right?

That doesn't make using the brakes a soft field technique. It is a short
field technique.

Oh please. It's part of almost every landing technique.

moo

"Jay Honeck" wrote:

Can you imagine being on that plane? I'll bet everyone was standing up
immediately after stopping, clamoring to get off, pronto!

Just because you are an idiot, Honeck, don't assume the passengers on
the plane are.

Stranger still, how long did it take those fire trucks to appear in the
screen after the plane slid to a stop? It seemed close to a full minute,
although my memory could be faulty -- maybe it was 30 seconds. Either way,
what happened to the "trucks chasing the plane down the runway?" Shoot, it
looked like they had enough equipment there to place a fire truck every 200
feet on that 12,000 foot runway.

"Place a fire truck every 200 ft on the runway"??? What an idiotic
notion.

From my oh-so-comfy FoxNews vantage point, it seemed like a less than
stellar performance by LAX

And from my vantage point, you are a moron. "Less than stellar
performance by LAX"??? Honeck, you haven't a clue.

- -- IYNH -- -