Wow

On Mar 2, 5:25*pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
wrote :



We had a couple of very windy days over here in Europe.
Look at a crosswind landing of an A320 at HAM, a near crash:

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ddb_1204404185

Nice pic:

http://www.airliners.net/uf/view.fil...name=phpOltUWB....

Next time someone tries to tell you that airliners just "kick it straight"
when they land, like this guy did, show em this...

Bertie

Remnds me of this video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9M3m1U-QYA
I can watch tis all day.

Wil

William Hung wrote in
:

On Mar 2, 5:25*pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
wrote :



We had a couple of very windy days over here in Europe.
Look at a crosswind landing of an A320 at HAM, a near crash:

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ddb_1204404185

Nice pic:

http://www.airliners.net/uf/view.file?id=536882887
&filename=phpOltUWB
...

Next time someone tries to tell you that airliners just "kick it
straight"

when they land, like this guy did, show em this...

Bertie

Remnds me of this video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9M3m1U-QYA
I can watch tis all day.


Yeah, they are kicking i straight, though they are laying off a bit of
the drift by getting the wing down as the flare. The first one has th
edownwind wing donw slightly. Remember that this exercise is intended to
demonstrate what the airplane is capable of and not to develop
technique. I have a frined who flies the 777 and he tells me it flies
just like an airplane. His first line flight to LHR had mih landing in a
strong crosswind. The trainer next to him asked if he would prefer that
he do th elanding, but my friend pressed on and found it easy.
Note that in each touchdown, the alignment takes place after touchdown,
and that th etouchdonw is positive. the yaw towards alignment is done
smoothly and though you can't see it, they are almost certainly
introducing full aileron ( smoothly) to keep the wing down and to
introduce some very welcome adverse yaw.We used to have to land the 727
like this and though it felt absolutley awful, it worked OK.

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

Much snippage...

technique. I have a frined who flies the 777 and he tells me it flies
just like an airplane.

Ok, I'll bite. What airplanes don't fly like airplanes?

Jim Stewart wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

Much snippage...

technique. I have a frined who flies the 777 and he tells me it flies
just like an airplane.

Ok, I'll bite. What airplanes don't fly like airplanes?



Well, some of the older airliners had some interesting and challenging
quirks. They were not very speed stable on approach, wallowed around like a
milk van and could develop rates of descent on approach that could plant
you in seconds if you weren;'t careful. Then there's the FBW Airbusses.
Every time I talk to one of those guys I walk away more confused about how
the flight controls work than I was before. Others, most of the 4 engine
contraptions, for instance, have to be landed wings level. The nmost recent
crop handle quite nicely, don't have spool up times stretching towards ten
seconds and just generaly are pleasant to handle. The satisfaction in
handling the older jets came mostly from tricking them into doing what you
wanted them to!


Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Jim Stewart wrote in
:


Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

Much snippage...


technique. I have a frined who flies the 777 and he tells me it flies
just like an airplane.

Ok, I'll bite. What airplanes don't fly like airplanes?




Well, some of the older airliners had some interesting and challenging
quirks. They were not very speed stable on approach, wallowed around like a
milk van and could develop rates of descent on approach that could plant
you in seconds if you weren;'t careful. Then there's the FBW Airbusses.
Every time I talk to one of those guys I walk away more confused about how
the flight controls work than I was before. Others, most of the 4 engine
contraptions, for instance, have to be landed wings level. The nmost recent
crop handle quite nicely, don't have spool up times stretching towards ten
seconds and just generaly are pleasant to handle. The satisfaction in
handling the older jets came mostly from tricking them into doing what you
wanted them to!

What did you think of the 727? In my youth I flew a lot
as a 727 pax. There was always something reassuring
about having 3 people up front and 3 big ole engines in
the back. Engines that you could fsking feel when the
levers were pushed all the way forward. A real airplane
for passengers that love planes.

Then there was the time I asked if I could sit up front.
The copilot graciously apologized for not being able to
let me, but he kindly offered to let me tag along as he
preflighted the a/c. Those were the good old days.

Jim Stewart wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Jim Stewart wrote in
:


Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

Much snippage...


technique. I have a frined who flies the 777 and he tells me it
flies just like an airplane.

Ok, I'll bite. What airplanes don't fly like airplanes?




Well, some of the older airliners had some interesting and
challenging quirks. They were not very speed stable on approach,
wallowed around like a milk van and could develop rates of descent
on approach that could plant you in seconds if you weren;'t careful.
Then there's the FBW Airbusses. Every time I talk to one of those
guys I walk away more confused about how the flight controls work
than I was before. Others, most of the 4 engine contraptions, for
instance, have to be landed wings level. The nmost recent crop handle
quite nicely, don't have spool up times stretching towards ten
seconds and just generaly are pleasant to handle. The satisfaction in
handling the older jets came mostly from tricking them into doing
what you wanted them to!

What did you think of the 727? In my youth I flew a lot
as a 727 pax. There was always something reassuring
about having 3 people up front and 3 big ole engines in
the back. Engines that you could fsking feel when the
levers were pushed all the way forward. A real airplane
for passengers that love planes.

I liked it for some of the same reasons you did. The three crew thing
was great. We used pro flight engineers ( as opposed to a kid fresh out
of Embry Riddle ). It wasn't exactly a sprots car in the handling
department, but it went where you told it with a bit of persuasion
(though you would get exactly the opposite view from a guy who came onto
it off of a 707, which was supposed to be a real handful) It was very
fast. Anything up to mach .93, a bit slower if you were heavy.
Very noisy flightdeck (wind) Nicely thought out for it's day with lots
of redundancy in all systems. It must have seemed like something from
Buck Rogers in 1963.

Then there was the time I asked if I could sit up front.
The copilot graciously apologized for not being able to
let me, but he kindly offered to let me tag along as he
preflighted the a/c. Those were the good old days.


Indeed. You wouldn't get that now.


Bertie

-------------------clip----------------

What did you think of the 727? In my youth I flew a lot
as a 727 pax. There was always something reassuring
about having 3 people up front and 3 big ole engines in
the back. Engines that you could fsking feel when the
levers were pushed all the way forward. A real airplane
for passengers that love planes.

I liked it for some of the same reasons you did. The three crew thing
was great. We used pro flight engineers ( as opposed to a kid fresh out
of Embry Riddle ). It wasn't exactly a sprots car in the handling
department, but it went where you told it with a bit of persuasion
(though you would get exactly the opposite view from a guy who came onto
it off of a 707, which was supposed to be a real handful) It was very
fast. Anything up to mach .93, a bit slower if you were heavy.
Very noisy flightdeck (wind) Nicely thought out for it's day with lots
of redundancy in all systems. It must have seemed like something from
Buck Rogers in 1963.


-----------clip------------

Bertie

Tell the story about when 727 first came out and a couple crashed
during flare (one was at SLC as I remember).

Bird was dirtiest aircraft I had seen up to that time when on final.
With everything out and down and Stews dragging their feet out of back
stair well didn't hardly look much different than a flying brick )

You can correct my remembrance. Bird started to get a bad name and
lots of quick investigations took place. It was found that if pilots
were sloppy flying the handbook airspeed on final and got just a
couple of knots slow they couldn't flare the bird. The fix was to
change the operating manual and raised approach speed 3 or so knots
(just a tweak) and bird became one of the best and safest birds
flying.

Correct me where I have remembered the details wrong.

Big John

On Mar 2, 9:41*pm, Jim Stewart wrote:
Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Jim Stewart wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

Much snippage...

technique. I have a frined who flies the 777 and he tells me it flies
just like an airplane.

Ok, I'll bite. *What airplanes don't fly like airplanes?

Well, some of the older airliners had some interesting and challenging
quirks. They were not very speed stable on approach, wallowed around like a *
milk van and could develop rates of descent on approach that could plant
you in seconds if you weren;'t careful. Then there's the FBW Airbusses.
Every time I talk to one of those guys I walk away more confused about how
the flight controls work than I was before. Others, most of the 4 engine
contraptions, for instance, have to be landed wings level. The nmost recent
crop handle quite nicely, don't have spool up times stretching towards ten
seconds and just generaly are pleasant to handle. The satisfaction in
handling the older jets came mostly from tricking them into doing what you
wanted them to!

What did you think of the 727? *In my youth I flew a lot
as a 727 pax. *There was always something reassuring
about having 3 people up front and 3 big ole engines in
the back. *Engines that you could fsking feel when the
levers were pushed all the way forward. *A real airplane
for passengers that love planes.

Then there was the time I asked if I could sit up front.
The copilot graciously apologized for not being able to
let me, but he kindly offered to let me tag along as he
preflighted the a/c. *Those were the good old days.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The good old days, sure mis them. I flew in a PanAm 747 a few imes
and an Eatern 727 once as a kid and remember getting the wing from the
PanAm crew. Too bad I lost that wing.

The good old days when kids get wings from pilots, fire hats from
firemen and badges from policemen. I jnow the firemen still give out
fire hats at open houses, but the cops are no longer someone that
kidslook up to anymore. At least not around here.

Wil

---------------------clip-----------------

The good old days, sure mis them. I flew in a PanAm 747 a few imes
and an Eatern 727 once as a kid and remember getting the wing from the
PanAm crew. Too bad I lost that wing.

The good old days when kids get wings from pilots, fire hats from
firemen and badges from policemen. I jnow the firemen still give out
fire hats at open houses, but the cops are no longer someone that
kidslook up to anymore. At least not around here.

*********************************

Wil

Are you talking about the "Leg Spreaders" they used to hand out?

I still have a set in my box of old airplane memorabilia )

Big John

On Mar 2, 9:17*pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Then there's the FBW Airbusses.
Every time I talk to one of those guys I walk away more confused about how
the flight controls work than I was before.

And I hate to tell you this, but it shows.

A good friend of mine (and in fact the guy who taught me to fly my
Twin Comanche when I bought it) went from captain of the DC9 to 727 to
A320 to 757, and has a lot of good things to say about all of them -
except for the A320. We're both engineers by training, so it only
took him about an hour or two to explain that flight control system to
me. Mostly my response was "What?!?!?!?" and "You gotta be kidding."

It's a perfect example of what happens when you allow the engineers to
design the user interface. It usually turns into something only an
engineer will want to use.

I saw this video when someone emailed me a link to it - before I saw
this thread - and I knew right away what sort of plane it was. I
can't recognize them by sight - but from the way it was behaving, it
was obvious what the pilot was trying to do - and why it wasn't
letting him. Only then did I really believe my friend.

I know you mentioned proportional mode upthread - but it does not mean
what you think it means. You still can not command a deflection - or
anything that would act like a deflection. What you command is a
rate. In other words, down low it doesn't do what it does up high
(your understanding is correct there) but it still doesn't act like an
airplane.

You can not slip an A320 - not even down low. Try to find an A320
driver who is trained as an engineer (and not one who scraped by on
C's) and he will probably be able to explain it to you. Once you
understand it, you will understand why the pilot did what he did, why
the crosswing limit is so low, and why you probably wouldn't have done
any better.

Michael