• There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.

    If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.

    Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.

    The Staff of SOH

  • Server side Maintenance is done. We still have an update to the forum software to run but that one will have to wait for a better time.

Airliner question for real pilots

I went searching around for a good explanation of the technique, but couldn't find one.

What I did find was a generic Boeing document that said to merely flare until you reach a proper landing attitude then hold what you have, allowing the plane to settle on the runway with a reasonable rate of descent.

It also directly stated that a "smooth" landing is not a prerequisite for a "safe" landing.

So, there's another technique for you and apparently the Boeing approved one.

I can't say where the technique in our company's manual came from, but it was in the FAA approved flight manual. As for whether it works in FSX, I have to wonder. Something like this works because the rotation of the gear makes the mains touchdown at a slightly lower rate of descent than the center of mass of the airplane.

But does FSX recognize the distinction? Or does FSX consider the softness of the landing purely by virtue of the aircraft's overall rate of descent? If the answer is the latter than this technique will not work in the sim...

...and, according to Boeing, isn't really necessary for a safe landing in any case.

Interesting stuff!
 
Deacon211 said:
It also directly stated that a "smooth" landing is not a prerequisite for a "safe" landing.
Click to expand...

On wet runways, you need to slam the mains down to avoid any possibility of having water between runway surface and tyre (and thus potentially inducing aquaplaning).
 
Bjoern said:
On wet runways, you need to slam the mains down to avoid any possibility of having water between runway surface and tyre (and thus potentially inducing aquaplaning).
Click to expand...

True dat!

When the runway was short or the crosswinds gusty, you also didn't fiddle too much with the landing. You got one chance for greatness, then you got the *** on the ground!

Deacon
 
Bjoern said:
On wet runways, you need to slam the mains down to avoid any possibility of having water between runway surface and tyre (and thus potentially inducing aquaplaning).
Click to expand...

I'd say a better term to use would be a "firm" touchdown when landing on a wet runway. Slamming it on really isn't necessary in most cases.
 
DaveKDEN said:
I'd say a better term to use would be a "firm" touchdown when landing on a wet runway. Slamming it on really isn't necessary in most cases.
Click to expand...

Well, my sim landings are usually very smooth, so a firm touchdown surely feels like slamming it. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top